• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

P&S Alternative Theories thread v. orange tang

She may (or may not) be a schizophrenic, by her level of obsession with this shit I would find it hard to believe she isn't. But she sure knows how to make a buck out of all the believers that follow her around

"1 Hour: Private Channeling Session $250
One hour private Psychotherapy/Visual Centering session $250
Past Life Regression session, 2 hour minimum $500"

http://www.whoneedslight.net/privatesessions

Best of all, she does it through skype, nice and easy. Add that to the book revenue + profit from the radio shows, and I would say shes swmming in it.

This looks great. I might start channeling entities from outer space myself if times get tough. =D=D=D
 
Clearing/Channelings are getting registered as a form healing or psychological balancing, after decades of experimenting (Not I believe it's all it's used for - Scientheology?).

Random thought not directly to do with this - Has anyone read "The Mars Records"(1&2).

I've read them 3 times with many years-intervals. Each time I can't quite believe it and I do see it more as entertainment. It makes "Star Wars" seem ultra-realistic.

Imagine this work has been the target of various slander from many sources.

Gives more credibility to the whole thing when so many naysayers came out, protest too much, etc.
 
Last edited:
sexNcandy said:
She may (or may not) be a schizophrenic, by her level of obsession with this shit I would find it hard to believe she isn't. But she sure knows how to make a buck out of all the believers that follow her around

"1 Hour: Private Channeling Session $250
One hour private Psychotherapy/Visual Centering session $250
Past Life Regression session, 2 hour minimum $500"

http://www.whoneedslight.net/privatesessions

Best of all, she does it through skype, nice and easy. Add that to the book revenue + profit from the radio shows, and I would say shes swmming in it.
Click to expand...

But the woman here is an accomplished, high-level psyshciatrist charging her normal rates. She doesn't need these clients. Or are you expeted to do it free because it's "spiritual"?

There's a massive amount of free spiritual information on the site you're charged nothing for.
 
Ninae said:
But the woman here is an accomplished, high-level psyshciatrist charging her normal rates. She doesn't need these clients. Or are you expeted to do it free because it's "spiritual"?

There's a massive amount of free spiritual information on the site you're charged nothing for.
Click to expand...

She is not a psychiatrist, she's a sci-fi writer.

You don't realize this, but your inability to perceive this is what separates you from (almost) everyone else in the world. Nothing in that site has anything to do with psychology or psychiatry.

Anyone can get a degree in anything and then have a mental breakdown, go crazy or simply decide to make up stuff. Someone having a degree in civil engineering doesn't mean that anything they say about buildings or bridges is right, credible or sensible. A degree doesn't automatically give anyone credibility, you have to be very gullible to believe that.

This is all very entertaining and all, and I can see why you are drawn to it, but its worrying that the line between reality and fantasy has become so blurred for you.
 
"Kathryn E. May, PsyD is a practicing clinical psychologist and workshop leader who has been in private practice in New York City and the Hudson Valley area for more than 35 years. She has developed the radical new Visual Centering technique which has helped hundreds of clients to rework neurological brain channels, allowing them to see life, literally, from a more positive, present-oriented perspective."

Do your research and separate someone's profession from their spiritual beliefs. You still have freedom of religion of your country, no? Besides, channeling is not fiction, never mind science-fiction.
 
Ninae said:
...Besides, channeling is not fiction, never mind science-fiction.
Click to expand...

I tend to think it is, even if usually unconcsiously so. Channeling has been done by so many different people over so much time, each time with pretty much mutually exclusive messages - can they all be right? How do you tell which one? There are ceratinly some entertaining stories in there, and there are often similar themes, but mostly they contradict each other (eg are the goody aliens from sirius or pleiades was the question in the 90s) - there's a whole industry of channelers with their own lucrative books who often give specific date predictions, and chronologies of ancient aliens or atlantis history - one after another they turn out wrong, then they release another book with a slightly different version.

This stuff goes back years - check out Alice Bailey (anti-semitic influence on the nazis), Dion Fortune, Edgar Cayce, Uri Geller - they can't all be right because their stories are all so different.

If i'm going to read a channeler, i prefer the more honest approach of say Dion Fortune to lay it out that they don't know it's from a real entity and it's as likely to be from the subconcsious. (I read Fortune's 'Cosmic Doctrine' as science fiction myself)
 
Last edited:
Of course there are crap and fake channelers and few are 100% true. But many have also been verified. And the few I have privately spoken to have been in possession of a lot of personal information about me and my family that they'd have way of knowing (living on the other side of the world).

If someone can tell you things like what your grandfather did for a living and what disposition he had that's a pretty good indicator there's some capabilities there. I believe there's such a thing as remote viewing and reading of the acashic records, among other things, that humans can learn to learn (more than who do). But ultimately, such abilities are power, and are generally not encouraged but dismissed as superstition (How many wants to empower you?).

It's interesting to look at it objectively and study it in detail rather than dismiss all channeling that doesn't fit your own beliefs, but I know most won't be inclind to. Predictions for the future are something different. They more often don't come true, at least the way they claim, for various reasons.
 
Ninae: i didn't necessarily dismiss it, though i personally find most of it worthless (i did enjoy some of dion fortune's cosmic doctrine - have you read any?); i just classify it as unconcsious creativity (with the honest ones at least - quite a bit of it is undoubtedly concsious genre-novel writing - it's a lucrative market (especially with 1-2-1 seminars available) - as with mediums, i would only trust the ones who don't ask for any money (which is a very small number))

i can still see valuable stuff being possible to learn (same as i do with all fiction). I could imagine that accessing the sub-concsious (whatever that is) might result in some archetypal knowledge or 'super ego' or something which might be like wisdom (or even sort of equate to an 'akashic record' at times), but it never pans out in literal interpretation of the details in my experience - there's been as much out and out nonsense in the stuff i've read. I ask again how do you know which ones are good, and which are bad like alice bailey-racists? (apart from the obvious racism of course)

I have some little experience of 'mediums' having good 'hits' of personal details which i wasn't able to immediately write off as cold reading - but if this wasn't just really good cold reading, i tend to see that as more likely some type of telepathy with the subject rather than some real contact with entities (in afterlife or otherwise) - mainly because that seems to tally better with the naure of the information i've seen them get.
 
I take a slightly different skeptical angle. I have no doubts communication with entities is possible, and assuming this person really is doing so my issue is can you trust what she is receiving from these entities? You have no way of knowing whether she is being played or not, on top of the possibility of miscommunication, deliberately misleading people for money etc. Unless you're doing it yourself you have little way of knowing whether it's true or not, and I wouldn't base a lot around that type of foundation if you don't want to be disappointed at some point.
 
I discard 99% of that kind of thing - I use my own judgement to decide if it rings true or not.

Predictions about the future are different, though, I don't think there is any way to tell if they will be true for various reasons.

"Truth" has its own vibration to it, though. Even if most are so insensitive to it many try to take advantage of it. i.e. Politicians full of lies. But some are so good at it they even believe themselves and that makes it harder to tell (form of hypnosis).
 
Last edited:
Ninae said:
Of course there are crap and fake channelers and few are 100% true. But many have also been verified. And the few I have privately spoken to have been in possession of a lot of personal information about me and my family that they'd have way of knowing (living on the other side of the world).

If someone can tell you things like what your grandfather did for a living and what disposition he had that's a pretty good indicator there's some capabilities there. I believe there's such a thing as remote viewing and reading of the acashic records, among other things, that humans can learn to learn (more than who do). But ultimately, such abilities are power, and are generally not encouraged but dismissed as superstition (How many wants to empower you?).

It's interesting to look at it objectively and study it in detail rather than dismiss all channeling that doesn't fit your own beliefs, but I know most won't be inclind to. Predictions for the future are something different. They more often don't come true, at least the way they claim, for various reasons.
Click to expand...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
 
The most confusing thing about this is the concept of alternative timelines.

Like, in the years prior to 2012, I remember reading about how there were two possible timelines. Timeline 2 of disaster and destruction, and timeline 1 of spiritual transcendence and ascencion.

And how we were going on timeline 1 and there was less than 20% chance that timeline 2 would manifest. But something like, certain interests were interested in bringing it about, and saturated mass consciousness with it in the hope that humanity focusing their energy on that outcome would bring it about.

But in the end human consciousness wasn't so low as to justify the destruction of the Earth at the time so it was against divine will.

And that was that.
 
quantum theory says that in at least one possible timeline this discussion will persist forever, until the heat death of the universe.
 
For a while now I've thought the "why haven't they landed, then?" question was problematic as an argument. How do we presume to know the intentions of those capable of reaching us from interstellar distances when it's beyond obvious we cannot forecast or envision our own future even just decades ahead? If a species can travel interstellarly, it can certainly effect self-evolution genetically or cybernetically, perhaps putting human beings to them on par with rats to us. Insofar as we communicate with rats it's for our own ends, and we wouldn't cross the galaxy for the sake of such exchanges.

Think of SETI and our attempt to "eavesdrop" on other intelligent life and how unlikely even that is to be a success.

LINKS:

Ask Dr. SETI: Aren't you becoming discouraged?
more SETI: How much of the sky have you covered?
 
Last edited:
sekio said:
quantum theory says that in at least one possible timeline this discussion will persist forever, until the heat death of the universe.
Click to expand...

The Many-Worlds interpretation of quantum theory says that. Multiple universes/timelines aren't actually a part of quantum theory, but they're the hallmark of one interpretation that explains the mathematical and experimental results that are known to be true.

It is the interpretation that I lean towards the most, personally. But it's rather solipsistic at its core. Check this wiki article out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top