i need some skeptic input... dreams that come true

by googlemagoogle 121 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Sirona

  A predictive type dream is different from your ordinary dream. I dream "normally" regularly. Then once in a while, the dream is so vivid - it has a quality that I can't describe, and you know for sure that the dream is significant.

  I had one - it was my father (who has died) telling me something that would happen that day. When I woke, I told my husband. Then I went to work and told a work colleague. We laughed and said "wow wouldn't it be wierd if that actually did happen today?" The thing is, it did. And it wasn't something I could have known would happen.

  I understand the skeptical arguments and I think they apply in some cases. However, I don't think they apply in all the cases and no matter how hard you skeptics try and rationalise that we're 1. delusional 2. overly hopeful 3. irrational - admit it, you wish you could have one of these experiences, just one, to prove to you that there might be some truth in this (scientific or otherwise).

  Sirona
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  admit it, you wish you could have one of these experiences, just one, to prove to you that there might be some truth in this (scientific or otherwise).

  sirona: certainly, yes i do admit that having a paranormal experience would do a lot to help me understand where everyone is coming from. i think i may have had similar dreams as many have described on this thread. did i immediately jump to the conclusion that they were paranormal or spiritual in some way? no, i did not. why not? because i am aware of our history as homo sapiens. how do you think all the grand prophecies of various faiths came to be? faith-based historians say they were inspired by holy spirit. secular historians say they were similar to dreams that all humans have that seem super lucid and combine nicely with different natural phenomena. why is this distinction important? because after applying the rule of parsimony, it was plain for me to see that it was no use carrying on the credulous traditions of my ancestors.

  abaddon pointed out that there is no real, credible evidence that any of these experiences add up to anything more than a natural explanation. why does this fact have no affect on people in interpreting their dreams? why do people always think they are some exception to the rule, if they are even aware of the rule in the first place?

  You are indeed very closed-minded,

  sonnyboy: i really think that jeffro is simply trying to help people see that there is a different way than the usual to approach personal experiences. i don't think that anyone is denying that you had these experiences. it's the explanation that is called into question. it's nothing personal.

  being close-minded and dogmatic is one thing. being a skeptic is another thing. people often do not like spending time with skeptics because they are incredulous to a lot of stuff, wanting evidence, and so may be hard to talk with. no body likes a party-pooper. like when i went on the haunted house tour, and everyone else in the group was super freaked out, and i was not. they did nt appreciate my skepticism. being on the outside, looking in, is surreal. just because we don't accept everything as fact as it comes forth from the mouth of the experiencee, does not make us close-minded. we do not await some magical time in the future when science will prove all us skeptics wrong and close-minded, because we are living in the present, and speaking based on present data. sorry.
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  This study has been redone several times with the same results. So there is proof.

  skyman: there are a lot of "paranormal" researchers out there with funding. some of them even hold chair positions at prestigious universities. however, like theists in an "existence of god" debate, all their arguments have an implied assertion in them. like a "biblical archaeologist" digging with a shovel in one hand and his bible in the other, they have an implied assertion in everything they find and say. in the case of paranormal researchers, it is that the paranormal exists. that there is natural, and supernatural.

  it would be great if you could post the sources for the experiment you mention, so that we may have a look at it as well. thanks.
• 

  sonnyboy

  being close-minded and dogmatic is one thing. being a skeptic is another thing.

  You're right. Something told me not to post after drinking a worldly beverage...my message sounded ridiculous. I shouldn't have called Jeffro closed-minded, but skepticism can come off as calling someone a liar. Perhaps that's appropriate in some cases.

  Everyone is skeptical at times; I'm not asking anyone to be gullible. I know there are plenty of people who make up outrageous stories of supernatural events to get attention, or perhaps the event is coincidental and they construe it as something else. I'm don't often take things at face value myself; I try to see things from every possible angle, including the events I described. In my case, I don't see how the dream could be coincidental and I have no desire to get attention (at least not consciously); I'm usually the low-profile type. I'll try to be more careful with what I post in the future.
• 

  LittleToe

  tetra:
  In the spirit of the thread title, perhaps you could offer a "natural" explanation for prescient dreaming.
  
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  I'll try to be more careful with what I post in the future.

  hey sonnyboy,

  don't worry about it! i post some dumb things after a drink or two sometimes, and also sometimes when i am tired. take care

  In the spirit of the thread title, perhaps you could offer a "natural" explanation for prescient dreaming.

  hey LT,

  i already have:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/91817/1547275/post.ashx#1547275

  another thing: i have heard in this thread and others, a lot of people insinuating that skeptics are presumtuous to rely on current scientific method and evidence to base their skepticism on. after all, einstein describes reality better that newtonian physics! why do we apply possible future scientific developments to justify credulity for phenomena that occurs now? sure, i agree, things change. but that is a very poor reason to be so "open minded" to anything that comes along. scientific method still applies.
• 

  Jeffro

  Jeffro:
  Is it a pride thing, that causes you not to listen?

  I tend to operate best on logic, which is largely why I left the 'truth'™. What is it that you think I am not listening to?? I have stated that I am not convinced of paranormal phenomena on the basis of that I have not seen proof of them. I have not denied that people have had the experiences they said they had; simply that I do not necessarily believe that there is a supernatural force that caused them unless proven, and that a more 'rational' (ie compatible with current scientific knowledge) explanation may exist.
  That does not mean that the people who claim to have had these experiences are delusional (though that does not preclude delusional people from also claiming these types of experiences).

  How many people have you now disuaded from bothering debating with you?

  From what I can see, none. The thread calls for sceptism, and I am going to provide it. The topic is not intended to be a tradefest for the paranormal without objection.

  Meanwhile, perhaps you could elucidate on this point:
  ...some forms of paranormal belief are mutually exclusive.

  It is a paranormal belief that when people die their soul floats off to heaven or hell for eternity. It is also a paranormal belief that life is an ongoing cycle of reincarnation on earth. That's the first example that comes to mind right now.
  
  On predictive dreams: If a particular predictive dream is not to be seen as co-incidental, that would mean that either the events in the dream are thereafter caused by the same force that triggered the dream (unless by an extraordinary co-incidence a separate force does), OR the future is pre-set, the flow of time is not linear, and the person's mind has somehow been transported to that future time. If the future, and therefore the present, is pre-set, I should not be rediculed for saying things that the universe has already foreordained for me to say. And if that is the case, maybe I'm here just for some people to learn a lesson in long-suffering.
  
  On astral travelling: does a person's body weigh the same when they are astral travelling? If so, how does the astral form, that is massless and therefore not affected by gravity, account for the fact that earth is moving in it's orbit around the sun.
• 

  skyman

  I posted a topic with some proof it took me only a few minute to find proof. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/91989/1.ashx But the biggest proof to me is the fact that our government and all the other governments spend billions of dollars keeping remote veiwers imployed some do you think the governemts are dumb enough to pay the remote veiwers if it is not true!!!!!!!! The fact is this we have went to war over what the remote view have seen looked at it this way maybe millions alive today owe their lives to the remote viewer of Governments.
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  I posted a topic with some proof it took me only a few minute to find proof. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/91989/1.ashx But the biggest proof to me is the fact that our government and all the other governments spend billions of dollars keeping remote veiwers imployed some do you think the governemts are dumb enough to pay the remote veiwers if it is not true!!!!!!!! The fact is this we have went to war over what the remote view have seen looked at it this way maybe millions alive today owe their lives to the remote viewer of Governments.

  i will go look at the data you posted. thanks for answering the challenge. BTW, have you ever heard of a logical fallacy called "Appeal to Authority"? your post is an appeal to authority that is unrequired. it doesn't matter who believes what, or what circumstantial evidence this generates. it's about the evidence. i am not dismissing it out of hand, and i will go take a look at the data you provide. thanks for rounding it up.
• 

  googlemagoogle

  I wouldn't worry about her saying: "sister XYZ died"
  
  However, if she says, "Googlemagoogle, I'm going to kill you", well, then that could very well be prophetic. And painful.
  
  hell yes! i'd start packing in the very moment.