Finally, we rational people can discuss here

[Ghost94]

I think it´s great that now we rational people can discuss about these paranormal things right here in the Beyond Dreaming, you know, we can now debate about this subject. What do you people think?

[Merlock]

I think it´s great that now we rational people can discuss about these paranormal things right here in the Beyond Dreaming, you know, we can now make threads about how rational we are. I believe the saying is: fix'd.

[Ghost94]

That was the stupidest joke ever. I meant that we can discuss about these subjects without believing in them, we can talk generally about them, you know.

[Kuhnada29]

if you don't believe in them, why would you discuss them...

[spaceexplorer]

if you don't believe in them, why would you discuss them... Because they effect our lives too. I'm sure you've discussed religions you don't believe in? You know, trying to understand why rational people have irrational beliefs and do seemingly bizzare things. Have you never discussed why the 9/11 terrorists did what they did? Dosn't make you an extremist muslim does it? I think it's be rather crazy to only discuss that which you believe. It's putting yourself in a box. I think the term is "being open minded", wanting to see why other people believe what they do, trying to understand it, and often trying to get people to prove or stand by the claims they make. How can anyone make a decision on if they believe something, if they are not allowed to discuss or ask questions on it? Oh and my opinion on the original question... FINALLY!!! WOOP.

[Scatterbrain]

Meh. My care-o-meter isn't responding.

[yellowlight]

Meh. My care-o-meter isn't responding. My care-o-meter looks nicer. Spoiler for Take a look:

[Scatterbrain]

Nah, your's looks fake.

[bushi]

Not fake.. Just got more bling.

[juroara]

rational? please the truth is if you don't believe in the super natural, it is simply because you have never experienced it it is rational to believe in that which you have experienced. it is however human nature to discard an experience if it doesn't fit in a predefined box of what reality is

[DeathCell]

That was the stupidest joke ever. I meant that we can discuss about these subjects without believing in them, we can talk generally about them, you know. I also love the topic where you put a little dig at people that believe must not be rational... As if rational people couldn't discuss here before.... No one complained till you started attacking them when they were trying to discuss things, they weren't trying to prove everything to you..

[spaceexplorer]

rational? please the truth is if you don't believe in the super natural, it is simply because you have never experienced it it is rational to believe in that which you have experienced. it is however human nature to discard an experience if it doesn't fit in a predefined box of what reality is I have never been to spain, but I believe in it because there is plenty of evidence to prove its existence. Having not experienced something is not the reason we do not believe in such things as the paranormal, it's the lack of supporting evidence. There are plenty of things I have not experienced that I will take as true, because there is evidence to support the claims. Offer some evidence other than anecdotal stories and strong beliefs. Thats not much to ask, you can do it with ANY other real phenomena, so why not the paranormal? Why is the paranormal given special rights to avoid having to prove itself?

[DeathCell]

They are not given any special rights, its the fact that you are asking people on a forum to prove something as if we are all a bunch of scientists with labs at our disposals.

[Ghost94]

I also love the topic where you put a little dig at people that believe must not be rational... As if rational people couldn't discuss here before.... No one complained till you started attacking them when they were trying to discuss things, they weren't trying to prove everything to you.. DeathCell, just shut up. If you think that Beyond Dreaming is a rational sub-forum, then..... Awwwhhh.. I don´t want to read your stupid posts cause you clearly can´t post anything sensible. If you post, post sensible things. EDIT: (To the latter post of deathgell) You don´t need a lab.

[Smarties]

rational? please the truth is if you don't believe in the super natural, it is simply because you have never experienced it it is rational to believe in that which you have experienced. it is however human nature to discard an experience if it doesn't fit in a predefined box of what reality is Science does not discard things just because it "doesn't fit in a predefined box of what reality is" - science is constantly redefining that box to fit our current understanding of the world. If science were to discard anything that doesn't fit the current world view, we'd still be believing lightning is the result of a magic man in the sky chucking lightning bolts at us, but as we gain new information about the surrounding world we no longer have any need to blame it on Zeus or whoever. If you have had a personal paranormal experience, then good for you, but you're not going to convince me without presenting any solid proof. I haven't experienced anything that could not be explained by fully naturalistic means and thus, the rational stance for me to take is to remain skeptical about any such claims until sufficient evidence is provided. I'm not saying that no paranormal claims are true, but without solid proof, it is unreasonable to expect someone to believe in such things.

[Ghost94]

Smarties, you´re right. Now, here is everything in a nutshell: BD used to be a sub-forum where irrational subjects could only be discussed by irrational people. Now rational people can also talk about them. And here´s some additional stuff: There are totally childish and laughable subjects in this sub-forum. Most of them are, I mean. They are totally irrational, make no sense, and they are bull. Plus, they are totally random. Something like night stalkers versus dream walkers.. Really cool, isn´t it.. But man, if you have any sense, you can figure that it is totally bullshit.

[DarkLucideity]

I think one of the greatest benefits of this is that new members won't come in here, excited about lucid dreaming, and then start believing in all this stuff without question. Thus they won't become disappointed/delusional. I'm not calling anyone here delusional, but eventually it's going to come to one of those ends. Dreamwalkers/Nightstalkers? Come on. The whole thing is just so erratic and disorganized that it's hardly believable. Not to mention how pretty much there's no explanation but it's all created by your dreaming mind. Holy shit, I just realized that Ghost94 said about the same thing. EDIT: also, I've read a few OBE/whatever guides and if you switched "OBE" with "LD" and "OBE induction" with "WILD" I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between it and a shitty WILD guide.

[DeathCell]

Grow up. You should be able to pick out the childish pretty well, after all your behavior is quite childish..

[moonshine]

Smarties, you´re right. Now, here is everything in a nutshell: BD used to be a sub-forum where irrational subjects could only be discussed by irrational people. Now rational people can also talk about them. And here´s some additional stuff: There are totally childish and laughable subjects in this sub-forum. Most of them are, I mean. They are totally irrational, make no sense, and they are bull. Plus, they are totally random. Something like night stalkers versus dream walkers.. Really cool, isn´t it.. But man, if you have any sense, you can figure that it is totally bullshit. BD used to be a place for believers. As long as you didn't believe it was all a load of rubbish. Its good to see a bit of fairness and parity being injected. Though its dissapointed to see "believers" further coddled and protected from the awful truth in the reopened deep dreaming section.

[Posquant]

I think you're just as unlikely to prove the impossibility of the paranormal as our puny modern science. And, really, quantum mechanics etc. paints the world itself as paranormal, and makes such phenomenon more, not less likely. But the fact that our science is puny doesn't make it's suggestion of the possibility of paranormal phenomenon seem any less compelling. Read this, then read for another five years, then think again: www.dhushara.com/pdf/hard.pdf Good luck ... you will work yourself into knots trying to prove that not. PQ

[Creation X]

I have never been to spain, but I believe in it because there is plenty of evidence to prove its existence. Having not experienced something is not the reason we do not believe in such things as the paranormal, it's the lack of supporting evidence. There are plenty of things I have not experienced that I will take as true, because there is evidence to support the claims. Offer some evidence other than anecdotal stories and strong beliefs. Thats not much to ask, you can do it with ANY other real phenomena, so why not the paranormal? Why is the paranormal given special rights to avoid having to prove itself? You are dumb. You believe in Spain, rofl because everyone knows it's there, and has seen pictures of it, etc. When people do get pictures or video's that are put up, everyone calls it a fake. So, that's why a lot of people don't post videos, or put pictures, because there's no reason to. Why should I do something, and give you proof? I'm satisfied enough that I did it, and I just felt like sharing it. This forum shouldn't be (and isn't) about debate, it should be about general discussion. Say I have a shared dream, and I make a thread about it. The people who have had one before will post there experiences, but those who think it's completely irrational will try to debate. It's just like some lucid dreamers. They stumble upon this site, never having a LD before and think that it's completely fake. Then, they experience it and are amazed at the feeling (usually). Now then, there are KNOWN methods of inducing a lucid dream. And, there are some tutorials for beyond dreaming things. But just like the average new lucid dreamer, it takes two or three tries (most cases it would take more) to get a lucid dream, the same thing applies with most things here in Beyond Dreaming.

[wet_roof113]

Debunking Common Skeptical Arguments Against Paranormal and Psychic Phenomena "The notion that 'It is rational to only believe what's been proven' somehow got twisted into ‘It is irrational to believe in anything that hasn't been proven’." By "proven" skeptics mean proven according to the scientific method, which they consider to be the only reliable method. There are several problems with this argument: 1) First of all, just because something hasn't been proven and established in mainstream science doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't true. If it did, then nothing would exist until proven or discovered. Bacteria and germs would never have caused illnesses until they were proven and discovered, smoking would not cause cancer until it was proven, the planet Pluto would not have existed until it was discovered, etc. Anyone knows that this simply is not so. For instance, when Acupuncture was first introduced in the West, skeptics and certain scientists claimed that it had no basis and only worked due to the placebo effect because they couldn’t understand how it worked. This reflected the typical false thinking of skeptics that anything they don’t understand must be due to superstition or chance. However, practitioners and believers knew otherwise and were later validated by extensive studies have been done to show that it indeed does work for treating various ailments and getting results which placebos can’t account for. An extensive listing of these research studies can be found on the Med lab website. In fact, the AMA (American Medical Association) has already declared that Acupuncture works and is an effective treatment, proving the skeptics wrong. The point is that Acupuncture worked before it was proven to work, not after. 2) Second, just because something hasn't been proven to established science doesn't mean that it hasn't been proved firsthand to certain people. Established views are not the dictum of all reality. Many types of paranormal phenomena have been proved firsthand to eyewitnesses and experiencers. For example, even though the cases of NDE’s don't prove the existence of an afterlife (at least not yet), those who have experienced them claim that the experience of the separation of body and spirit is firsthand proof to them of an afterlife, just as riding in a car is firsthand proof that cars exist, and they fear death no more. Those who have OBE’s (Out of Body Experiences) also make similar claims, and they need no proof nor do they need to convince anyone. These claims are further supported by the fact that in many documented cases the subject could hear conversations or see things in other rooms and other places, which are later confirmed and verified to be remarkably accurate. Who's to say that they're wrong just because we haven't had the same experiences? That would be equivalent to saying that because I’ve never been to Japan, everyone else who claims to have been there is mistaken or deluded. The same goes for eyewitnesses of ghosts, UFO's (Unidentified Flying Objects), alien abductions, Bigfoot, etc. These sightings and encounters range from the obscure and distant to ones that are crystal clear and at point-blank-range, making them much harder to dismiss. 3) Third, many research experiments and studies conducted under the scientific method HAVE passed with positive results. For example, experiments in micro-psychokinesis done by Dr. Robert Jahn and Brenda Dunn at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research labs (PEAR) using random generator machines to measure subjects’ PK influence on them, obtained positive consistent results for over 20 years. These were done under proper controls and scientific procedures, even according to prominent skeptic Ray Hyman, who investigated the Prince experiments in person and conceded that he could find no flaws in the methodology. The small but consistent results achieved by PEAR over 20 years are calculated by chance alone to be 1 in 1035. (For more on PEAR, see their website at www.princeton.edu/~pear/index.html). Likewise, the Ganzfeld experiments in telepathy done in the early 70’s also had repeated success, with receivers in 42 controlled experiments scoring an average of 38 to 45 percent compared to the chance rate of 25 percent. (See Argument # 17) The odds of that occurring by chance are less than one in a billion. More recently, controlled experiments involving four prominent mediums accuracy were done by Dr. Gary Schwartz of the Human Energy Lab of the University of Arizona. (See Argument # 16) These mediums achieved a hit rate 70 to 90 percent, even when in one experiment they were NOT allowed to ask any questions of the sitters or see them! Skeptics repeatedly continue to ignore this fact! (See the Jan 2001 edition of the Journal for the Society of Psychical Research) A list of studies that produced psi results can be found in Dean Radin's book The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena. Many researchers will tell you that these studies prove that telepathy and micro-psychokinesis exist at least on the micro level. The skeptics, of course will say that those tests yielded impossible results and therefore were not done under properly controlled conditions, or else the researchers’ overzealous desire to get psi results botched the results. But this of course reflects their bias and a priori dismissal of facts that don’t fit in with their beliefs. It is not logical to deny the facts that don’t support your beliefs, it is more logical to update your beliefs to account for the facts. Nevertheless, new scientific discoveries tend to pass through stages first before being accepted (see last paragraph of Argument # 8) 4) Fourth, just because something is irrational to skeptics doesn't mean that it is irrational to others who know or believe that it is real. Skeptics and scientific materialists do not have the monopoly on rational thinking. Lots of rational intelligent intellectual people believe in God, spiritual dimensions, or that there is more to reality than the material world. The skeptics' system of rational thinking is not the dictatum by which all things that exist must conform to. This can easily be demonstrated by all the things that skeptics have been wrong about before, such as flight, laws of physics, quantum mechanics, giant squid, etc. proving their fallibility. http://www.victorzammit.com/skeptics/winston.html

[Scatterbrain]

"The notion that 'It is rational to only believe what's been proven' somehow got twisted into ‘It is irrational to believe in anything that hasn't been proven’." Twisted? Lol. If you agree it's only rational to believe in giant squids if there is proof giant squids exist, then it logically follows that believing in giant squids without proof is not rational. (irrational) Lots of rational intelligent intellectual people believe in God, spiritual dimensions, or that there is more to reality than the material world. That's meaningless. Lot's of intelligent people believe in contradictory things.

[The Cusp]

Great post Wetroof! Though its dissapointed to see "believers" further coddled and protected from the awful truth in the reopened deep dreaming section. Lol, your head would explode if you saw what was going on in there!

[Scatterbrain]

I want to feel like I'm accepted and part of something special, please invite me.