It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your "Ufology" Is Lacking. Can You Handle the Truth (Evidence)?

page: 13
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Wow, you do have some ego don;t you? You seem to know the answer to all the big questions and yet, seem to have never actually asked yourself any of them. Lies? Evil??really now....how about just plain stupid, another human construct?. Nothing personal however, I think it's time you took a basic course in philosophy before trying to joust with those who at least have some comprehension of their own fallibility and mundaneness. You can replace everything you call evil with the words, pointless, stupid, wasteful and you still have wholly human constructs.

There's nothing so amusing as someone banging on about moral relativism when everything is relative to their perception of said morals.




posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


Your assumptions are showing again. Attacking the messenger instead of dealing with the issues is old, low class and boring.

Perhaps you know what PhD stands for?

I earned a high quality version with a LOT of dogged work.

More to the point of the thread. . . your responses, indicate to me, that you have a great discomfort to incapacity to handle the truth of the evidence of the evils involved on the part of the critters and their human cohorts.

I don't know of too many people who REALLLLLY, when the rubber meets the road . . . claim that there is

NO EVIL in the world in any traditional sense.

Folks who claim that ALL IS RELATIVE--cannot actually live that way even in their own daily lives. Their choices and behaviors are AS THOUGH things are NOT that relative.

Otherwise . . . some would be killing their associates almost as often? as feeding them. LOL.


.



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Look let me be totally upfront with you.... This thread is about ideas and about what we might think, not about foisting some balmcake religious agenda on people. You wade in here with no manners at al telling everyone... hold the boat.. you don;t need to know anything other than what i know folks..I'm here to correct all your wrongs

Do you have the slightest clue about how darned disrespectful you have been for several posts now towards the person who started this thread? I doubt it as you have absolutely no interest in a discussion at all. You are simply here to foist your beliefs on people and actually have failed to provide a single shred of credible evidence, save anecdotal cant, to back it up.

The Gut starts threads for people to chew the cud and theorise, take a trip outside of their norms and try and wear someone else's philosophical clothes for a while. You pay no heed to that and just come barging in demanding we all listen to your "truth" and that we don't need to discuss cos, you know the answers. Do you have the slightest idea how ignorant that comes across as and how disrespectful to the majority of those who read, participate in and enjoy The Gut's threads?

This thread is about, I suspect, I think ,maybe, not about...Hey kids I'm here to save you all from yourselves cos I know...You want to preach, buy yourself a pulpit, please don't think you''ll get away with it on here.
edit on 5-7-2013 by FireMoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by FireMoon
 


Doooooooodness!

Sensitive, much?

imho . . . ATS is a pretty vigorous give and take kind of place.

I merely offer my perspective. I know a lot are not in sympathy with it. I assume a lot skip my posts. Fine with me.

I fail to understand how reactionary sorts of personal responses to someone's personhood or personal perspective contributes to greater knowledge, wisdom or understanding within one's self.

In terms of the OP, THAT sort of response again seems to SCREAM: "No, I can't take the truth about UFO's and the fallen angel critters. So keep it away from my eyes else I'll label you beyond the pale."

Impressive.

I offer my perspective. I'm 66 years old. I have formed some fairly firm conclusions from my 51 years of study of the topic. Folks are welcome to reject my conclusions and me.

Those who know me best and who have lived with me would laugh at your characterization as the furthest off the wall thing from the truth.

However, enjoy your perspective about me. You clearly have tons of emotion invested in it.



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:06 PM
link   
this has been a eye opening thread.I have enjoyed reading it.I have no idea what the truth is but I am keeping a open mind.I do have a couple questions thou.Wouldn't advanced technology seem like magic and the supernatural to us?Second could they be beings who have evolved to no longer needing there physical bodies like the anceints in stargate.Lastly could the earth itself be doing it with it magnetic field?Just a couple thoughts.



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Hey brother; come back at me when you experience and explore the astral realm. When you have accomplished at least ONE instance of remote viewing. When you have telepathic communication with another human, or non human (which includes animals/plants).

My "construct of this reality" is not based on a BOOK - its based on EXPERIENCE. If you knew anyhting about what Im talking about, even what you, yourself are talking about "Yeshua" who is "Yesus" as I mentioned earlier.. This conversation might of flowed better.

Learn your chakra system, learn your potential energy asa human, open your third eye, then talk to me about "Yeshua" and some "god" dude
I'll tell you right now, your idea of the individuals you talk about, are not anyhting like you think they are. Thats why they come form RELIGION - aka the unltimate deception of the human mind..

When you look outside of yourself for the one that created you - you fail a lifetime over. Your not even and EXTERNAL consciousness, you are an INTERNAL being living inside a body - so obviously your creator will not be outside - its inside. Theres the biggest clue for you to ponder.

Why pray (Prey) upon something that you cannot commune with? Why doesnt your "god" or "yeshua" answer your prayers? Because hes not there! OPEN YUR MIND, ACTIVATE your CHAKRAS - then come back at me


.. Sorry but its wake up call time - I dont play games



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by covertpanther
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Hey brother; come back at me when you experience and explore the astral realm. When you have accomplished at least ONE instance of remote viewing. When you have telepathic communication with another human, or non human (which includes animals/plants).

My "construct of this reality" is not based on a BOOK - its based on EXPERIENCE. If you knew anyhting about what Im talking about, even what you, yourself are talking about "Yeshua" who is "Yesus" as I mentioned earlier.. This conversation might of flowed better.

Learn your chakra system, learn your potential energy asa human, open your third eye, then talk to me about "Yeshua" and some "god" dude
I'll tell you right now, your idea of the individuals you talk about, are not anyhting like you think they are. Thats why they come form RELIGION - aka the unltimate deception of the human mind..

When you look outside of yourself for the one that created you - you fail a lifetime over. Your not even and EXTERNAL consciousness, you are an INTERNAL being living inside a body - so obviously your creator will not be outside - its inside. Theres the biggest clue for you to ponder.

Why pray (Prey) upon something that you cannot commune with? Why doesnt your "god" or "yeshua" answer your prayers? Because hes not there! OPEN YUR MIND, ACTIVATE your CHAKRAS - then come back at me


.. Sorry but its wake up call time - I dont play games


I don't want to get into a religious discussion here but the Bible actually addresses all of the things which you calling him ignorant of. IE 7 chakras, seven heads of the beast with a rebirth to follow a 'one-eyed' false prophet to boot . . . it goes on and on.

If you are interested I will link you to a thread where it has all been laid out including my own explorations.

That being said I feel the UFO contact/abduction phenomena is closely linked to this experience of "illumination" which has always been the method of contacting the 'gods' and is ever present within the UFO cult communities and various religions that have spawned up in this age.

And for God's sake its YOU'RE . . .
edit on 5-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by covertpanther
 


Ahhhhhh . . . evidently . . .

the seductiveness of some experiences has not occurred to you.

Whereas the exclusively GREEK manner of knowing is insufficient

[i.e. dissecting to the smallest component etc.--more or less the so called "scientific" method]

so also

is the exclusively HEBREW manner of knowing.

[i.e. as in Adam KNEW Eve--sexually. Phenomenological methodologies are robust and fitting in many situations. However, KNOWLEDGE THROUGH EXPERIENCE is inherently seductive and can easily be deceptive and delusional when used alone.]


A balance between the two is best, imho.

A long list of the sorts of experiences you mention are best accounted for, imho, by my cosmology vs yours.

. . . as are the craft and critters . . .

However, if you wish to examine your construct system and its robustness . . . and thereby its capacity to investigate reality and make functional practical predictions . . . here's a good site for that:

gigi.cpsc.ucalgary.ca:2000...

Though I'd suspect that such a scientific examination of your construct system would reveal it to be a bit too narrow . . . significantly too rigid . . . to be maximally functional at making good hypotheses and predictions about reality.

I will say this given the thread topic . . . you seem to have offered many illustrations earning you the status of the front runner as a great example of folks who are NOT REALLY "up to handling the truth about UFOs."

Perhaps a scientific examination of your construct system at the WebGrid 5 link could help you improve on such capacities.

It's one thing to have weaknesses in being able to face the UFO realities.

It's another thing to stay stuck there.

WE all have weaknesses in construing reality. Maintaining a death grip on such weaknesses is not usually considered a great survival habit or skill.
.
.




edit on 5/7/2013 by BO XIAN because: ADDITION of defs



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by othello
Wouldn't advanced technology seem like magic and the supernatural to us?


Probably Arthur C Clark was right about that.

However . . . . HOW do you propose to be ABLE to

detect

the DIFFERENCE between

1. super advanced technology;
2. traditional occult magic
3. supernatural manifestations of God's angels vs
4. supernatural manifestations and/or super technologies of fallen angels in cahoots with Lucifer?

THAT, it seems to me . . . could be an incredibly problematic discrimination task.



Second could they be beings who have evolved to no longer needing there physical bodies like the anceints in stargate.


I suppose that WERE IT THE CASE that . . . there really are an infinite amount of possibilities--that that could be one of them. I don't actually think that there ARE a truly infinite number of possibilities but it sounds all scientifically fun to pretend that there are.

In the case of the critters . . . the trouble is, they DO manifest in physical bodies . . . and they USE said physical bodies AND technologies to RAPE human victims. There's also evidently something very serious and important to them about MIXING their DNA with human DNA . . . which . . . from ancient times to this--has left The Almighty God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, furious with them.



Lastly could the earth itself be doing it with it magnetic field?


Sorry. I think such notions are absolutely off the wall. A magnetic field is . . . in normal senses of the term . . . VERY IMPERSONAL. The critters get VERY PERSONAL to the extreme.

The magnetic field notion takes a kind of generalized dynamic between impersonal more or less homogeneous matter . . . and pretends that somehow there's a magical leap from said matter to very detailed and differentiated complex structures, organisms, events, dynamics, transactions etc. It just does not compute, to me.



Just a couple thoughts.


I'm all for thoughts--including off the wall out of the box thoughts--some may trigger a very practical and useful thought as in brainstorming.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by othello
this has been a eye opening thread.I have enjoyed reading it.I have no idea what the truth is but I am keeping a open mind.I do have a couple questions thou.

Wouldn't advanced technology seem like magic and the supernatural to us?

Second could they be beings who have evolved to no longer needing there physical bodies like the anceints in stargate.

Lastly could the earth itself be doing it with it magnetic field?Just a couple thoughts.

Hey, othello, thanks for stopping by! It's an honor to be visited by an ATS family member who has been here since 2005!


Yep, I agree those are some of the very best questions when keeping an open mind. The magnetic field question especially intrigues me these days and seems to hold within itself possible answers in ALL the categories we discuss in relation to ufology.

The gubmint is also VASTLY and consistently interested in the possibilities & uses of electromagnetism. I even sometimes wonder that if they ARE hiding anything of value about the mystery, could it be some stunning news that has to do with EM.

I actually have the makings of a thread about EM--from UFOs to mind control to weaponry to high-strangeness to hallucinations--that I can't seem to finish because the information--and its implications--continue to run ever deeper and wider and eludes my meager abilities for trying to tame it into something cohesive. I HATE it when that happens. And so often, too!


See you around, mate.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


Absolutely the EM effect on the brain is incredibly interesting. It was the method used in producing the effects of the 'god helmet' ( en.wikipedia.org... ) that has resulted in experiences very much comparable to the abduction/contact phenomena.

So many questions spring up such as, do the chakra meditations cause the brain to mimic the EM fields, what exactly are these EM fields acting on to produce such effects, why the similar experiences across the board, are these the actually a physical experience or are the marks a manifestation of what happens in the dream state?

A few more years and I will finally have access to proper equipment, mathematical models, and established data sets which I may just use to pursue this line of questioning further.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
Sigh.

I wish such issues weren't so tedious.


Me too. Sigh.




How SUBJECTIVE do you think the millions of oppressed individuals and families think their experiences were wherein there were physical damage to their bodies and sometimes horrible deaths from demonic forces?


That is the very definition of subjective. THEY THINK. If they believe the cause of their woes are invisible demonic forces, then it is subjective.

Since one individual causing bodily harm, or even death, to another individual, is a felony in every jurisdiction that I am aware of, these are things that should be reported to law enforcement and medical personnel. In a few cases, this has been done. However, to this date, no one has successfully provided any concrete evidence of supernatural involvement in this cases. No laws or ordinances regarding cases of supernatural harm have been brought forth. No case has conclusively, via scientific or legal investigation, has proved that anyone has been abducted or harmed by any non-human entity. And since more logical explanations have been given in many cases (mental or emotional disorders, sleep disorders, physical problems, or some sort of hazard in the environment) then the explanation of "demons" is a totally subjective one.

Just because I believe that my bruises, scratches, or illness was caused by spirits does not mean it was caused by spirits. That is a subjective interpretation. It has no factual basis in reality, because there is no evidence of spirits existing in the first place. Nothing concrete, at least.




How many of the more than 3 MILLION abductees have you talked to face to face about how SUBJECTIVE the traumas they experienced were?

How SUBJECTIVE do you think it was to the mothers who had their babies taken from their wombs at the end of the first trimester with not a shred of baby evidence left--sometimes the very evening of the exam that day by the gynecologist who had VERY NON-SUBJECTIVELY VERIFIED that

1. THE BABY WAS THERE and
2. That the baby was doing fine.


So far, no one has proven that

1. Three million people have been abducted. That number was based on very spurious conclusions from the Roper poll. Just because a person has experienced sleep paralysis, weird dreams, or missing time does not mean they have been abducted by anything. I answered positively to about 6 of the Roper poll questions. And guess what. I do not believe I have been abducted by aliens or demons. Because all six of my "abductee" experiences all had very normal, mundane explanations.

Have YOU talked the the supposed three million abductees? Doubtful. I have talked to some people who believe they had an abduction experience. Some are traumatized. Some thought it was awesome and believe they have been enlightened or made better by the experience. Some are mildly confused. Different reactions to perceived events. Very subjective.



NO LESS REAL than the damages--cuts, scratches, breaks, death and destruction to bodies and property by demonic forces.


So far, I have yet to learn of any reliable, independently investigated case, where the cause of harm, let alone death and destruction, was proven, or even given solid evidence of, that it was caused by evil invisible or other inter dimensional beings. Hell, I'm still waiting for some sort of good, reliable evidence that demons or any other spirits exist in the real, corporeal sense, and not in the subjective, perceptive, metaphysical sense.




Uhhhhhhhhhhh methinks your biases are showing fairly brazenly . . . evidently you have been swallowing wholesale the dogma, doctrines and blather of the religion of scientism and the PTB MSM mass media brainwashing memes.

The demonic literature is a lot older and MORE VERIFIED than the modern UFO literature.

M Unger is a decent source.

Neil Anderson

Bob Larson

Derek Prince

all have jousted with such successfully and have plenty of narratives in their literature.

The notion that the GREEK manner of KNOWING is the only valid one is idiocy on the face of it--for thought-filled people.


And your biases are also apparent. People in ancient times believed thunder was shot out of the sky from angry gods, and that what we now know and understand as epilepsy, schizophrenia, and other disorders were caused by spirit possession. That eclipses were caused by dragons eating the sun. That earthquakes were caused by pissed off sea gods. That throwing helpless cats into a bonfire would drive devils away. That diseases were caused by curses or angry spirits.

So if people thousands of years ago believed and "knew" all this "wisdom" it MUST be true! Because they totally understood everything!




posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 


Let me clear one issue up for you right this very instant concerning 'real corporeal demons' in regards to Christianity. There is no such thing. Their holy book the Bible states clearly that they all had their corporeal bodies destroyed in the flood. So the only place in which one can exist is via 'possession' and in what is often called the 'astral realm'.

EDIT
Well most of them at least, so it is very unlikely that if they existed they would be risking exposure to humans via random abductions. One must remember that they were wiped out by men with swords.
EDIT

Now knowing this it will become all the more frustrating when you hear people talk about real physical demons, your welcome. LoL

As far as the superstitions of the past there is a large body of evidence that those sacrifices were symbolic acts and that the priestly class could have been in possession of knowledge which was taught via symbols.

For example the god Bacchus was said to be able to bring people to and from the land of the dead and was represented with agricultural symbols. This was resembling the fact that Bacchus was the constellation Capricorn which when the Sun passed through during the winter solstice. Winter meant death and starvation to the ancient peoples. On another level his rituals involved beating drums, consuming drugs and wine, and dancing till you drop in the hopes of a 'liberating' experience (basically a modern rave). This liberating experience was a feeling of leaving the body very similar to an OBE.

Basically there is more to it than mere superstition, it is encoded in a symbolic language with several layers of meaning. These several layers of meaning encouraged a more complex thought process.
edit on 6-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


I actually have read Vallee's 5 arguments against ETH. While he certainly does well on some points (like reports of beings vanishing and reappearing, or the humanoid shape reported of most alien encounters) overall, especially for the core cases in ufology, the argument doesn't really stick to a number of the nuts and bolts cases. It certainly would apply to a number of more ambiguous incidents.

While a number of reported events get thrown into the category of UFO sighting, only a relatively small number have gained the interest and study of the more empirically minded researchers, especially those involved in the hard sciences like engineering and biology. In other words, the "nuts and bolts" cases. The more subjective cases, where people experienced something that is not independently verifiable or objective, tend to be more of interest to other paranormal fields of study.

Not all UFO sightings or experiences would qualify under the ETH. But the ones that do are of interest to me. And in those more solid cases, a metaphysical explanation would make no sense.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Symbolism and ritual, again, subjective things that require belief, not evidence. Changing thinking and perception are both things that create subjective experience. If I do not believe in gods, spirits, or demons, than none of these entities will have any effect, subjective or objective, on me. If I do not believe in an entity or concept named Bacchus, corporeal or not, then any ritual or secret celebration will be little more than a drunken orgy for the hell of it, without any significant change in my thought. Beyond of course, intoxication. Those who believe in Bacchus will believe, feel, see, and think some sort of greater significance and belief in the whole thing. These are subjective things. The only objective thing in this example is that there is a party taking place. Whoever observes the orgy will see a bunch of intoxicated people having fun, regardless of who or why the individuals involved are partaking.

I get what you are saying about symbolism and such, but symbolism is again, subjective and not concrete. What one symbol means to one person has an entirely different meaning to another person. I apply certain symbolic meaning to things that are of subjective importance to me. But they are only important to me. The symbols do not have any real power beyond what I apply to them. The only objective reality would be the concept or object of whatever is symbolized exists. Like, black cats, number 13, ect.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 


The drumming and dancing acts as a form of mesmerism which has a documented physical response in the brain.

I understand that you want to focus entirely on evidence that is easier to attribute objective data from which to analyze. However all the subjective experiences, by many, are believed to be the result of some physical phenomena so it would behoove one to investigate such things as well.

Just my 2 cents as I agree there is a great need to determine the validity of a nuts and bolts type craft and deduce their potential origins. It is important to pursue all angles when searching for truth.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
Try Yeshua.

HE HAS helped at least 100's of folks stop "ET" abductions in the middle of them . . . and stopped generations of their family experiencing such from happening ever again.


And granting that for the sake of discussion, how many "ET abductions/demonic possessions" have been stopped throughout the history of humankind by appealing to other deities? Or even to one's higher self?

Once again oversimplifying but perhaps any given religious belief system is just one of many constructs through which an underlying phenomenon is filtered; a phenomenon which would clearly have at least something to do with the function of the human brain/psyche.

Regarding the ETH vs. EDH vs. Demon/Angel discussion: even taking into account the possibility of the existence of some evidence, all three theories posit realities beyond what is verifiable by the scientific method.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


I am getting it now (the video)

It seems you are confusing the difference between reading the actual thought taking place and scanning the areas of the brain being highlighted and predicting whether a thought would be a lie or truth or apple.

You are not addressing the origin of that thought.

EDIT
Thought Identification
en.wikipedia.org...


Identifying thoughts

When humans think of an object, like a screwdriver, many different areas of the brain activate. Psychologist Marcel Just and his colleague, Tom Mitchell, have used FMRI brain scans to teach a computer to identify the various parts of the brain associated with specific thoughts.[2]

This technology also yielded a discovery: similar thoughts in different human brains are surprisingly similar neurologically. To illustrate this, Just and Mitchell used their computer to predict, based on nothing but FMRI data, which of several images a volunteer was thinking about. The computer was 100% accurate, but so far the machine is only distinguishing between 10 images.[2]

Psychologist John Dylan-Haynes states that FMRI can also be used to identify recognition in the brain. He provides the example of a criminal being interrogated about whether he recognizes the scene of the crime or murder weapons.[2] Just and Mitchell also claim they are beginning to be able to identify kindness, hypocrisy, and love in the brain.

. . . .

Predicting intentions
See also: Neuroscience of free will

Some researchers in 2008 were able to predict, with 60% accuracy, whether a subject was going to push a button with their left or right hand. This is notable, not just because the accuracy is better than chance, but also because the scientists were able to make these predictions up to 10 seconds before the subject acted - well before the subject felt they had decided.[7] This data is even more striking in light of other research suggesting that the decision to move, and possibly the ability to cancel that movement at the last second,[8] may be the results of unconscious processing.[9]

. . .


Do you understand the distinction?
edit on 5-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101


I'm not misunderstanding anything relevant to what our little debate is about. The fact of the matter that you said, directly, that thought comes from protons and electrons. It doesn't. It comes from chemical reactions, and protons and electrons are not chemicals. They are the building blocks of chemicals, sure, but they're the building block of everything and anything physical. They are NOT thoughts, nor can one "predict the future once the protons and electrons in his/her brain are acting accordingly." (Paraphrashing)

There is zero evidence of what you claim.

You told me to "research it." Okay, well I did. And there is no evidence. And so now I'm asking you to point me directly to a source which verifies your claims and you can't do it. It's not coincidence. The scientific research didn't conveniently disappear to make you look wrong, you're simply incorrect and you refuse to accept it.

I only want your colloquial proton/electron theory explained. I don't want to hear anything else. I don't care what else you (claim to) know about the functions of the brain or what thoughts are in a philosophical manner. Answer me directly and straightforward with evidence relevant to protons and electrons carrying thought by themselves, and if you don't have any source material then please don't bother responding.


edit on 6-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


Actually there is no generally accepted theory to the origin of thought or how experience works . . . there is a theory that it is a complex transference of electrons between different chemical structures, but this theory is currently having difficulty identifying what those interactions are.

For example there is currently no pill you can take to experience a memory constructed by others.

You have not produced any evidence to counter the binding problems I linked you to nor the hard problem of consciousness. Even Kurzweil acknowledges the short comings of the current scientific model of the brain in this regard.

EDIT
Watched your documentary as well and it does not deal with the idea which you claimed it did, sorry. The man clearly states that consciousness is non physical and assigns quantum principles to it.
edit on 6-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by HairlessApe
 

You have not produced any evidence to counter the binding problems I linked you to nor the hard problem of consciousness. Even Kurzweil acknowledges the short comings of the current scientific model of the brain in this regard.


That's because there is no reason to counter a layman's opinion on a subject he isn't qualified to speak on. You can't disprove a false claim without there being any research into the subject. You could tell me a portal to fairy world exists in my closet but I can't access it because I'm a mud-blood and I couldn't disprove you or offer a definitive counter-point either. The only appropriate course I'm left with is to ask, "fair enough, show me the evidence." At this point, I've done that. And even though I asked you to not reply without evidence directly related to your idea of protons/electrons carrying thought, though you have anyways, as though you had something relevant to say.

I did not make a claim. I simply said that you have zero evidence to back your claim. And so far you haven't shown any.



EDIT
Watched your documentary as well and it does not deal with the idea which you claimed it did, sorry.
edit on 6-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101


I'm fairly certain it did. But I watch too many docs for my own good. It very well may have been part of the TEDTalks.

But anyways... As compensation I'll put up a few snippets regarding accurate thought-prediction:




Thought identification refers to the empirically verified use of technology to, in some sense, read people's minds. Recent research using neuroimaging has provided some early demonstrations of the technology's potential to recognize high-order patterns in the brain. In some cases, this provides meaningful (and controversial) information to investigators. Professor of neuropsychology, Barbara Sahakian, qualifies "A lot of neuroscientists in the field are very cautious and say we can't talk about reading individuals' minds, and right now that is very true, but we're moving ahead so rapidly, it's not going to be that long before we will be able to tell whether someone's making up a story, or whether someone intended to do a crime with a certain degree of certainty."





Psychologist Marcel Just and his colleague, Tom Mitchell, have used FMRI brain scans to teach a computer to identify the various parts of the brain associated with specific thoughts.

...

To illustrate this, Just and Mitchell used their computer to predict, based on nothing but FMRI data, which of several images a volunteer was thinking about. The computer was 100% accurate, but so far the machine is only distinguishing between 10 images





In 2011, a team led by Shinji Nishimoto used only brain recordings to partially reconstruct what volunteers were seeing.




On January 31, 2012 Brian Pasley and colleagues of University of California Berkeley published their paper in PLoS Biology where in subjects internal neural processing of auditory information was decoded and reconstructed as sound on computer by gathering and analyzing electrical signals directly from subjects brains.[




Emotiv Systems, an Australian electronics company, has demonstrated a headset that can be trained to recognize a user's thought patterns for different commands




en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 6-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join