There are skeptics and believers on here but welcome to Scepcop. I hope you take part in the discussions.
Statistics: Posted by Paradox — 19 Feb 2011, 11:40
]]>
I see that I have some new info to check out via your links that sounds interesting. I look forward to it.
Statistics: Posted by NinjaPuppy — 16 Feb 2011, 19:44
]]>
We do certainly dream a lot; although there are a lot of underlying factors when people sleep that do not yield a lot of dreams. Largely, people enter a state of sleep induced amnesia and wake up with very little if any dream recall. Quite often such recall quickly fades and is left unrealized or stored in longer memory stores.
In the case of chance, certainly there will be dreams that suggest common mundane events with a casual occurrence which simply is not precognitive dreaming. Literal precognitive dreaming is more like taking a video sampling from a future reality and watching it on playback when the future event occurs. The dream and the future event it portrays are if perceived clearly, identical events. Video mirror images of each other down to specific details.
Mark Twain was specific about details, the metal coffin, the flower arrangement and his brother having died. These events matched his dream when they occurred, it's a more likely anecdote of a literal precognitive dream.
Here is an interesting anecdote on another forum: http://www.anthonypeake.co.uk/forum/vie ... f=8&t=1521
In my experiences with similar events, sadly I too have observed loved ones die with specific details pertaining to their death. For example my cousin and his friend dying in a pick-up truck accident nearly 1 year before it happened. It was a dream I told his mother and my other Aunt. The details of which were accurate and both himself and a friend would die in a pick-up truck on their way home for Christmas the following year. At his funeral my Aunt approached me and relayed her memory of me sharing the uncomfortable dream.
I have a personal experience with this, not an interest based on anecdotes or literature. The events can be identical to the future events they represent. It is a non-linear and non-localized look at future data in the form of a dream. It is why I find this area so fascinating... how is such an impossibility remotely possible? It's really a paradox and one worth understanding for science.
Statistics: Posted by YouAreDreaming — 16 Feb 2011, 12:06
]]>
but then again.. we dream a lot.. eventually some of them could happen right?
Statistics: Posted by derrida — 16 Feb 2011, 11:50
]]>
The reality of this challenge is quite astronomical as there are clearly problems with data collection and the issues of the subjective paradox and how it is easy to measure brain wave activity, but not information processing in the brain. To weigh in on future research that may finally produce more extensive evidence I am looking at MRI research such as that from Yukiyasu Kamitani at ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories in Kyoto, Japan where they are able to reproduce information from the visual cortex and render what people are seeing.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... reams.html
This is very exciting progress into an area that has long been an issue for the hard problems of consciousness. We are extracting inner data from the result of visual information processing in the brain. If this does evolve into dream recording and they speculate that it will over time. We may start to extract precognitive images and have them measure up to future events more accurately and telling then the textual versions, or sketches which lack the finer details one might expect from this research.
Now as a person who has this experience and with it dimming with age; my relative peak period was during the ages of 16-24 with a gradual and steep decline into now 38. That said, during my observations of this phenomena, there is too many personal accounts of events which are literal and specific to the future event.
Like the debate of Lucid Dreaming as part of skeptic conjecture in 1959 and finally with more modern research into empirically measured brainwave activity and controlled eye-movements; science may finally reach the required technology to satisfy the nature of precognitive dreaming once and for all.
Then all this research and anecdotal evidence will have more gravity for the questioning skeptic. However, understanding this non-linear and non-localized event I feel is a step forward for science. For me the argument of skepticism is long abandoned with the realization of a valid and real experience within the human psyche. I simply seek to understand what I have also been affected by; and it's definitely precognitive dreams in the literal context.
Statistics: Posted by YouAreDreaming — 16 Feb 2011, 11:19
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
My interest with precognition is not because this is a belief system; rather a matter of fact from the perspective of personal experience. At one point when I was 15 years old, I started noticing that some of my deja vu experiences have their origins in dreams I have had in the past, days/weeks/months prior to the onset of deja vu.
Over the years I would begin to gain the courage to explore this new paradigm and uncover the mystery around such a phenomena. I have published an abstract which you can read here:
It covers my research and that of many others as well as providing a deeper look at this phenomena. That is until the skeptics get a hold of it and ignore the evidence and attack the source (namely me) as a fraud. All their arguments are ones of convince; not truth. Simply ignoring all the existing peer-reviewed journals on precognition, the documented cases and historic record. All in favor of spouting some decree that they know everything and those who know something else are simply delusional.
Yet I find these arguments in the face of a long standing history of evidence to be the delusional and irrational; how can one say that if I woke up to day and saw that sun; that I must prove it with the scientific method and validate that I did indeed to as I said I had did. Personal experience is how reality is observed; and through personal experience I have observed the relationship between dreams and waking reality. No skeptic can scrub a lifetime of personal evidence and awareness that is gained through first-hand experience.
If J.W Dunne applied the scientific method and verified his precognitive dreams back in 1927; just because I have had them does that mean I must do also? Clearly there is a point where I can just enjoy these experiences and grow with learning the mechanics and science behind them without irrational thinkers screaming fraud at something that is experienced and not believed.
It's all so redundant and I need this website now more then ever!
Statistics: Posted by YouAreDreaming — 16 Feb 2011, 04:57
]]>