Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 19 20
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940


"it happened by natural selection with no selector! "
False. It happened without a conscious selector.

"... invented a new form of probability.'
It's not necessary to invent a new form of probability. It's only necessary to understand that we don't know enough to derive the actual probabilities.

"I won't bother to even go into the complexity of proteins, amino acids, etc. that are required for successful adaptations,"
Because it is irrelevant. Successful adaptions already occur. Even ardent creationists admit this.


"Multiple universes!"
That is one explanation.


"All who ask God to appear, ought to have lived 2,000 years ago, then they could draw their own conclusion. After all, some say there was no holocaust, only 50 years ago."
This is the kind of silly comparison I expect one who is a religious apologist to make.


.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Quote:
I'm sure he didn't imply imagination without knowledge.
Where, and when, did I ever suggest that Einstein suggested that knowledge be ignored?

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
I'm sure he didn't imply imagination without knowledge.
Where, and when, did I ever suggest that Einstein suggested that knowledge be ignored?

When and where did you suggest that it not be ignored? And where and when did you suggest the True meaning of Faith Love and Hope?

Oh, and where and when does Faith Love and Hope truly draw forth energy from a constant and what would that constant equal in mass?

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
"When and where did you suggest that it not be ignored?"

That is a really silly argument! You suggested that Rev had implied something-- he said he didn't. He cannot then refute something you implied he had done before he did it! Arguing logically is always a better idea than accusation.

"All who ask God to appear, ought to have lived 2,000 years ago, then they could draw their own conclusion. After all, some say there was no holocaust, only 50 years ago."

Many who were 'there' 2,000 years ago did not a) believe that Jesus' birth hailed the coming of the promised Messiah, b) believe that Jesus was the son of god or c) did not know of his birth, life or existence at the time. We didn't live then, so it's another ridiculous argument. I doubt that I would have believed then that this wise young rabbi was the son of god, as I do not now. As for the holocaust, some of the people who experienced this horror on both sides are still alive to bear witness, and denying that something exists does not negate its reality. If you believe that Jesus was the son of god then for you he will be. God exists in whatever form you wish, or without form if you prefer. All that has to happen is that you believe it so. I cannot prove your belief wrong anymore than you can prove that my disbelief wrong.

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted By: Ellis
"When and where did you suggest that it not be ignored?"

That is a really silly argument! You suggested that Rev had implied something-- he said he didn't. He cannot then refute something you implied he had done before he did it! Arguing logically is always a better idea than accusation.

Understanding what is being said is always better than assuming something has been said that wasn't.
I simply met the Reverend with the same language he met my statement with.

If I suggested anything, it was that emotional attachment to the context of words does not sanctify meanings into Absolutes in truth, but instead divide and separate relative truths by their emotional attachment to belief and opinion.

What is Knowledge of God without the experience of God?
What is knowledge of evolution without the experience of Truth absolute?
What is the meaning of the SON of GOD when one does not live in Christed Consciousness but assumes the reality of a God that is separate from ones self and an idealistic Son of such a creation of belief and idealism?

What is Faith, Hope and Love if it is driven from emotional attachment to personality and belief that is an opinion.

And finally what has Faith Hope and Love have to do with E=MC2 other than it is an idealistic fantasy where the mind takes its knowledge and experience of quantum physics and applies it to emotions that are individual to ego?
Any constant when applied to change points to surface appearances that are constantly changing.

What does change have to do with evolution if change is a constant? Does something evolve just because it changes or does it just change? If something is a constant how can it evolve?

What is evolution when it is relative to beliefs in God and opinions of God and theoretical science derived of imagination that is not based on a constant but in changing perceptions and belief?

If we use a previous statement used by a source of information:
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that what we call "creation" is an illusion of the human mind, and we, individually, are creating it with our minds, right now. and then apply that to another statement used by the same source:
How about E = MC2 X F(aith)+H(ope)+L(ove)?
FHL have to do with the human imagination, which, Einstein said, is more important than knowledge.

The source is suggesting all that is being created is an illusion and in the illusion that source is implying a knowledge of God and an idea of Faith Hope and Love from the mind immersed in illusion.
What is the constant? Is it illusion? Is it God which is an opinion or belief? Is evolution based on illusion or belief?
Does Faith hope and love become an illusion of imagery within the minds immersion into belief?

What is the difference between illusion and belief? What is the difference between illusion and Truth absolute?
Does Truth absolute exist and can it be known and experienced and how would one come to know the answers to the questions?

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Good points, Ellis.
BTW, Ellis, there is good evidence that qualities like faith, hope and love can be measured. Hypnotists use it all the time. Using the power of suggestion, in conjunction with the imagination, they use it to measure people's ability to have faith and trust. They use it to pick people out of a large audience, who are willing to accept, by faith, their suggestions.

BTW 2, Hypnotism--the ability to focus the mind on one idea--is a subject with which I happen to be very familiar. It has a lot to do with ones ability to have belief, faith, hope and love.

Beginning with my daughter--In 1964 she had a life-threatening lung condition--over the years I have found it a very useful pneumatological (spiritual) tool. It can be used to help people deal with psychosomatic and pneumasomatic (self-inflicted) health problems. To a limited extent, it also works somatically. Jesus used this spiritual power, and taught his disciples to do likewise. Check out Matt. 11:28,29.

Yes, over the years, I have been attacked, mostly by fundamentalist and obscurantists: "This is a dangerous, devil-based, evil and demonic power..."

ALL POWERS--PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL--CAN BE USED FOR GOOD OR EVIL
I have discovered that it is a power that can be used for good, or evil. What is dangerous is: when good people allow themselves to be ignorant of it AND fail to use it for good. Meanwhile, we can be sure that every demagogic dictator will use it to its fullest extent. The Nazis used a team of highly qualified hypnotists.

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 84
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 84
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Good points, Ellis.
BTW, Ellis, there is good evidence that qualities like faith, hope and love can be measured. Hypnotists use it all the time. Using the power of suggestion, in conjunction with the imagination, they use it to measure people's ability to have faith and trust. They use it to pick people out of a large audience, who are willing to accept, by faith, their suggestions.

BTW 2, Hypnotism--the ability to focus the mind on one idea--is a subject with which I happen to be very familiar. It has a lot to do with ones ability to have belief, faith, hope and love.

Beginning with my daughter--In 1964 she had a life-threatening lung condition--over the years I have found it a very useful pneumatological (spiritual) tool. It can be used to help people deal with psychosomatic and pneumasomatic (self-inflicted) health problems. To a limited extent, it also works somatically. Jesus used this spiritual power, and taught his disciples to do likewise. Check out Matt. 11:28,29.

The Nazis used a team of highly qualified hypnotists. [/color]


Revlgking;

Any time I see weasle words, I have to ask for some qualitying data. "there is good evidence" are classic, textbook weasle words. Where does one find this "good evidence" that faith, hope and love can be measured? What is the metric used in this measurement? Can you point me to any studies in which these qualities are measured?

Hypnotism as the "ability" to focus the mind on one idea? If hypnotism is an ability, what is the need for a hypnotist? It has "a lot" to do with one's "ability" have belief, hope and love? A lot? Is this a unit of the metric used to measure these qualities? How many "pinches" are there in a "lot"? How many "lots" are there in a "whole bunch"? How may whole bunches in a sh**-load?

Jesus used this "spiritual power"? Okay... human ability or spiritual power weilded by a diety? If a diety is omnipotent, why the hell would he need hypnotism if He could heal blindness or leprosy by touching someone on the head?

"The Nazis used a team of highly qualified hypnotists..." I don't know where you got this information but I don't doubt they did. Why wouldn't they? They used "highly qualified" teams into every kind of "magic" they could find, from deviners of chicken guts to astrologers and crystal readers.

I'm a little confused by this post. I usually find more substance in your posts. A bit of woo perhaps, here and there, but usually containing some interestingly grounded stuff. This one looks to be pretty much pure woo.

I could be wrong about this but... I doubt it. :>)


When you talk to me like I'm five, I want to write on you with a crayon. -- Joanna Hoffman
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
there is good evidence that qualities like faith, hope and love can be measured. Hypnotists use it all the time. Using the power of suggestion, in conjunction with the imagination, they use it to measure people's ability to have faith and trust. They use it to pick people out of a large audience, who are willing to accept, by faith, their suggestions.

What you're alluding to is that people allow themselves to believe in something and with the aid of a hypnotist further solidify the belief in and amongst other beliefs. The suggestion has to have possibility and meaning before the hypnotist can suggest any meaning can lead to experience.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

BTW 2, Hypnotism--the ability to focus the mind on one idea--is a subject with which I happen to be very familiar. It has a lot to do with ones ability to have belief, faith, hope and love.

Focus no. Suggest in and amongst the myriad of other programs yes. Focus comes from desire and free will. No hypnotist can focus or direct desire and free will, only remind the easily suggested that they have a choice.
As I said faith can be in anything, one can have faith in a dog or a hamster, politics, science and religion, not to mention ones personal idea of a God incarnate or a personality living in the sky.
Hope lives in and amongst illusions created by diverse thoughts of being a victim to reality and a victim to others. Hope is thrown out when one reaches a culmination of thoughts idealizing ones sense of self that is lost in situations not created by ones own actions, desires, faith and love.
Love if it is driven by attachment and feeling, influences one to lose sensibility of reality in the relationship of creator and created. We by our beliefs in what is real identify what is around us including ourselves by the very thoughts passed on from parent to child, peer to peer and from social mores we often derive our purpose. Evolution might show is that the social mores have become more sophisticated with certain scientific discoveries but our morals are still bound by superstition and fear, and the personal attachments of love that is a feeling and romantic notion.
Scientifically we understand that a child falls before it learns to stabilize walking. Emotionally we try to prevent the very things that make sense scientifically as the necessities that expand our knowledge and awareness of ourselves. Love attached to the ideas of suffering sabotage the very things we scientifically derive as necessary to growth and in love twist our science and politics to try and save ourselves from ourselves. Wisdom is often lacking from faith hope and Love.

E=MC2 X FHL is an imaginary idealism not based on wisdom but on the personal ideals of faith hope and love in belief created from the ego.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Beginning with my daughter--In 1964 she had a life-threatening lung condition--over the years I have found it a very useful pneumatological (spiritual) tool. It can be used to help people deal with psychosomatic and pneumasomatic (self-inflicted) health problems. To a limited extent, it also works somatically. Jesus used this spiritual power, and taught his disciples to do likewise. Check out Matt. 11:28,29.

You are suggesting hypnosis is a spiritual tool, and similar to the omnipresent and omnipotent potential in a Master of Self Realization. Possibly you believe Jesus used hypnosis to raise the dead and walk on water as well as the other miracles he performed?
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Yes, over the years, I have been attacked, mostly by fundamentalist and obscurantists: "This is a dangerous, devil-based, evil and demonic power..."

No, you drew to you the reflection of your own beliefs. Self hypnotized by your belief in the opposition you saw anything opposing your ego as the devil when it was the reflection of your ego that you were battling.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

ALL POWERS--PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL--CAN BE USED FOR GOOD OR EVIL
I have discovered that it is a power that can be used for good, or evil. What is dangerous is: when good people allow themselves to be ignorant of it AND fail to use it for good. Meanwhile, we can be sure that every demagogic dictator will use it to its fullest extent. The Nazis used a team of highly qualified hypnotists.
No one can be hypnotized against their will. Period.
Ignorance of that fact sees human free will as a belief, because such a person has not realized the free will within themselves and does not know what evil is or what God is.

Evolution in appearances of human development is tantamount to the level of knowledge and experience of Human awareness of what it is to be Human. Victim or creator, that was more akin to the message of Jesus than hypnosis of the mind as spirituality or the tool to find the way to spirituality. Spirit is not a belief tho you can have many beliefs of spirituality.
The true evolution of the species is to rise above beliefs and to experience truth absolute.
Until then all ideas of faith love and hope are relative to ideals and projections of the ego.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Beginning with my daughter--In 1964 she had a life-threatening lung condition--over the years I have found it a very useful pneumatological (spiritual) tool. It can be used to help people deal with psychosomatic and pneumasomatic (self-inflicted) health problems. To a limited extent, it also works somatically. Jesus used this spiritual power, and taught his disciples to do likewise. Check out Matt. 11:28,29.

Matthew:
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.


Jesus did not hypnotize his disciples and his disciples did not use hypnosis to spread the word of Jesus. Hypnosis is not a spiritual tool to realize enlightenment or Christ Consciousness.
Jesus spoke only of the Father that resides within the human heart and the ability to become self aware of that which lives in every human. This has everything to do with free will and choice and the refinement of the senses. Hypnotism and belief are tools of the church and they can lead one to the diversity of beliefs so that they may choose to seek something, or set the mind to an idea. But if an idea is founded on beliefs that are constantly changing one will have to find something that is stable regardless of changing beliefs.
Hypnosis is not the spiritual tool to achieve that, and no one of such a level of consciousness would invade the evolutionary process of free choice and free will to leave the ego and its illusions behind for truth absolute.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
WOW! What a flurry of comments and interesting questions. If I chose to answer all of them I would need to write a book. Just time, now, for a couple of notes on hypnosis:

Quote:
http://a-albionic.com/lloyd/public_html/oldprojects/weeklyish/estabrooks_zombie.txt

Subject: National Security Cloaks Advanced Hypno-Technology?

. . . "if the next war survives the first bomb it can be
guaranteed that both sides will include hypnosis among their
weapons.

"And not merely for such crude and vulgar purposes as
getting prisoners of war to talk: that trick is so obvious that
both sides could protect against it simply by making sure in
advance that all the good hypnotic subjects among their personnel
were . . . made immune to the hypnotic state.

The future will
bring far more refined techniques than this. For developing
some of them, the senior author of this book [Estabrooks], to
whom the military applications of hypnosis have always been of
interest, must plead guilty, and if the effort to discover means
of helping one's country in time of war is antisocial, then he
has engaged in antisocial behavior.

It is not revealing military
secrets to tell the story of some of these researches or to
outline some of the ways hypnosis, when imaginatively applied,
make its use undetectable; to know the possibilities does not
mean to recognize them when they are put into action.

Consider,
for example, what might have happened if the techniques of
military hypnosis devised during the Second World War had been
used at that time. It was the Nazis who stimulated our first
intensive investigations of the question: faced with the fact
that they would undoubtedly use hypnosis if it was at all
possible, we began to look into its potentials, too....

==============================================================
More about the Rhodes Scholar George Estabrooks
http://www.textfiles.com/conspiracy/mind.con
===============================================
http://www.dangers-of-hypnosis.co.uk/stage_hypnosis_how_it_works.html

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
ABOUT PROFESSOR GEORGE ESTABROOK
================================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Estabrooks

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Fantastic claims. Morality then is not imbedded within the psyche but influenced into being.

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Quotations of Estabrooks:
"I can hypnotize a man -- without his knowledge or consent -- into committing treason against the United States."

So much for those who say we all have free will. In my opinion, free will, like knowledge and wisdom, is only for those who consciously choose to have it.

"Is hypnosis dangerous? It can be. Under certain circumstances, it is dangerous in the extreme. It has even been known to lead to murder. Given the right combination of hypnotist and subject, hypnosis can be a lethal weapon."

The above points to the danger of choosing to remain ignorant.

"The key to creating an effective spy or assassin rests in splitting a man’s personality, or creating multipersonality, with the aid of hypnotism.... This is not science fiction. ...I have done it."

In my (LGKing) Estabrooks was right. All successful demagogues in all categories, including religionists, made, and are making, use of this knowledge. If good people do nothing, they can, and will, succeed.


Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Estabrook implies that hypnotism is possible against the will of the subject. Is this so? And can everyone be hypnotised, or are some people naturally immune!? Does anti-hypnotism always have to be learned? People generally are very easy to persuade --- we only have to look at the numbers who fall for the latest scams--- but I thought hypnotism, as opposed to propaganda-type behaviour modification, had to have consent to be successful.

PS. Obviously I am not talking about drug use in conjunction with hypnosis here.

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Originally Posted By: Ellis
Estabrook implies that hypnotism is possible against the will of the subject. Is this so?
Ellis, using my son's 'puter, this is Lindsay G. King. At my age, I have no fear of anyone knowing who I am, or where I live. Being a BIG ego, like you smile my fear is that they will get my name wrong, eh?




And can everyone be hypnotised, or are some people naturally immune!? Does anti-hypnotism always have to be learned? People generally are very easy to persuade --- we only have to look at the numbers who fall for the latest scams--- but I thought hypnotism, as opposed to propaganda-type behaviour modification, had to have consent to be successful.

PS. Obviously I am not talking about drug use in conjunction with hypnosis here.

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A

A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
It is still me, LGK. Now to your questions:

1. Estabrook implies that hypnotism is possible against the will of the subject. Is this so?

In my experience, yes. Unless we are consciously aware of what is going, we are vulnerable.

2. And can everyone be hypnotised? (to be continued when I get back to my own computer.)



Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Back to my 'puter. Ellis, you ask:

3. And can everyone be hypnotized?

Yes. But pay close attention to the following: ALL HYPNOSIS IS NOTHING MORE THAN SELF-HYPNOSIS. It iS for this reason that I want us to have a new word, pneumatism--the conscious self (pneuma) acting on the mind and body--the psyche and soma.

Keep in mind that the Scottish surgeon, Dr.James Braid, the one who invented the word 'hypnosis' tried, later, to change it to 'monoideism'--the ability to focus on one idea. Though he failed to get this idea accepted, he was on the right track.

4. Are some people naturally immune?

Yes. But such must consciously choose to be immune.

5. Does anti-hypnotism always have to be learned?

Anti-hypnotism? What we need to learn is this: the nature and function of hypnotism. (More on this).


Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
This is an interesting topic. It seems to me that it could be that we are more responsive to hypnotism in a group. For instance rallies of any sort will allow us to get caught up in the moment (even without the 'funny' cigarettes etc). I'm thinking, for eg, of religious rallies, Hitler's brilliant manipulation at his rallies and of course good old Rock concerts. People are in a highly emotional state at these events, and even in small groups of people can behave in ways they would not as an individual.

Though is this hypnotism? Or is this 'group consciousness' something that a skilled hypnotist may be able to exploit in an individual. Certainly there have been many religious leaders, politicians, military commanders and rock singers who do just that. I mean- manipulate peoples' emotions for their own advantage.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
E
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
E
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,490
Actually Rev-- it was the plethora of Anonymi, all holding different points of view, that got to me, not the fact that some people prefer to be 'unknown'. Very confusing!

Page 4 of 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 19 20

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5