- I don't know that I like the 'hologram' analogy he uses. I mean, I've heard various explanation about how the universe is likely based on a hologram, but that theory includes everything that is physical, and has a lot more context. The way he uses the analogy in this video seems completely underdeveloped - as if he's saying "since we can interpret the workings of the brain as similar or 'the same' as the geomagnetic activity of the Earth, we should just assume that it works like a hologram." Not to say that he's wrong, but I'm not completely sure that the analogy was fleshed out enough for me to agree with it.
I also had trouble with this, it didn't seem like he properly explained this aspect though I'm sure it makes sense to him. I'd like to know more.
- When he talks about how these experiences happen 'Particularly when we're dreaming', I have to ask 'when else would they happen, at such a large scale. When our minds are in altered states (dreaming, drugs) we are most likely to experience things that aren't really happening in any other place but our minds. So the idea that we mostly experience these while we are dreaming makes just as much sense, if these phenomena aren't real, as it would if they were.
I'm not really sure what you mean when you say an altered state of mind makes you more likely to see things that are only in the mind. Do you mean to say not real? Because that's debatable.
- Some of the picture analogies were so abstract that they are likely to fit - somehow - into one's bias. It's like when people look up at the clouds and see a giraffe, and then make the assumption that the universe (Or God) intended that cloud to be a giraffe.
That's a different phenomenon, taking senseless data and pulling form from it is an adaptive quality humans developed in order to spot camouflaged predator and prey. These pictures already had real objects and photos to be compared to, and the question is a matter of whether or not they match. This isn't about seeing something in inkblots, rational interpretation of data was more of an obstacle than an aid as exemplified by the person drawing a wormhole when looking at the bridge.
- When he says that subjecting two minds to the same magnetic field "makes the brains the same" this is contradicted by the fact that he stated that there were still the matters of personal biases and interpretations and perspectives that exist within the data. The way I see it, if the two brains were 'the same', personal biases would have no bearing on the experiment, and the two people would be thinking the exact same thing about the exact same concepts.
While their brains are operating the same, personal bias stemming from life experience still plays a role.
- There are a few more analogies that I don't really like. Comparing how "we see birds fly and then we can make airplanes" and how "we see lightning and then we can make harness electricity" with "we see possible cases of telepathy and then we can inherently harness that power". The two former examples are of our subsequent reactions to actual, empirical, undeniable phenomena. The latter is about a phenomena that we can only theorize exists, because of the ability to demonstrate situations that (merely) suggest their existence. They are not the same.
I'm not sure that's the conclusion he was going for, but if so I'll admit there's a difference because I see this telepathy as something we can all develop naturally, without the need to use technology to emulate it.
- When he said the relationship between cellphone / tech use and paranormal experiences wane, as more tech becomes available, he then says that this is not because those people are becoming more exposed to information, but really does not offer any evidence to that end.
We lost our telepathy long before they invented the telephone, that's for sure. In fact, according to the Aboriginals, we lost our telepathy the moment we decided to keep secrets.
- That these events happen more often under periods of low geomagnetic disturbance. I'd like to see more telepathic experiments done in these types of conditions.
Me too, and eventually I'd like to see it mapped out in order to ascertain exactly what level of disturbance is caused and why it's caused, and furthermore I'd like to see if there's a relationship between geomagnetic activity and wide scale social behavior.
- I would definitely like to see more about 'photons being emitted' when thinking of 'light' and the possibilities surrounding this concept.
- The entanglement issue, which is one that I have also thought would be a plausible reason for telepathy.
I find it fascinating, and I vouch for the entanglement theory myself based upon my personal experience of AP. This is also why I'm more interested in learning of this hologram theory.
- I'm also just very interested in the role of technology, through all this, and whether or not we will be able to detect some of these 'hidden' forces, sometime in the future. Of course, it's easy for one to compare the "it's not possible" paradigms of the past with what's going on now, but that does not mean that everything we believe is inherently possible now, will be rendered truth, in the future.
Judging the world from the present standpoint, it's impossible to tell the difference between insanity and innovation. Indeed, that is why I stress so often that success is only form of truth in the universe.
|
|
Bookmarks