Topics Topics Edit Profile Profile Help/Instructions Help Member List Member List Edit Profile Register  
Search Last 1|3|7 Days Search Search Tree View Tree View  

Archive through May 11, 2002

Sepulchritude Forum » The Absinthe Forum Archive thru June 2002 » Archive Thru May 2002 » Ouija Boards - The Real Shit? » Archive through May 11, 2002 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Albertcamus
Posted on Saturday, May 11, 2002 - 2:48 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

hobgoblin,i do accept her view.however i think the mind can play tricks on us also,her husband {my grandfather} died a couple of years back,so i think one sees what they want to see,sometimes.her mother died when she was a young girl,and guess what?that was another time that she claims she saw a ghost.what a coincidence.my father died awhile back and i never saw anything,except for a few dreams,which is what is expected.like i said,i want to see a ghost.i hope there are.if i claimed to have seen bigfoot,are you going to compell yourself to concluded there are bigfoots running around.?
Gettingsane
Posted on Saturday, May 11, 2002 - 1:25 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

so mental sunrise

schmack breed schmack
plain and simple

as a scientist majoring in levels
i offer one universal truth

THINGS WILL GET BETTER

THINGS WILL GET BETTER

more truth in caves ive got to dig

that you know so absent from such discussion

MOVE ON MOVE ON

choose au natural
so rarely apparent

proper

so out there
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Saturday, May 11, 2002 - 12:06 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

Tortainglese,

A ouija board is no more dodgy than using a medium or doing it yourself. You never know what or who you're dealing with.

Hobgoblin
Unless of course you can collect enough data in which case you can be fairly certain about this ;-)
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 11:59 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Blackjack,

Who said anything about smearing oneself in chicken blood or hope? It has nothing to do with belief or superstition, only with experience. I never said anything about 'reality' as such. I'm not really bothered about proving anything to anybody. I've never claimed any reality here beyond my own experiences.

Your position is based on belief, not mine. You seem to believe that until something is proved it does not exist. Did the world suddenly become round when data was collected to prove this? What shape was it before man collected this data? Anyway data proves nothing in itself, everything depends on how the data is perceived and interpreted.

Hobgoblin
Tortainglese
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 11:58 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I think the ouija board is to be totally avoided. You dont know who or what you are communicating with. (not unlike this forum!) Didn't you see or read the Exorcist?

The things I believe in the most are those which cannot be named, explained or sometimes even seen. This is a big complicated mysterious universe and I dont need science with it's limited grasp to tell me what's up. Mystery and mysticism are powerfull in my world. But this is what works personally for me...
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 11:43 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Camus,

If you believe your Grandma to be honest then all you can do is accept her view that she saw something that she interpreted as being a 'ghost'.

Everything gets clouded by this 'does one believe in ghosts or not' as if these are two definite positions. If you haven't seen one then how can you 'believe' they exist, and just because you haven't seen one does that mean that you believe they can't exist because you haven't seen one?

Personally I think that there are a great many things that exist around us that are either beyond our ability to experience them, or are just on the very edges of our ability to experience them. I base the latter on things that I have felt, seen, heard and experienced.

We should stop thinking that humans are the centre of the universe and that if human senses cannot experience things they simply cannot exist.

Hobgoblin
_Blackjack
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 11:23 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post


Quote:

Why the obsession with measuring anyway?



Not measurement, per se, but data, and more precisely, data which has predictive value. An Ouija cannot produce any information which can, with any reliability, be used to model future experiences. If something interacts with anything else, it creates data which can be measured, and this data can allow us to understand the nature of the interaction and predict future interactions. Now, FINDING the data can be tricky, but the key is to look for the data, not to smear yourself with chicken blood and hope.


Quote:

the ability to measure or not proves nothing.



The ability to measure the same results taking place under the same conditions repeating themselves with consistancy goes a long way towards proving things.

I don't believe I even have to argue this in this century. Look around yourself. Why do all the things you see around you WORK? They work because they are based on principles which have been observed to repeat under the same conditions. You can concern yourself with phenomena which can't be reporduced if you want, but you aren't going to accomplish much.


Quote:

If a man is blind and does not have a sense of sight does that mean that colour does not exist simply because his senses cannot perceive it?



"Color" is our brains' interpretation of the interaction between our optic nerve and differing wavelengths of light within a very narrow spectrum. One does not need to see in order to comprehend the ways in which light interacts with matter and energy. I can't "see" radio waves, but I'm perfectly capable of recognizing how they interact with my TV set. I can't "see" electrons, but dammit if every time a charge is applie to the cathode gun on my set, if it don't make purty pictures.

The failure of superstitious claptrap is that it makes no attempt to understand. If the Ouija planchette moves on its own, then there must be force being applied to it, and this force can be measured and understood. We may not have the technology to measure the source of said force just now, but if you think it's there, you should bloody well be LOOKING. If you are going to make a claim of the reity of something, it is up to YOU to demonstrate that it is there.

I don't give a shit about "truth". I give a shit about "works", and my side wins that game hands down. I will cotton no subsequent claims unless they are back with data.
Albertcamus
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 6:01 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

thats called a snapper!
Pikkle
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 5:57 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

That fucker jumped back at me!!!!!!!
Albertcamus
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 5:41 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

was it a floater?
Pikkle
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 5:21 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I was using a weeja bored one time and I had to take a real shit! Man, that turtle head is still haunting me to this day!!!!!!!!
Mr_Rabid
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 3:23 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Tarot cards are very useful, even if you can't use spooky powers with them. Like the I-ching, the reveal what's going on in the diviner. The act of thinking about the cards and patterns can help to clarify the situation and mind a great deal.

I have found I get brief glimpses of the future, but only passively, and never by using a ouija board or magic 8 ball or goat entrails or whatnot.

I sometimes go into the room where my phone is to answer it right before it rings, and that saves me some time ;-)

I also get a very strong feeling of aversion once in awhile. It only comes up when there is no other way I would find out about a particular threat. When it first happened, I ignored it. I ignored it the second time too. Both times I received permanent injuries I couldn't avoid with senses 1 thru 5, and so since then I've respected that muthafucka the same way I would my eyeballs or my ears.

And if I haven't seen somebody in a long time, I think about em (out of the blue) a day or two before I see them unexpectedly, like at the mall or a bar or sumthin. I always notice thinking about them- cause I won't have done for months or years. Once, it was damn near a decade.
Albertcamus
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 3:06 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

i agree,perhaps the use of "believe" may be misleading.trust me i have an open mind,but..for example my grandma recently told me she has seen a ghost and so she expected me to accept her view without reservation.just because she said she saw one is not good enough for me.as nietzsche said about christianity:"what is wanted is blindness and intoxication,and an eternal song over the waves in which reason has drowned"..oh i dont want to turn this into a religous debate.i am hoping i will eventually see things that i have never expected or thought logical.i really really hope there is "the supernatural"..who wouldnt?
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:52 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Camus,

You shouldn't want to believe or disbelieve. The honest thing is to have an open mind and experience things as they arise with as little prejudice as possible. Nothing to do with believing one way or the other. Belief clogs up your mind.

Hobgoblin
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:40 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Bullshit Blackjack.

I never said anything about accurately measuring anything. In fact I never mentioned anything about measuring anything. I'm not interested in measuring or proving anything. I know what I sense and experience therefore I know what exists in my experience (what exists in your or anyone else's experience is not a concern of mine). Why the obsession with measuring anyway? Measurement depends entirely on the ability of the human senses to perceive what has been measured, the ability to measure or not proves nothing. If you cannot perceive it you can confidently argue that it simply does not exist. If a man is blind and does not have a sense of sight does that mean that colour does not exist simply because his senses cannot perceive it? You seem to have such faith in the omnipotent power of 'normal' human senses that you believe that anything outside of these 'normal' senses simply cannot exist.

Hobgoblin
Chrysippvs
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:18 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I think Edward Kelly said it best, "When divination relies, it is not divine."

And for ghosts etc see my profile quote...

- J
Destiny
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:16 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

DoobyScoo,

Did you listen to the Art Bell show last night?
Albertcamus
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:10 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

i am not convinced at all about tarot cards and such.as much as i want to believe i just dont buy it.like ghosts,i would love to see a ghost and i really want there to be ghosts,but i dont think there are.hell the only reason i bought a video camera was to maybe catch a UFO on tape,oh and for homemade porn...
Mvario
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 2:05 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

I think that being covered in the fat of unbaptized babies usually rates a free upgrade to first class... at least on NorthWest.
_Blackjack
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 1:45 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Consistancy is a very good benchmark for USEFULNESS. That is what I'm saying. You rub yourself with the fat of unbabaptized babies, I'll book myself on the next 747, and we'll see who's flying first...
Mr_Rabid
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 12:47 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post

Ah, that's bullshit Blackjack.

They should do so constantly if, and only if, the systems involved are simple enough for consistency.

The entropic values are WAY too high for that. Too many variables. For someone with a weekend to kill and some tarot cards or a spare sheep, it's amusing, maybe eye opening, but not usefull. For a full time oracle it might be usefull.

So you can't go using inconsistency as a benchmark for whether it's crap or not crap- if you couldn't see the test tubes, the same inconsistency would be apparent in most science, except for the very simple bits, no? That is to say, without a rigorous and recorded series of experiments, everyone would go 'ooh, I put the yellow goo in the bottle with the green goo, and it fucking exploded!'
_Blackjack
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 12:36 pm:   Edit PostPrint Post


Quote:

But things do exist that are beyond our 'normal' sphere of sensory experience. It is arrogant to think otherwise.



Yeah, but it is equally arrogant to think that they can be accurately measured using superstitious claptrap. If Ouija boards or Tarot cards or reading the entrails of slaughtered sheep have any useful predictive value, they should do so CONSISTANTLY, which so far, they do not appear to. If, on rare occasion, they correspond with future events, they are still useless, inasmuch as they are innacurate the VAST majority of the time.

Wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first.
Barsnake
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 11:16 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

A long time ago we started experimenting with a Ouija board. We were talking about it in a group one day and one of the guys (we always thought he was strange, but never knew why) said we should leave it alone.
That nite we were using the board and no matter who was touching the pointer, all that would come up was S6. The next day that same guy came walking by our table and looked over at us and said "S6".
We never knew what it meant and the guy would never say anything about. We kinda lost our enthusiasm after that.
Lordhobgoblin
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 10:57 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

I've had several experiences with Ouija boards and a lot more without. I've used Ouija boards when I was a child, used Tarot since a teenager, I've seen a few 'ghosts', felt a few 'spirits' and heard a few more of them (I tend to hear them rather than see them) and I've acted as a medium (with moderate success) on a couple of ocassions. Not bad for an atheist.

What I find odd is the big deal that many people make out of these experiences. Why do we find it strange that there are things that may exist that we do not have a full grasp of? Do we understand everything about the Universe? Of course not. Then why is it spooky or strange to contemplate that there are many things about the world around us that are beyond our normally narrow human minds and senses? Just because we drive around in cars and own computers it doesn't mean that that's all there is. Our ancestors were not as surprised as we tend to be about such things but then they were a lot more in touch with the natural world than we are.

Do 'spirits' exist? Who knows? But things do exist that are beyond our 'normal' sphere of sensory experience. It is arrogant to think otherwise.

Hobgoblin
Scoobydoo
Posted on Friday, May 10, 2002 - 10:18 am:   Edit PostPrint Post

What do you guys think? Any experiences...

Thank you Pikkle and Head for your wonderful replies before anyone else can read this post :)

Administration Administration Log Out Log Out   Previous Page Previous Page Next Page Next Page