21st century physics.

[Rift Zone]

Already Sir. I have to disagree with humility.

I do believe that our minds are hardwired in a sense.
People at places like the PEARS lab at Princeton and those who have continued with the Global Consciousness Project have shown (certainly not beyond a doubt but with more proof than a good deal of theories that are generally accepted) that our minds do interact with our world and universe and there is such a thing as a “Global Consciousness”.

I have seen personally, as have other witnesses that there are anomalies that can exist in our own space/time such as “ghosts” not necessarily of the deceased kind…but I am a big proponent of our minds and brains working in tandem yet as separate entities.
PSI has been proven and buried by our own government and others…this is fairly well documented, and yet dismissed because it is taboo and forces people to rethink what they have been taught to be the “truth”.

What say you Sir? ;-)

I mostly argree with that. We pick up a lof of information directly from the universe. In that way, we are hardwired to it. I still argue our mental landscape is largely a construct that gets refreshed fairly often. We have documented things like long hair functioning as a sensory organ. Plus, communication had developed in quality throughout the history of our lineage. We have lanugage now, it's pretty comprehensive, much better than forms of communication we've had in the past. I cannot look far forward and claim language is the best it will ever get. The universe says nothing against being able to communicate in emotion, images, whatever. There's no question our minds interact with the universe in more ways than we consciously/scientifically know. I don't think that means "global consciousness" though. It can mean many things. I don't think we disagree much here, looks like we just need to define our terms better.

 

[Skarekrow]

I mostly argree with that. We pick up a lof of information directly from the universe. In that way, we are hardwired to it. I still argue our mental landscape is largely a construct that gets refreshed fairly often. We have documented things like long hair functioning as a sensory organ. Plus, communication had developed in quality throughout the history of our lineage. We have lanugage now, it's pretty comprehensive, much better than forms of communication we've had in the past. I cannot look far forward and claim language is the best it will ever get. The universe says nothing against being able to communicate in emotion, images, whatever. There's no question our minds interact with the universe in more ways than we consciously/scientifically know. I don't think that means "global consciousness" though. It can mean many things. I don't think we disagree much here, looks like we just need to define our terms better.

I can mostly agree with that too.
I also think of this reality we “see” as a construct of our minds…there is no such thing as color or sound or solid objects for that matter…only how our mind perceives it and interprets those things back to us. So in that sense I agree.

I do think we are more connected to one another than people realize, and I do believe that our minds actually “reach out” and effect the things and people we interact with. So in that sense I do believe that events that occur that effect large groups of people like 9-11, do actually change our perception and emotional state for good or naught.
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/911formal.html

 

[Rift Zone]

I can mostly agree with that too.
I also think of this reality we “see” as a construct of our minds…there is no such thing as color or sound or solid objects for that matter…only how our mind perceives it and interprets those things back to us. So in that sense I agree.

I do think we are more connected to one another than people realize, and I do believe that our minds actually “reach out” and effect the things and people we interact with. So in that sense I do believe that events that occur that effect large groups of people like 9-11, do actually change our perception and emotional state for good or naught.
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/911formal.html

Agreed. I have a rule about not believing anything unless the universe confirms it. There is something there, absolutely. That coneection you describe is real. The nature of that connection, what it can interact with, what's the quality of the interation??? -hard to say from here.

 

[Skarekrow]

Agreed. I have a rule about not believing anything unless the universe confirms it. There is something there, absolutely. That coneection you describe is real. The nature of that connection, what it can interact with, what's the quality of the interation??? -hard to say from here.

It is hard to say…to determine something that is less tangible than the shoes on my feet.
And it is for that reason that I feel many taboos about our minds and how much they actually DO interact with our environment and with each other persist.

I have seen physical interaction with the environment by outside unknown forces…it could have been PSI in nature, or it could have been some other anomalous “something” interacting. But it was quite profound in several cases personal to me.

It warrants further investigation though, which current science and TV has made a mockery of.
I am used to going against the current belief structure as well Sir.
No worries.

 

[Rift Zone]

It is hard to say…to determine something that is less tangible than the shoes on my feet.
And it is for that reason that I feel many taboos about our minds and how much they actually DO interact with our environment and with each other persist.

I have seen physical interaction with the environment by outside unknown forces…it could have been PSI in nature, or it could have been some other anomalous “something” interacting. But it was quite profound in several cases personal to me.

It warrants further investigation though, which current science and TV has made a mockery of.
I am used to going against the current belief structure as well Sir.
No worries.

I came across this in the INTJforum. It seems to be a scientific approach to these types of things. I thought you might appreciate it. Like I mentioned above, it's hard to say if they know precicely what they're talking about, but there is definitely something there:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdneZ4fIIHE

 

[Skarekrow]

I came across this in the INTJforum. It seems to be a scientific approach to these types of things. I thought you might appreciate it. Like I mentioned above, it's hard to say if they know precicely what they're talking about, but there is definitely something there:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdneZ4fIIHE

I am familiar with the Institute of Heartmath…they have some very interesting and compelling evidence!
Thanks for the link…I may repost it on my thread with some greater commentary!