Finally, A 10 second lucid induction! Title -*MFG*

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by malac

@Golden Son : When you grab it, is it to the point of high vividness that makes you think of how real it looks?

---

Yes, like I said my visualization is king, I've taken objects the size of 20 story buildings and broken them down piece by piece in full detail in my mind and traced them back all the way to their original thought where they're an intangible object existing in someones mind. It was full vividness, its just that my physical body continued to override and grab with my real hands waking me up, and nose plug rc proved I wasn't dreaming. That's the only problem, if you fail Grab, it takes its toll, but if you fail FILD you are still relaxed and can try again way more easily. Had my first real lucid last night so will stick to FILD's subtle movement backed by trusty traditional relaxation WILD.

And why do you dislike SP so much? Just train yourself to welcome it dude, like I said it's a natural occurrence. Last night I heard the weirdest shit, felt my bed tilt all the way to its side, and felt my body fall hundreds of feet in 3 separate locations one after another and I was completely calm, I welcomed it. After 5 seconds of strange feeling I was lucid, no biggie! SP is your friend!

Lol SP is laughable and I enjoy it somewhat, but after so many times... oh so many times..it can be a little annoying. As for people who don't like sp because of the old hag or whatever they call it, its all in the head and negative thoughts produce a negative situation. ...Think I just solved the sp annoying prob right now.. People think of scary stuff and it sometimes happen during SP but I instead think of how annoying it is not to move, thus expecting it to happen... :banana: Think I'll do it again in a couple minutes after lunch and see what happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by malac

@Golden Son : When you grab it, is it to the point of high vividness that makes you think of how real it looks? Also about my "V-Wild". I'm not holding it or anything, I just feel like people should create their own version of WILD since its them operating their own mind. When I'm finish with mine, then sure I'll tell you if you want, not top secret or anything :) Beware of the SP that comes after it...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommo

Well SP is fairly universal.

---

So SP coming after it is common then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spaceexplorer

There really isn't anything new here.
And calling it a 10 second induction so emphatically and to be frank, arrogantly, is meaningless.
If you actually read the "Technique"
the very first step requires you to sleep for quite a few hours... which in itself immediately wipes out the 10 second claim. If you ignore that side of things, then when is this magical 10 second timer starting?
Also what here is really new and not just a rewording or hashing together of things that are already well known?

---

I'm new to this thread, and new to the forums in general. But as I was skimming through this thread, I noticed the general mood change. Read the first page and see all the positive posts contributing. Then skip to the second last page and start seeing insults and, what I see as jealousy.

Okay, spaceexplorer, I'm picking on you because your posts sounds like something a 15 year old would say with a 5 year old brain. So, let's get technical, shall we!

The method cannot be deemed a 10 second method because it requires "quite a few hours" which "itself immediately wipes out the 10 second claim". Right? But wait, even you are wrong! Because the method actually requires you to be born first, and then reach an age in which you can read the method, and then reach a mental level of competence in order to actually carry out the method, and THEN several hours of sleep! So, maybe we should actually call this the life-long method! But doesn't a WBTB WILD require several hours of sleep also? Would you deem that a long and drawn-out process? Probably not!

Next childish comment.

"Also what here is really new and not just a rewording or hashing together of things that are already well known?"

Well, I for one (and being a noob, you should be ashamed that I noticed this and not you) noticed the use of reaching out with your real hands to be new. I haven't seen this before. I've read more about a WILD where you DON'T try to move, and it can take up to 30 minutes to fully enter the dream.

So, why does it bother you that someone has come up with a method you didn't think up? Why? You should be thankful! I haven't actually tried this method, but I will. And as long as I keep a positive attitude, it'll probably work for me. As for you, it may require an attitude adjustment first. Let go of the jealousy and put your big girl panties on. Just give the guy and his method the time of day at least. And if it still doesn't work for you, then that's all...it didn't work for you. Do you bash LaBerge for developing techniques that don't work for you? Suck it up, man!

As for malac...good job. I like seeing fresh ideas. Even the slightest alteration can be a whole new spin off something old and worn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paradox-db3

I'm new to this thread, and new to the forums in general. But as I was skimming through this thread, I noticed the general mood change. Read the first page and see all the positive posts contributing. Then skip to the second last page and start seeing insults and, what I see as jealousy.

Okay, spaceexplorer, I'm picking on you because your posts sounds like something a 15 year old would say with a 5 year old brain. So, let's get technical, shall we!

The method cannot be deemed a 10 second method because it requires "quite a few hours" which "itself immediately wipes out the 10 second claim". Right? But wait, even you are wrong! Because the method actually requires you to be born first, and then reach an age in which you can read the method, and then reach a mental level of competence in order to actually carry out the method, and THEN several hours of sleep! So, maybe we should actually call this the life-long method! But doesn't a WBTB WILD require several hours of sleep also? Would you deem that a long and drawn-out process? Probably not!

Next childish comment.

"Also what here is really new and not just a rewording or hashing together of things that are already well known?"

Well, I for one (and being a noob, you should be ashamed that I noticed this and not you) noticed the use of reaching out with your real hands to be new. I haven't seen this before. I've read more about a WILD where you DON'T try to move, and it can take up to 30 minutes to fully enter the dream.

So, why does it bother you that someone has come up with a method you didn't think up? Why? You should be thankful! I haven't actually tried this method, but I will. And as long as I keep a positive attitude, it'll probably work for me. As for you, it may require an attitude adjustment first. Let go of the jealousy and put your big girl panties on. Just give the guy and his method the time of day at least. And if it still doesn't work for you, then that's all...it didn't work for you. Do you bash LaBerge for developing techniques that don't work for you? Suck it up, man!

As for malac...good job. I like seeing fresh ideas. Even the slightest alteration can be a whole new spin off something old and worn.

---

Disagree completely.
I'm not jealous at all, because I have no urge whatsoever to write methods to gain some kind of "Rezpectz" in an internet forum. Also if i did I wouldn't write it as some kind of arrogant rant with a challenge for everyone to do better (which implys that Malak thinks his is the best method... which is arrogant and is disrespectful for all the other techniques developed - especially considering some were designed by people like Stephen LaBerge PHD who has done full scientific research on such matters. )

I have the world of respect for people who have dedicated careers and research time to developing real proven methods, and write them in clear no-contradictory and humble ways. I also have big respect for people who develop home-grown techniques and share them with a humble, open attitude, who are not claiming to be gods-gift to lucid dreaming. There are many many good techniques in this forum, non of them mine, which i respect fully. Do you see me being critical of those in the forums releated to them? no.


Your argument about the length of the technique is, i'm afraid to say, nonsense. It is taking a point, and then streching it to beyond it's reasonable level. In Malacs own words:

Quote:

---

The technique:

1. Sleep for at least 4-6 hours, so that you're at REM.

---

Call me old fashioned but if the very first line of instruction, under the title "Technique" is to tell you to sleep 4 to 6 hours, that is where the technique starts, and is thus, as described by Malac himself, a technique that requires 4-6 hours of sleep to be successful. A ten second technique, would require no more than 10 seconds to use, and also implys that you should be able to start the technique whenever you wish (with no prerequirements of sleep).

Also, just one point...
The idea in this technique is not to use your real hands, it is to think as if you are going to use your real hands, at which point if you are dreaming youre dream hands would move instead. Because if not then how on earth could you grab hold of a dream object with a physical hand. You simply cannot do this. In fact this is one of my main criticisms for Malac and this "technique" in particular. It is worded badly, and causes confusion. He should never have mentioned moving real hands, because real hands implys physical hands, which clearly makes no sense. He should have said

"Concentrate as if you are going to move your real hands, if the dream has formed fully, then your dream hands will be the ones that move, and thus grab the dream object. If the dream is not stable, then you will move your real hands, which will of course lead to you waking from the dream"

That in itself is the key to this so called "technique", and is Ok in theory. It is however not new, and very similar versions of the same basic principle have been published in lucid dreaming literature since the early 1980s.

Why do I bother being critical?
Because Lucid Dreaming is a subject that has been dear to my heart since childhood (i am now in my mid 30s), I hate to see misinformation on the subject. I also cant stand arse kissing for what is clearly a rehashed version of existing techniques, which is written in poor unclear English, and full of arrogance.

I also think Malac is on a huge self promotion campaign, mentioning his technique in any other threads he possibly can, and even including links to this thread in his own signature (the fact that he even has to include his name in the techniques name says it all, should we be calling MILD the SLBMILD (SLB for Stephen LaBerge) now too? no, because it's not about the ego of the creator, it's about the technique)

All of which I think is misleading, ego driven, and gives this forum and lucid dreaming a bad name.

I would challenge Malac to remove the links from his signature, and stop constantly posting links in other threads. And to let the technique stand its own ground. See how many people keep coming to post without the advertising!

The method itself is an ok mediocre rehash of other much older and published techniques, which could work for some in some cases, but certainly isnt a 10 second lucid dream induction.

Jealous has no part to play. I could rattle up several techniques in the same way Malac has, if i so wished to come across as a "Dream Guru". I could advertise them in my own signature, and post links in endless threads.
I don't see why Malac should get praise for rewording (badly) ideas which anyone with the most basic understanding of lucid dreaming would probably have thought of themselves.

In a nutshell his so called technique is this basic piece of common sense:

When performing a WILD, and the Visual element of the dream starts to form, try to engage your dream body in the dream by attempting to grab some of the dream scenery and pull yourself into it (which will feel like you are using your real hands, but of course cannot be because your awareness has moved to your dreambody)

Of course any million of variations on this idea could be thought up in a few second... try running into the dream scenery. Try spinning into the scenery. Jump into the scene etc. etc. etc.

This is not Malacs invention, it has been thought of by millions of lucid dreamers worldwide, over and over, when they simply think to themselves "this Hypnogogic imagery is getting clear, maybe the dream is stable enough to move now, lets try and move..."

It's all been done before, can be written in one paragraph. And is not original nor is it anything extraordinary. It is common sense, written in poor english and with a whole lot of Malacs Ego thrown in for good measure.

Sorry, I didn't read all you post. Instead, I smiled and thought, 'I made someone type a lot...WOW, I've got power!'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paradox-db3

Sorry, I didn't read all you post. Instead, I smiled and thought, 'I made someone type a lot...WOW, I've got power!'

---

The only power you have my friend, is to come across foolish.
If you cannot take the 20 seconds to read my post in answer to your points, then i feel you cannot take your points (or this method) very seriously, or simply fear that you were wrong and that you cannot form an argument that stands up to a bit of critical thought and logic. If you want to call ignorance a power, that's your choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paradox-db3

Sorry, I didn't read all you post. Instead, I smiled and thought, 'I made someone type a lot...WOW, I've got power!'

---

its this kind of immaturety that made me reluctant to joining this site. but i thought maybe it will be different here. well, paradox you just proved to me that there are jerks on every board.

spaceexplorer has some very good points.

I think Arby, here at DV did a fantastic tutorial like this a while ago, I should look it up.
Think it was a VILD.

There seems to be a large component of people seeking credit and using these posts as a Ego Competition.
It should be to share your experiences to help others or to ask for help if needed, for eg.

These links I never saw, but could explain the popularity of this thread.
I do like the technique, but think it was a bit rushed in its composing.
The challenge to do better and such leads me also to think it is set as a competition, and that is where real crap starts being posted and rushed and truths stretched.

Maybe why we had these ...ILDs come through so fast with rediculous titles.

I am usually fairly balanced in my responses, but I more agree with spaceexplorer so far on this one. (Although the old base technique still holds true).
The picking up on the timeframe was on the border of petty though.
I have on numerous occasions disagreed with him, as I love logical debating, but not childish banter.

BTW by debating this and responding, we are supporting this post and making it bigger - a paradox in itself (no pun intended).

DreamChaser, you're probably right about the timeframe being a little pedantic of me.
Just the whole concept of people trying to take credit for basic obvious principle frustrates me.


Also, I forgot to mention, I have a fairly extensive collection of Lucid Dreaming and Astral Travel books (i've been collecting them for over 15 years now) So I can happily findreferences to published texts that already use this principle. Of course the writers of these books were not looking to score brownie points in a forum as "technique creators".
Maybe It'd be anal of me to do so, but if it puts the whole thing to rest, it may be worth it.

One that i remember reasonably clearly was published as an Astral Travel technique, in an early 1960s publication. The principle was to visualise a rope above your bed,when the rope visualisation because vivid, you would attempt to pull yourself up by it. Not identical, but close enough to prove that the basic idea has been around a long time. The rope technique by the way is quite effective. The author suggest actualy hanging a ropefrom the ceiling and getting used to the feel of it in real life, so that when in right state of mind to perform a WILD, the physical feeling is easier for you to recall (and for your brain to recreate.)
As a good deal of early lucid dreaming literature borrowed heavily from Astral Travel techniques (as its basically the same thing interpreted differently) it's no suprise that this principle has been around along time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spaceexplorer

The only power you have my friend, is to come across foolish.
If you cannot take the 20 seconds to read my post in answer to your points, then i feel you cannot take your points (or this method) very seriously, or simply fear that you were wrong and that you cannot form an argument that stands up to a bit of critical thought and logic. If you want to call ignorance a power, that's your choice.

---

You're back again to make a fool of yourself huh? I didn't read your whole meaningless post too, as it was full of assumptions and nagging. Even so, I did catch some of it.

First, when I say to move your whole hand, I really mean "move" your actual hand. And yes, this idea is original. Bold letters can make my statements louder too :) By claiming that you don't move your actual hand, I can see how you could easily mistaken this for an average WILD. Of course, you failed to do this and judged anyways. Another thing I noticed is that your knowledge of lucidity stops short around acronyms. You seem to think there is an it WILD. Some one WILD that starts it all. As you said, millions of LDer's WILD like this technique posted here.

Let me get this in your head, there are two ways of approaching a dream to gain lucidity. There are WILDs and there are DILDs, the only two ways of approaching LDs. There is NO "it" WILD. There are many methods of WILDing and many methods of inducing a DILD. Stop saying "WILD WILD WILD"! All methods are either WILDs or DILDs. If there was just one way of inducing lucidity then the whole purpose of this forum wouldn't exist! Now, since there isn't just one way to lucid dream, there are many methods to induce lucidity through use of WILDing or a DILD.

Here's another one - You talk about visualization being used...um hey I got a secret so listen closely. Did you know that most methods require some form of stimulation of the senses? Yes, even visualization! Just because visualization is used, doesn't mean to categorize this as the same with your imaginary one WILD. Again, this tech is original so stop comparing it to others. Find one other method on the internet that is like mine. Just one.

As for your praisal of the BIG guys out there, lol? This have to do with what again? Sorry if I don't have a fancy laboratory to cook up "important" experiments and dedicate my life to writing 500 page books about lucidity, though I try.... It's like your logic is such in a way that I have to have a PH D or be a humble chap to share an effective technique. In fact, your arguments are solely on my personality, which you again, have no idea about. And when the hell did I say this is a godly technique and all shall bow? When is helping, a bad thing? Sorry if the way I present things are not in your category of respect, most you misinterpreted as arrogqnt ranting. All I see is you ranting about MY technique that I didn't have to share.

A couple other things. My challenge statement was meant to encourage others to make methods for lucidity, something a third grader would obvious get. As for my signature, why can I not post a link to my other techs that are capable of helping others? Many others do. Oh yea, I forget..if I do it its advertising. Gosh me and my forgetfulness! If I mention visualization, its like everything else. Don't even have to understand the tech right, just see the word visualization and you know everything! If I make a brilliant tech, then spaceexplorer gets jeolous and cries over my E-personality.:embarrassed: He also makes irrelvelant posts about people he respect. He also discredits him self by proving to be child, making bullshit claims that are conveniently absolutely wrong, which does make me laugh. Seriously though, what are the mods doing about this guy? He's just annoying and spreads more misinformation with every post. I know you've said so many stupid stuff and you can only go on because if you backed out, you would look worser but come on..... PM me dude, don't spam.


Only thing you got correct about me was the typos and grammar I didn't seem to care about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DreamChaser

spaceexplorer has some very good points.

I think Arby, here at DV did a fantastic tutorial like this a while ago, I should look it up.
Think it was a VILD.

There seems to be a large component of people seeking credit and using these posts as a Ego Competition.
It should be to share your experiences to help others or to ask for help if needed, for eg.

These links I never saw, but could explain the popularity of this thread.
I do like the technique, but think it was a bit rushed in its composing.
The challenge to do better and such leads me also to think it is set as a competition, and that is where real crap starts being posted and rushed and truths stretched.

Maybe why we had these ...ILDs come through so fast with rediculous titles.

I am usually fairly balanced in my responses, but I more agree with spaceexplorer so far on this one. (Although the old base technique still holds true).
The picking up on the timeframe was on the border of petty though.
I have on numerous occasions disagreed with him, as I love logical debating, but not childish banter.

BTW by debating this and responding, we are supporting this post and making it bigger - a paradox in itself (no pun intended).

---

Base technique? May I explain what a wild and dild is to you too? My tech and every other method in the world is either a WILD or DILD. Everyone knows this. You speak as if no one else knows. Though all are WILDs, there are different approaches and thus, differrent methods. Is this really profoundly hard for you to understand? Also, I and others can't credit our methods because S. Labarge made an acronym for the two different approaches and only his ways, which is not one, but multiple ways of inducing lucidity the right way? Some of the methods and the ones he learned from others use visualization and etc so this misunderstanding of Laberges acronyms should wither quick. There isn't a base technique but there are base senses we use to help. Visualizations, smell, hearing, and use of tactile sensations.

Differ your acronyms from how to ld, to classification of inducing an ld. The how is what we share here. Else, lets all just call our methods WILD so noone can know the difference between how we exactly acheive LDs. Yea, along with that, lets just not take credit for what we're sharing, smart idea.

If your understanding of things are slow like spaceexplorer, then let me sum it in a quick metaphor.

There are different ways of entering a pool. There is jumping, backflipping, slipping into, and many other ways, but every way puts you in the pool.

And did you just compared this to a VILD...oh boy... Anyways, here is a quote from Arby, the creator of the fantastic Vild tutorial, appreciating my method too->

"Aha, Malac. You seem to have done well this time.

I'll be honest... someone told me you had another tech and I got my skeptic pad out and looked to see what it was all about. I was very happy to find a quite logical and helpful v-wild tech/supplement. I give this the arby official stamp of approval... whatever that means anymore around here XD

Also, no (well almost no) 100%/superiority dressings so I give you another for that. Welcome to the trustable technique community, malac. =)

I leaned back, stepped through this and got a vivid rainforest (grabbed a big fern leaf) and it worked pretty well but I didn't like the pause after you grab the leaf and look around. It is a chance for instability when the visualization might not have fully stableized/matured yet. Thus I present a twist I played with. Instead I grabbed an interactable object and used it. In my case, I grabbed a stick off the ground and started to hit the things closest to me with it. Kept me occupied longer and led up a little plot (whacked an animal etc... not gonna get into all that XD)."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by malac

Base technique? May I explain what a wild and dild is to you too? My tech and every other method in the world is either a WILD or DILD. Everyone knows this. You speak as if no one else knows. Though all are WILDs, there are different approaches and thus, differrent methods. Is this really profoundly hard for you to understand? Also, I and others can't credit our methods because S. Labarge made an acronym for the two different approaches and only his ways, which is not one, but multiple ways of inducing lucidity the right way? Some of the methods and the ones he learned from others use visualization and etc so this misunderstanding of Laberges acronyms should wither quick. There isn't a base technique but there are base senses we use to help. Visualizations, smell, hearing, and use of tactile sensations.

Differ your acronyms from how to ld, to classification of inducing an ld. The how is what we share here. Else, lets all just call our methods WILD so noone can know the difference between how we exactly acheive LDs. Yea, along with that, lets just not take credit for what we're sharing, smart idea.

If your understanding of things are slow like spaceexplorer, then let me sum it in a quick metaphor.

There are different ways of entering a pool. There is jumping, backflipping, slipping into, and many other ways, but every way puts you in the pool.

And did you just compared this to a VILD...oh boy... Anyways, here is a quote from Arby, the creator of the fantastic Vild tutorial, appreciating my method too->

"Aha, Malac. You seem to have done well this time.

I'll be honest... someone told me you had another tech and I got my skeptic pad out and looked to see what it was all about. I was very happy to find a quite logical and helpful v-wild tech/supplement. I give this the arby official stamp of approval... whatever that means anymore around here XD

Also, no (well almost no) 100%/superiority dressings so I give you another for that. Welcome to the trustable technique community, malac. =)

I leaned back, stepped through this and got a vivid rainforest (grabbed a big fern leaf) and it worked pretty well but I didn't like the pause after you grab the leaf and look around. It is a chance for instability when the visualization might not have fully stableized/matured yet. Thus I present a twist I played with. Instead I grabbed an interactable object and used it. In my case, I grabbed a stick off the ground and started to hit the things closest to me with it. Kept me occupied longer and led up a little plot (whacked an animal etc... not gonna get into all that XD)."

---

Firstly you shouldnt be so obtuse and arrogant. Trying to teach us basics like a pompous school teacher.

The maiking of ILDs is now subject and lockable. So your point is against even the Site Mods. "Else, lets all just call our methods WILD so noone can know the difference between how we exactly acheive LDs". This is whats happened and we have things like CGILD (chewinggumILD).

Next, you just said there is no base tech, but just before said there are only Wilds and Dilds. Contradiction? Arent these base techniques?

And the Arby seal of approval. He was just proud someone expanded on his tut.

As far as the ego complex, you do have something in common it seems now.

Keep going. I will enjoy your responses to any possible questioning.

It seems people are striking a nerve or getting hot here.

Heh, it's funny, spaceexplorer types a, fairly long, yes, but coherent post. Then you Malac, diss him for posting such a long response, admit you didn't read it all, then attempt to refute his statments with a double post, both adding up to more than his post and using terrible grammar. Then you expect us to read that!?

Ok let me make my point clear that no one (even the, in malac's mind, god-like Arby who's decision is final) seems to understand right now.
I could enter a LD from WILD'ing. Just a normal WILD.
My entering technique would be the classic, 'lying there and waiting for the dream to start.'
Or I could use the, also classic, 'rolling out of bed'.
These two obviously differ. One 'forces' entry into the dream, one just waits for the dream to start.
Now what is the difference, Malac, between your hand grab technique and rolling out of bed?
So what if "using your 'real' hand is unique" as you say.
Should I make a new technique telling people to stomp on the nearest bit of ground?
I'll call it the TSILD.

Ok this, I think, is not a petty insult as spaceexplorer thinks now.
It is a blatant attempt to get people to look at the thread, esp. noobs.

What makes this a 10 second induction?
Where do you define this induction as starting from?
Just answer this already, me and spaceexplorer asked you at least 3 times on the previous page. Oh wait.... you don't read 'long' posts huh? Guess you don't read 'long books' either, which would explain why you can't tell the similarities between this technique and already existing ones.

One that i remember reasonably clearly was published as an Astral Travel technique, in an early 1960s publication. The principle was to visualise a rope above your bed,when the rope visualisation because vivid, you would attempt to pull yourself up by it. Not identical, but close enough to prove that the basic idea has been around a long time. The rope technique by the way is quite effective. The author suggest actualy hanging a ropefrom the ceiling and getting used to the feel of it in real life, so that when in right state of mind to perform a WILD, the physical feeling is easier for you to recall (and for your brain to recreate.)
As a good deal of early lucid dreaming literature borrowed heavily from Astral Travel techniques (as its basically the same thing interpreted differently) it's no suprise that this principle has been around along time.



Actually I read that from "Out Of Body Experiences". How to have them and what to expect by Robert Peterson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allensig3654

One that i remember reasonably clearly was published as an Astral Travel technique, in an early 1960s publication. The principle was to visualise a rope above your bed,when the rope visualisation because vivid, you would attempt to pull yourself up by it. Not identical, but close enough to prove that the basic idea has been around a long time. The rope technique by the way is quite effective. The author suggest actualy hanging a ropefrom the ceiling and getting used to the feel of it in real life, so that when in right state of mind to perform a WILD, the physical feeling is easier for you to recall (and for your brain to recreate.)
As a good deal of early lucid dreaming literature borrowed heavily from Astral Travel techniques (as its basically the same thing interpreted differently) it's no suprise that this principle has been around along time.



Actually I read that from "Out Of Body Experiences". How to have them and what to expect by Robert Peterson.

---

And I from Robert Bruce - Astral Dynamics. It boils down to everything originating from the same mind - these techniques existed long before the internet, dating back to the origin of man/ancient civilizations. These are natural abilities and these techniques have been around forever, man has been around long enough to think most things. The rope exit technique works, and before man had the rope, they had the single string/invisible intangible rope that didn't exist yet(see the mime artist :D), the technique still worked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DreamChaser

Firstly you shouldnt be so obtuse and arrogant. Trying to teach us basics like a pompous school teacher.

The maiking of ILDs is now subject and lockable. So your point is against even the Site Mods. "Else, lets all just call our methods WILD so noone can know the difference between how we exactly acheive LDs". This is whats happened and we have things like CGILD (chewinggumILD).

Next, you just said there is no base tech, but just before said there are only Wilds and Dilds. Contradiction? Arent these base techniques?

And the Arby seal of approval. He was just proud someone expanded on his tut.

As far as the ego complex, you do have something in common it seems now.

Keep going. I will enjoy your responses to any possible questioning.

It seems people are striking a nerve or getting hot here.

---

Lol What? I have an ego complex because I responded to you now? I'm arrogant for informing you guys with factual information, yet you guys come in here to insult and tell me off, contradiction? Yes. If you don't understand the basics, then I will teach them to you. Nothing to wet your pants about. Also, I didn't say WILDS and DILDs were techniques themselves idiot.

In the end, you guys are brainless morons making invalid points that doesn't benefit anything except your false sense of winning something. Well this proved to be funny. If you guys were trying to gain attention, then sorry but your worthless lives doesn't earn that role. Harsh. Yet, I don't even know you guys but just enough that you contribute little to nothing on here. Grow up, the three of you. Say your final words, I'm sure you children will, and then forget about this little argument that showed your lack of intelligence. My free time is over.

As for relevant subjects, I'll try to help if I can, though I've moved on to different projects.

Nice way to dodge answering a question. Insult the person and run. I'll try that next time, thanks.

http://i715.photobucket.com/albums/w...cess/wrong.jpg

LMAO!
Well, with every argument on the internet you convince at least 5 people I would say. Better than arguing off the internet, unless it's a debate or something.
EX. My argument here will probably stop 5 noobs who come here and read it from trying this shoddy technique. For which I am happy.

Perhaps someone should just start a thread called Tactile Induced WILDs.
Then everyone could share thier own variations on WILDs that focus on focusing on moving the dream body in dream onset?

I personaly have no issue with the idea of trying to use your hands (or any other tactile focus) on entering a WILD. I just don't think it deserves to be called a technique all on it's own.

Pulling yourself into a dream, rolling into it etc.
Such a thread would inspire new research and ideas, and not simply be a way for one forum member to call themselve a technique inventor.

Sounds interesting! I'm going to try this tonight. So in the grabbing part. I visualise myself grabbing the nearest object, but I stick my hands out to grab it as if it was there in real life right next to my bed?

In fact,
to save confusion and develop a spirit of experimentation,
Here's a thread to do just that:

Tactile Induced WILDs - Methods that focus on entering a lucid dream via the tactile sense.


http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...30#post1000330

Of course Malacs personal grabbing ideas are welcome there amongst all the other tactile/phyiscal focus ideas.

That's a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sol-R Nemesis

Sounds interesting! I'm going to try this tonight. So in the grabbing part. I visualise myself grabbing the nearest object, but I stick my hands out to grab it as if it was there in real life right next to my bed?

---

Yep :)