posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:59 PM
Bosansky, yes you are right he is looking like an ass. Ah well.
I am going to respond to the general criticisms by the critics. I don't think we are making claims to being superior beings, we are simply trying to
understand a phenomenon that many of us are perceiving, and like yourself looking for explanations. Resorting to adhominems will just make you look
like an ass.
I believe I said earlier that I have mostly dismissed them as optical illusions in the past, but I am now open to other explanations as the previous
explanation is unsatisfactory. This means I will consider all explanations, even the spiritual ones. So far the mundane explanations you have given do
not explain the phenomenon I am perceiving, and I repeatedly described this phenomenon.
The "visual snow" explanation does not explain the phenomenon becauset the tiny dots are moving around randomly and erratically, and they are very
vivid points of lights with multple colours. This is unlike visual snow.
Therefore this explanation has to be rejected.
The "floaters" explanation does not explain the phenomenon, for the same reason and also because I know the phenomenaon of floaters too, and can
make a distinction between them. Therefore this explanation has to be rejected
The "dust in the eyes" explanation does not explain the phenomenon because if there is a dust in the eye it would irritate the eye and that the
phenomenon stops by itself in a few moments or seconds, and maybe resumes again much later. If it was dust in the eye it would be consistently seen.
Moreover, I have had dust in my eyes before and I do not see the tiny dots. Therefore this explanation has to be rejected.
Light illuminating the dust in the air explanation does not explain the phenomeon because I know what dust illuminated by light looks like, and thus
can make a distinction between them. Also, because the tiny dots are moving very randomly and erratically in the air, appearing and disappearing in
different locations, which is nothing like the movement of dust in the air. Also, because they are very vivid, unlike any other normal visual
perception. Therefore this explanation must be rejected.
The white blood cells explanation does not explain the phenomenon, because the explanation itself is in need of explanation. This is the most silly of
the lot so far given by critics. Also, if it was this mundane, then I would experience it regularly. This not the case. It has been a long time since
I last saw the tiny dots. Therefore this explanation must be rejected.
As all these mundane physical explanations fail, I have no other recourse but to look at metaphysical explanations. This is likely, because my seeing
of the tiny dots has apperared more frequently since I began meditation practice. They take place in the peripheral of my vision which is the same
vision that enables me to see auras around objects. They are consistent with Quantum mechanical explanations of virtual particles which flash in and
out of existence. Moreover they are described in ancient sources as well as subtle particles that can become visible to a meditator. Modern Yogis also
describe them as "lifetrons" and "microvita" This explanation is far more consistent with the description of the tiny dots and thus it is the most
compelling to me.
The tiny dots are definitely a perceptual phenomena and the cause of these therefore as physical causes is only a theory. There is still no proof in
nerubiology that perception is being caused by physical things. Therefore it is all open to speculation. If you continue to force your explanations on
us as defacto, then suffice it to say, you are being an ass.
I would also ask the critic to be more open to others experiences and stop trying to insinuate there is something wrong with others, simply because
they are experiencing a reality that is different to yours. There is a vast body of phenomenological data that suggests that these experiences are
common. Ironically, many people in this thread have reported to having similar experiences. Again if we look at the phenomenological data of Yogis and
mystics etc there is even a description for these tiny dots, and names for them. Just because you have not experienced them yourself, does not negate
this mass of data.
[edit on 6-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]