when science finds something that pisses it off, it calls it a hallucination, or a lie, or a delusion
No, science says "Where's your evidence that the things you saw were real?". Listening to a spooky story doesn't count, because people AUTOMATICALLY will distort the truth, even if reporting an event in good faith. Why? Because we miss things, are unaware of things, forget things. We tend to exaggerate the truth to make a better story. In short, because we're human. These are things we KNOW.
When someone says "I saw X happen when I was unconscious", how is anyone supposed to know how accurate that is without access to independant information? And furthermore, why does it automatically mean something? The patient might have known what was going on before they started seeing things, and in the case of conversations, it's actually possible that outside stimuli was being incorporated into the imagery; we already know this happens to normal people when they dream/hallucinate as well. Or they might have seen something highly regular which was very likely to happen anyway.
And I do find it amusing that someone can come on to a lucid dreaming forum, and have not picked up on the realistic nature that dreams/hallucinations/whatever can take. I mean, if I dream something that happens I MUST HAVE MAGIC POWERZ, right?
Oh and then there's the nonsense about stuff "pissing science off", which again shows your lack of understanding on the subject. Science cares about finding facts about our reality. Provide it with adequate evidence that the moon is really made of cheese or that unicorns exist and it will accept it. But if you expect it to accept annecdotes - a person's word - when it comes to determining these facts, then you're insane, and if we all did that, then we'd be stuck in the stone age.
Oh, and I've been meaning to comment on your sig for a while now:
Scientists have no problem seeing the process of life in a puffball bursting to scatter its spores, but they do tend to have difficulty seeing the process of life in a star bursting to scatter its dust, for all that we are made of that dust
I find it very funny, given it was scientists who discovered supernovae, information on planetry formation, and generally found out this stuff in the first place, and accept that such events are responsible for Earth's formation and thus life's formation, even though those events are not actually life. Yes, scientists are so closed minded and find it difficult to see that they actually accept it played a part in the creation of life!
|
|
Bookmarks