Fight Club Pub.

I'm posting this here because, apparantly being being a few minutes late has locked me out of posting my closing argument.

CLOSING ARGUMENT

In my opening statement I asked the three questions that are relevant to the postulate that my esteemed opponent and I are debating. In the main body of this presentation I have answered, as promise, we have seen that the answers to all three of those questions are in the affirmative. Now let us review.


1. Can dreams be influenced and manipulated by sensory stimuli, such as sound, from an external source?

Yes, of course. We've all, I expect, dosed off and experienced an alarm and/or ambient sounds and spoken language becoming intertwined into the narrative of our dreams. I've related the specific anecdotal example of Bob Cunningham "writing" a version of Shortnin' Bread in a dream only to be told that he'd actually heard that version, while dozing, as it was broadcast on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.


2. Can the dreams of the dreamer be understood, in real time, by an external observer?

I've shown how the research of Yukiyasu Kamitani, et al, has led to the development of technology that can view the thoughts of his subjects as they occur, and the increasing possibility that dreams can actually be "videotaped", like a movie on a television screen, in the not too distant future. Such tools show remarkable promise for the future of therapy through dream manipulation.


3. Can an external observer, then, apply sensory stimuli from an external source to influence and manipulate the dreams of the dreamer?

This is simply a matter of applying the results of the requisite research to develop methodologies that are safe and effective at the manipulation of dreams. The foundations for the development of such methods are well in place, dispite my opponents assertions to the contrary.

My opponent suggests that normal non-lucid dreams become memorable if they are emotionally significant enough, even though by his own admission the parts of the brain responsible for such dreams do not support long-term memory and thus such dreams do not prompt the development of neural pathways.

While some sources, as I've pointed out, claim that dreams occur in a part of the brain that supports only short-term memory, we all know from experience, I trust, that some dreams can be very memorable indeed, especially if they occur shortly before we are awoken.

(emphasis mine)

We've all had memorable dreams, no doubt, and they do usually seem to happen before you wake up.

The lasting impact of dreams -- their memorability, if you will -- being associated with their proximity to waking up is not a trivial aspect. It is of major significance because we are discuss dream reading and manipulation that would occur in a clinical setting, where the subject is not neccessarily tucked in for the night but, rather, undergoing a scheduled weekly treatment program. The hightened memory acuity, emotional state and executive functioning of the subject shown to be present in that circumstance is key, not incidental, to the effectiveness of the therapy.


My opponent would have us believe that dreams are but a sideshow to reality; that they have been inconsequential in the development of the psyche and, therefore, shall forever be inconsequential in the forging of our behavior. But the hypothesis that the relationship between the conscious and the subconscious mind is a one-way street is just that; a hypothesis.

The person who has already decided that the dreams can never play a role in the perpetual re-encoding of the neurological landscape that defines who we are, and how we behave on life's large stage, will not be the person who discovers how to do it. I've shown that it can be done if we want it to be done, and the first step toward realizing that goal is to accept that charge. Otherwise dreams will be forever disconnected from "reality", and a significant percentage of the life that we experience is but a dream.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Oh yeah, because everyone knows I'm no good at all at putting words in your mouth. I'm harmless. lol

I can't believe you did that to me, Vag. BOOO!!!!!

I'm suggesting that if I'd been in the mood to BS I could have made the implant thread the crown jewel of my argument. But that definitely is an exageration.

Yeah, I'm a little evil, but I didn't prepare a post for that ahead of time to run up the score.

An Apt Metaphor

And that's really me shooting by the way. It's an exerpt from a student film that I acted in- Pagando El Coyote. Beware it contains profanity, violence, and racism, and is a flagrantly inaccurate propaganda piece that I do not necessarily endorse. It's also not all that awesome- such is life for directors who have little more than vision I guess- although we did take 3rd in the college film festival. Anyway, as a disclaimer, I only happen to be in it because a mutual friend between the director and I asked for a favor (and since I spent most of elementary school beating the everloving snot out of her obnoxious older brother, I felt I owed her one by proxy).


Edit to add- that ended up being a once in a lifetime kind of shot. I took the very top off a very sharply tapered boulder- I can't accurately estimate the range, but I can tell you I was pretty much guessing on the sighting because I couldn't quite focus in on the tip of the rock (If you've seen the movie Sergeant York, where they're shooting for the very tip of a notched card, that's a pretty decent explanation of the kind of accuracy test it was). It took me several minutes to convince anyone that I'd hit it on purpose. USMC Rifle Expert baby.

[edit on Thu Feb 26 2009 by The Vagabond]

Originally posted by GAOTU789

Originally posted by Heike

GAOTU, don't worry. Our MemoryShock is much too sweet and humble to get a big head. But, is this a hint that you'd like us to start a club for you? Ladies, what do you think would be a good icon for him? A teddy bear maybe?

Ummmm.........

No. That is quite all right. I prefer to be a more anonymous type mod. No fan club required.

I appreciate the offer and all.

. I don't think anybody is that desparate for applause yet though.

I think a teddy bear would be quite good. A very fair and wise teddy bear. In pink, naturally, even if it will clash with the Canadian flag

But can I be President of the GAOTU fan club? I submit as evidence of my fittingness for the position:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I wonder if I can lodge a complaint on the grounds I had until 11:25 PM to post and The Vagabond posted at 11:25 PM. After all, with 60 seconds available in each minute, odds are 50/50 that Vag didn't wait the full 24 hours before posting.

Any thoughts on that?

[edit on 26-2-2009 by Tuning Spork]

Originally posted by Heike


@ orange - guess what, you aren't the only "devil" in the FCP!

heike you rock!


be a member of the devil.s lounge

i sign up for MS, GAOTU and Semper fanclub

any plans for McLean, doggy, and other unions?


MS color is pink

Sempers should be either lavender or a very light green

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c60b5dd28417.gif[/atsimg]


so good morning pub!



[edit on Thu February 26 2009 by orange-light]

reply to post by Tuning Spork


I was thinking the same thing. If you change your date format to "r" in MemCenter, you will see that The Vagabond posted at Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:25:06 PST, and the previous post timestamp was Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:25:32. So he posted 26 seconds early. Get your closing statement posted, and see what the moderator says.

Originally posted by Ian McLean
So he posted 26 seconds early. Get your closing statement posted, and see what the moderator says.

That seems like excellent advice

Happy almost-birthday, Ian

orange: I think only mods get official fan clubs. The other guys have to wait.

reply to post by Ian McLean


Excellent find, Ian. That's the ticket.

I can't post my statement, though, because the thread is locked. I'll U2U MemoryShock.

Thank you again. Vag wants t'play hardball, eh? MWAHHAHHAHHAHHAH!!!

**rubs hands together**

Originally posted by americandingbat

orange: I think only mods get official fan clubs. The other guys have to wait.

so we are fine with semper and can start a FCP guy admiration - thought

just a thought not a fanclub not a thread


and we are very gracious and offer them to serve us drinks, flowers, choloclate, help
or what ever they think makes us think pleasantly of them

Morning everyone.

How goes it?

reply to post by nyk537


Good morning nyk

I couldn't be happier that Springer and SO decided to announce the new drug policy just as the first round ended and I was concerned I might have to start picking fights with creationists and atheists again

reply to post by americandingbat




Unfortunately now though we will have to suffer through several weeks of people screaming about suppression of their right to free speech and how ATS has sold out and blah, blah, blah…

Some of us may be in trouble though. Word is that the new drug policy here at ATS includes random testing.

Originally posted by nyk537

Some of us may be in trouble though. Word is that the new drug policy here at ATS includes random testing.

I suppose there's a sensor built into my monitor that can take a sample of my exhaled breath, analyze it for illegal substances, and send the results to SkepticOverlord and the DEA?

Hey, maybe I'll make a thread in SkunkWorks wondering whether that's the case

reply to post by americandingbat


I'm sure you would get quite a few people who would believe it sadly. I'm all for conspiracies (heck, that's why we're here) but some people take it a little too far.



Devices in your monitor to check for illegal drug use is just silly.



They will actually be sending government agents to our homes to check us in our sleep.

reply to post by nyk537


And that's different from the regular drama, how, exactly?

I'm stunned by the sheer number of posts in those BBQ threads! I'd jump into the fray, but I think the volume of rant is still pretty much overwhelming most reasoned discussion, and I'm far too moderate on the subject to get all vehement-like. It's nice to see young idealistic libertarians get all riled up, though.

Originally posted by nyk537
Devices in your monitor to check for illegal drug use is just silly.

Yes, everyone knows that's what the mandatory 'smoke detectors' are for. Why do you think they contain 'radium'? That's right, to power the hidden radio transmitter!