Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-05-2016, 01:57 PM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(22-05-2016 01:39 PM)Silentroar Wrote:  
(22-05-2016 01:28 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Why not take a little Ayahusca to go with. Native South Americans been doing it for long long time. Or, if you're Native North American peyote and psilocybin will do. Why the reluctance to consume a catalyst?

I would go for it ..if i dint have the natural option. ive also heard of some people barfing and such...so it has to be administered , ive heard about bad /evil trips.. imagine if someone gets wrecked for life on such a trip... When you go natural way you are guaranteed a reward which is always a positive experience.
(22-05-2016 01:39 PM)Silentroar Wrote:  the whole vibe to it is diff ..earn it the right way..

If you haven't actually experienced the vibes of apparently what you consider the wrong way how the fuck do you know what is the right way.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
22-05-2016, 02:03 PM (This post was last modified: 22-05-2016 02:28 PM by Silentroar.)
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(22-05-2016 01:57 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-05-2016 01:39 PM)Silentroar Wrote:  I would go for it ..if i dint have the natural option. ive also heard of some people barfing and such...so it has to be administered , ive heard about bad /evil trips.. imagine if someone gets wrecked for life on such a trip... When you go natural way you are guaranteed a reward which is always a positive experience.
(22-05-2016 01:39 PM)Silentroar Wrote:  the whole vibe to it is diff ..earn it the right way..

If you haven't actually experienced the vibes of apparently what you consider the wrong way how the fuck do you know what is the right way.
simply because ive watched a few vids of evil trips.. you can search for those if you like.

a few isolated cases.. do not define its true nature , but if it can be that damaging to someones well being i personally wouldn't jump in from all rosey picture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdr7mYVyQUo


LMAO this vid can be a fabricated xtian propaganda vid.. so i will not accept this vid at face value either,.

All i know is what was told,
All i think is what i know,
All i am is what i think,
All i know NOT is who I Am.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 05:07 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(21-05-2016 07:30 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(21-05-2016 06:53 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  no bro , i never said aura.. i was forced into defining it so i said its "Like an aura"
And i agree it sounds patronizing , but maybe im showing you that sometimes we close ourselves a lot more than we realize , and its mostly a natural reaction
to something we absolutely disagree with. And that shield itself becomes the new cage.

Let me ask you one question that troubles me personally ..(im no fool i agree with science) ..i wanna know if all scientists are closed to the unseen ..and those who attempt at the unseen are psuedo's and discarded at surface level , how is it that anyone would pursue that aspect if it is of no concern. it is easy to discard auras by saying its an altered mental state , but what if entering a realm that lies outside 4 dimensions requires and altered state?

Nobody rules out being intrigued by things that might exist but which have not yet been proven. The point is that it makes no sense to believe something prematurely.

I am not saying that your conjectured realm does not exist, I am saying that assuming it does exist is not justified. Let's say that this "aura" effect that you describe can be reproduced pretty reliably... we have a few basic options:
a) it is simply an odd by-product of the way the brain works
b) it is evidence of a sense that we possess but do not normally use
c) it is evidence that we can interact with some kind of hitherto unknown, intangible realm

You seem to be wishing that option c is true. I'm saying that, based on what we do know about how our brains work, option a makes few, if any, assumptions and fully explains the "evidence" we have so it is reasonable to believe that is the case. Option b may be intriguing but involves more assumptions about what is going on so it would need more evidence. Option c involves assuming a radical re-definition of what is real and is therefore the least reasonable to accept as the likely answer.

I don't have any objection to anybody conjecturing about something "beyond" our known reality but if you want me to believe it is possible, let alone probable, then I need evidence that it explains things better than simpler explanations. There also needs to be reason to accept that the proposed explanation, or something like it, is necessary and not simply sufficient.

Ill have to clear this with an analogy , That's the best i can do so , see if this helps.
Like your computer's processor accesses the HD when it has to pick info from the HD , and stays in constant interaction with the RAM at the same time. It is enabling a lot of calculations to occur. Making soft wares work , computing projecting .. and so on.. so far as you remain within the hard ware of the pc .. you will go as far as the PSU ( power supply unit ) and end your conclusion that psu ..supplies power ..and so this functions like this..and that functions like that..
But since we know how electricity works.. we can go beyond that end source ...THE PSU.. and say we know how it really works.. The Moment You move out of the PSU ..to explain the source... The Identity of the PC lapses . then you move to power socket... then to the Transmitters and the grid..

So long as you keep telling yourself , that this is it. This is where it ends..you will always find a reason to stay with that reasoning.Which is pretty logical and well within respected boundaries of sanity.

If you simply Look at a dead body.. you will find the PSU, The HD the RAM.. ..the brain nerve's etc etc, THE PSU is also there.. so whats gone?? if you artificially pump the blood of a dead body does it produce the power again?

Also.. if someone has mental disorders they see stuff which get curbed if you medicate them , so this is simply because the fault is within the hardware.However comparing a mental case to a spiritual experience happens only when you are convinced to believe this is all there is and no assumption of a third party can be assumed.

this observer is simply outside the hardware there is no way to prove it at all. if you compare it higgs boson , "based on assumption of existence of higgs boson, you can carry experiments and then you prove that higgs boson exists ".

.Similarly ..based on assumption of soul.. you can say that yes all parts of the body are present in a dead person ..but the enabler is missing.
This is the best i can do to explain , besides this i cannot.

All i know is what was told,
All i think is what i know,
All i am is what i think,
All i know NOT is who I Am.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 05:37 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 05:07 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  this observer is simply outside the hardware there is no way to prove it at all. if you compare it higgs boson , "based on assumption of existence of higgs boson, you can carry experiments and then you prove that higgs boson exists ".

.Similarly ..based on assumption of soul.. you can say that yes all parts of the body are present in a dead person ..but the enabler is missing.
This is the best i can do to explain , besides this i cannot.

Is English not your first language?

In the case of the higgs boson, it was not "assumed to exist", it was hypothesized based on actual evidence. Scientists observed effects that were not explainable without something apart from what was already understood. They proposed a particle that operated within the parameters of known reality and defined the properties that that particle would have to exhibit if it existed. They then devised tests to try to isolate it and the results of those tests provided additional evidence that there is a particle with the proposed particle. It became reasonable to believe that the proposed particle actually exists as the actual evidence FOR that particle mounted.

In the case of the soul you are barely at the conjecture stage. Nobody has defined what it is, how it works, or how to test the proposition. You do not even have any measurable effects that can be explained better by a soul then by what we already know about how the brain operates. Adding a "soul" not only adds nothing explanatory, it requires a whole set of assumptions about a reality beyond anything we have any evidence for. At best, all it represents is an argument from personal incredulity,

You are perfectly free to imagine all sorts of explanations for things that you don't understand. I think imagination is great and it is an important tool in scientific investigations. What I find useless is believing those imaginary solutions before there is actual evidence to support them. In order to make the soul believable you'd have to first define specifically what it does and find a way to test your conjectures to see if there is a real phenomenon there.

You don't start by "assuming a soul exists", you start by noting some demonstrable effect that can't be explained. If you aren't a neuroscientist you then begin by learning what we do know about how the brain works. You want to jump directly from your ignorance of the subject to a soul and some other realm in order to explain what you do not understand. It is amusing in a child. It is pathetic in an adult.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
23-05-2016, 05:52 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 05:37 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 05:07 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  this observer is simply outside the hardware there is no way to prove it at all. if you compare it higgs boson , "based on assumption of existence of higgs boson, you can carry experiments and then you prove that higgs boson exists ".

.Similarly ..based on assumption of soul.. you can say that yes all parts of the body are present in a dead person ..but the enabler is missing.
This is the best i can do to explain , besides this i cannot.

Is English not your first language?

In the case of the higgs boson, it was not "assumed to exist", it was hypothesized based on actual evidence. Scientists observed effects that were not explainable without something apart from what was already understood. They proposed a particle that operated within the parameters of known reality and defined the properties that that particle would have to exhibit if it existed. They then devised tests to try to isolate it and the results of those tests provided additional evidence that there is a particle with the proposed particle. It became reasonable to believe that the proposed particle actually exists as the actual evidence FOR that particle mounted.

In the case of the soul you are barely at the conjecture stage. Nobody has defined what it is, how it works, or how to test the proposition. You do not even have any measurable effects that can be explained better by a soul then by what we already know about how the brain operates. Adding a "soul" not only adds nothing explanatory, it requires a whole set of assumptions about a reality beyond anything we have any evidence for. At best, all it represents is an argument from personal incredulity,

You are perfectly free to imagine all sorts of explanations for things that you don't understand. I think imagination is great and it is an important tool in scientific investigations. What I find useless is believing those imaginary solutions before there is actual evidence to support them. In order to make the soul believable you'd have to first define specifically what it does and find a way to test your conjectures to see if there is a real phenomenon there.

You don't start by "assuming a soul exists", you start by noting some demonstrable effect that can't be explained. If you aren't a neuroscientist you then begin by learning what we do know about how the brain works. You want to jump directly from your ignorance of the subject to a soul and some other realm in order to explain what you do not understand. It is amusing in a child. It is pathetic in an adult.
Nope and im glad i know more than just English , But its cute that you are proud of it.
Alright fine , you say i shouldn't bother touching nero crap whatever it is ..when i don't know anything about it.. sure.

Whatever i said was a layman's way to explain to those who started as laymen and became whatever after learning things from the experts of their disciplines . just because today you know what you know , which was TAUGHT to you.. doesn't mean that i need the same crap to be learnt in order to interact with you with out being insulted.

If your discipline begins from point A and goes to point B... I m fine with that .. I just wanted to tell you that .. i come from - A... you cant understand it ..not my problem.. but if i attempt to explain ... i need not learn your nerocrap ..

All i know is what was told,
All i think is what i know,
All i am is what i think,
All i know NOT is who I Am.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 06:27 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
Rolleyes

What the fuck woo are you pushing now, Silentroar? You started with this aura experiment now you're onto drugs and you're getting less coherent by the minute.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 06:28 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 05:52 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 05:37 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Is English not your first language?

In the case of the higgs boson, it was not "assumed to exist", it was hypothesized based on actual evidence. Scientists observed effects that were not explainable without something apart from what was already understood. They proposed a particle that operated within the parameters of known reality and defined the properties that that particle would have to exhibit if it existed. They then devised tests to try to isolate it and the results of those tests provided additional evidence that there is a particle with the proposed particle. It became reasonable to believe that the proposed particle actually exists as the actual evidence FOR that particle mounted.

In the case of the soul you are barely at the conjecture stage. Nobody has defined what it is, how it works, or how to test the proposition. You do not even have any measurable effects that can be explained better by a soul then by what we already know about how the brain operates. Adding a "soul" not only adds nothing explanatory, it requires a whole set of assumptions about a reality beyond anything we have any evidence for. At best, all it represents is an argument from personal incredulity,

You are perfectly free to imagine all sorts of explanations for things that you don't understand. I think imagination is great and it is an important tool in scientific investigations. What I find useless is believing those imaginary solutions before there is actual evidence to support them. In order to make the soul believable you'd have to first define specifically what it does and find a way to test your conjectures to see if there is a real phenomenon there.

You don't start by "assuming a soul exists", you start by noting some demonstrable effect that can't be explained. If you aren't a neuroscientist you then begin by learning what we do know about how the brain works. You want to jump directly from your ignorance of the subject to a soul and some other realm in order to explain what you do not understand. It is amusing in a child. It is pathetic in an adult.
Nope and im glad i know more than just English , But its cute that you are proud of it.
Alright fine , you say i shouldn't bother touching nero crap whatever it is ..when i don't know anything about it.. sure.

Whatever i said was a layman's way to explain to those who started as laymen and became whatever after learning things from the experts of their disciplines . just because today you know what you know , which was TAUGHT to you.. doesn't mean that i need the same crap to be learnt in order to interact with you with out being insulted.

If your discipline begins from point A and goes to point B... I m fine with that .. I just wanted to tell you that .. i come from - A... you cant understand it ..not my problem.. but if i attempt to explain ... i need not learn your nerocrap ..

Your willful ignorance is deplorable.

You do not understand that scientific knowledge is based on evidence, not "being taught". What one scientist hypothesizes is not taught to others, it is tested by others.

Look at my signature. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
23-05-2016, 06:37 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 06:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 05:52 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  Nope and im glad i know more than just English , But its cute that you are proud of it.
Alright fine , you say i shouldn't bother touching nero crap whatever it is ..when i don't know anything about it.. sure.

Whatever i said was a layman's way to explain to those who started as laymen and became whatever after learning things from the experts of their disciplines . just because today you know what you know , which was TAUGHT to you.. doesn't mean that i need the same crap to be learnt in order to interact with you with out being insulted.

If your discipline begins from point A and goes to point B... I m fine with that .. I just wanted to tell you that .. i come from - A... you cant understand it ..not my problem.. but if i attempt to explain ... i need not learn your nerocrap ..

Your willful ignorance is deplorable.

You do not understand that scientific knowledge is based on evidence, not "being taught". What one scientist hypothesizes is not taught to others, it is tested by others.

Look at my signature. Drinking Beverage

Is there a thing in science where you assume X and based on assumption you conduct experiment and if it works that would prove X exists?

All i know is what was told,
All i think is what i know,
All i am is what i think,
All i know NOT is who I Am.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 06:56 AM
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 06:37 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 06:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your willful ignorance is deplorable.

You do not understand that scientific knowledge is based on evidence, not "being taught". What one scientist hypothesizes is not taught to others, it is tested by others.

Look at my signature. Drinking Beverage

Is there a thing in science where you assume X and based on assumption you conduct experiment and if it works that would prove X exists?

Your language is too imprecise. You may assume a hypothesis and design an experiment to test that hypothesis. The experiment doesn't "work" or "succeed". But the results may be what you expect if the hypothesis is true. If the hypothesis is false the results should be in line with that as well.

As an example, Albert Einstein predicted that star light should get bent by gravity - this is a prediction based on the theory of general relativity. The prediction was tested at a time of total solar eclipse. The test was the experiment. The prediction matched the experimental result very well - this is regarded as confirmatory evidence that general relativity does work, but it doesn't confirm that the theory is *true* in the sense that it's correct, it just means that it hasn't been disproved. If on the other hand the prediction had *not* matched the experimental result we can say for certain that something is wrong with the theory - maybe a miscalculation, maybe something fundamental.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2016, 06:59 AM (This post was last modified: 23-05-2016 07:09 AM by Silentroar.)
RE: Looking for 1 volunteer for an experiment
(23-05-2016 06:56 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-05-2016 06:37 AM)Silentroar Wrote:  Is there a thing in science where you assume X and based on assumption you conduct experiment and if it works that would prove X exists?

Your language is too imprecise. You may assume a hypothesis and design an experiment to test that hypothesis. The experiment doesn't "work" or "succeed". But the results may be what you expect if the hypothesis is true. If the hypothesis is false the results should be in line with that as well.

As an example, Albert Einstein predicted that star light should get bent by gravity - this is a prediction based on the theory of general relativity. The prediction was tested at a time of total solar eclipse. The test was the experiment. The prediction matched the experimental result very well - this is regarded as confirmatory evidence that general relativity does work, but it doesn't confirm that the theory is *true* in the sense that it's correct, it just means that it hasn't been disproved. If on the other hand the prediction had *not* matched the experimental result we can say for certain that something is wrong with the theory - maybe a miscalculation, maybe something fundamental.
is that the only case? where this concept is used... When you assume X , use that assumption to proceed with the experiment, If the experiment works i, it would ve proven That X does exist.
******Is there someone here who speaks science or English and can explain to them what im asking***

All i know is what was told,
All i think is what i know,
All i am is what i think,
All i know NOT is who I Am.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: