Transpersonal Psychology: Invitation to Dialogue

[Michael Mooney]

Erasmus:

None of the intention experiment research has been published in a journal, to the best of my knowledge. i.e. it hasn't made it through peer review. However, I'm skeptical of a psychologist attempting to measure "bio-photonics" as the subject of photon detection is so far outside the realm of the psychologist's experience and training that I doubt he can run adequate controlled experiments.

 

But you didn't answer my most important question- is there anything (evidence or otherwise) that would cause you to doubt that experiences meditating are an experience of an ultimate objective reality?

 

The book is, in part, a compilation of dozens of very well controlled experiments on the subject. Some of these individual experiments may well be reviewed in respected journals like the Journal for Consciousness Studies. Your reference to "bio-photonics" is a very small piece, but its lead scientist was also an expert in the field.

 

It would behoove you to actually read the book prior to a dismissive review!

 

To the last question: My experience of meditation for the 25 years prior to awakening was not experience of "an ultimate objective reality." Since the breakthrough I have had no doubt whatsoever that the "ultimate reality" is omnipresent consciousness, from which I am not separate... as a supposed (illusory) "separate identity."

And this consciousness has two aspects. It is transcendental on one hand, awareness itself, independent of content of awareness (what we are aware of)... "consciousness without an object."

On the other hand, the objective cosmos is also "real" in the objective sense. (I disagree with Merrell-Wolff on this point.*) It can be sensed/periieved by the physical senses and human awareness as it actually is once subjective "screening" is transcended. In identity with this cosmic consciousness, I know (by direct gnosis) that consciousness at the "Kosmic" level (omnipresent) is the Creator of cosmos, its physical body.

 

(*Modest: Please note)

 

So, yes there is a real, objective, physical cosmos, and, yes, the mystic knows that consciousness itself is the creative force on cosmic scale. It requires the transformation called enlightenment or gnosis in order to know this directly.

 

(Hopefully it will not take most folks 25 years of sitting silently for an hour a day to "awaken" from the sleep of egocentric consciousness. I have a "busier than average mind"... which is not a great asset to finding that deep stillness of reference in the quote "Be still and know that I Am God.")

And, no, this realm of knowledge (gnosis) is not presently "science"*, tho it is an integral part of transpersonal psychology.

(* Modest, please note.)

Michael

[Erasmus00]

The book is, in part, a compilation of dozens of very well controlled experiments on the subject. Some of these individual experiments may well be reviewed in respected journals like the Journal for Consciousness Studies. Your reference to "bio-photonics" is a very small piece, but its lead scientist was also an expert in the field.

 

I can find no references to any of the experiments in any refereed journal. If you know of some, please give the references and I will gladly retract my statement. I readily admit I have not read the book, I have only looked at the experiments listed on the website. If there are more experiments that are better reported, please give me references.

 

Dr. Gary Schwartz, the lead on the leaf intention experiment is NOT an expert in biology or any kind or photon emission. He is not an expert on "intention" experiments. He is a psychologist with the University of Arizona who spent most of his career doing experiments with mediums. What field do you claim his expertise in?

 

It would behoove you to actually read the book prior to a dismissive review!

 

Again, I can only speak to the website, I do not mean to claim otherwise. None of the experiments on the website appear to be published in peer-reviewed journals, and none of the "full results" appear to be journal article quality. Even in the summaries, most of the results were "inconclusive" or not statistically significant, which would probably keep them from being published (what good is an experiment that cannot decide one way or another?)

 

Since the breakthrough I have had no doubt whatsoever that the "ultimate reality" is omnipresent consciousness, from which I am not separate... as a supposed (illusory) "separate identity."

 

So there is nothing that would convince you that this experience is more about brain chemistry than contact with the "ultimate reality." There is no information/evidence/experience that would cause you to doubt your understanding of "direct gnosis?"

[Michael Mooney]

From "The leaf intention experiment" section of the website:

"Psychologist Dr. Gary Schwartz, director of the Center for Advances in Consciousness and Health at the University of Arizona, generously volunteered to carry out our first experiment. Dr. Schwartz has a great deal of experience carrying out experiments in energy healing, and is the first scientist to have photographed light (biophoton) emissions from living things through his super-cooled digital CCD camera system, which not only creates digital photos of biophoton emissions, but analyzes and counts them, one by one.

 

(Result summary and journal publication... pending... info):

Numerically, the increased biophoton effect was highly statistically significant. In fact, he said, all the punctured holes in the chosen leaf were filled with light. All the holes in the control leaf, on the other hand, remained black.

 

Dr. Schwartz eventually will publish these results in a scientific publication, which prevents me at this writing from publishing photos. Science journals demand that all details of a scientific experiment be published first in a peer-reviewed journal before being circulated publicly."

 

But that was 'just for openers.'

Page 27 of the book introduces German physicist Fritz-Albert Popp, who eventually founded the International Institute of Biophysics (IIB), not only recognized by the German government but composed of fifteen groups of scientists from centers around the world, including CERN, Northeastern University (U.S.), the institute of Biophysics Academy of Science in Beijing, and Moscow State University. The IBB, by 2001 included 40 distinguished scientists from around the world.

 

Popp constructed the first "photomultiplier"...

"a device which "captured light and counted it photon by photon. He carried out impeccable experimentation that demonstrated that these tiny frequencies were mainly stored and emitted from the DNA cells. The intensity of the light in organisms was stable, ranging from a few to several hundred photons per second per square centimeter of surface of the living thing-- intil the organism was somehyow disturbed or ill, at which pointthe current went sharply up or down. The signals contained valuable information about the state of the body's health and the effects of any particular therapy.

(My note:... including the effects of conscious intention toward various organisms.)

 

The book then goes into painstaking detail about refinements to such equipment and its application to "intention experiments" by Schwartz's team.

In brief summary: When healers were tested

,

..."the images radiating from their hands were breathtakingly clear: a stream of light flowed out of the healers' hands... and fingers. Schwartz now had his answer about the nature of conscious thought: Healing intention creates waves of light-- and indeed these are among the most organized light waves found in nature."

 

On page 42, other experiments by Popp himself confirm that "light seemed to be a communication system between living things.... (like) the silent communication holding (Daphnia water fleas) together like an invisible net (when they swarm.)"

 

The book covers the history of human/plant "telepathic" interaction, from its pioneer, Cleve Backster's earliest to later experiments, to physicist Konstantin Korotov (professor of quatum physics at St. Petersburg Technical University in Russia) and his work with Gas Discharge Visualization (using state of the art optics, digitized television and computers to capture photon emissions from living beings... as effected by conscious intention...

To the famous work of Semyon D. Kirlian.

 

It goes on and on... and the experiments are impeccably controlled.

 

I'll be back to reply to the rest of the post ASAP.

Michael

[Erasmus00]

We need to be careful to not put together two forms of research

1. the existence of biophotons and their role in biological activity

2. the hypothesis that intention has an effect on biophoton production.

 

As far as I know, Fritz-Albert Popp's experiments are entirely about the first, and he has not been involved in the second.

 

The experiments on the website aimed at the second were run by Gary Schwartz and have yet to be published, as far as I can tell. I would further argue that running photocounts experiments on sources as weak as biological systems requires a great deal of technical skill and experience, which Gary Schwartz simply does not have.

 

The book covers the history of human/plant "telepathic" interaction, from its pioneer, Cleve Backster's earliest to later experiments, to physicist Konstantin Korotov (professor of quatum physics at St. Petersburg Technical University in Russia) and his work with Gas Discharge Visualization (using state of the art optics, digitized television and computers to capture photon emissions from living beings... as effected by conscious intention...

To the famous work of Semyon D. Kirlian.

 

Journal references, please. Specifically to experiments which address the second of the two points above.

[Michael Mooney]

Erasmus,

You could save me a lot of "homework" citing specific experiments and where they were published in scientific journals (wherever... not yet researched... even in the Journal of Consciousness Studies) if you would simply quit asking me to spoon-feed you that research and just read the effing book!

 

If you are interested in this field of research, this is the best yet published on the science of it. If you are too lazy to get and read the book, I am not inclined to do the specifics for you... and there are a lot of very well controlled experiments in the book.

 

Edit: "The hypothesis that intention has an effect on biophoton production" is very well confirmed in this book. Take a look before you preach to me again from your scientific high horse, uninformed as you are on this very important scientific source on the subject.

Second edit:

Erasmus:

We need to be careful to not put together two forms of research

1. the existence of biophotons and their role in biological activity

2. the hypothesis that intention has an effect on biophoton production.

 

As far as I know, Fritz-Albert Popp's experiments are entirely about the first, and he has not been involved in the second.

M:

"On page 42, other experiments by Popp himself confirm that "light seemed to be a communication system between living things"

 

And, if you were to take the trouble to read the book, you would find that the above also applies to conscious intention to "communicate" to other beings and effect the well being of plants experimentally.

I will not keep feeding feeding you info from a book you refuse to read.

 

Michael

[Erasmus00]

You'll have to forgive me- I'm used to communicating with scientists, and the request for references is common and expected, and providing references common courtesy.

 

For instance, you reference Popp's work (from the book), why not simply reference the journal in which Popp published this work so that I can read the actual experiment? While I don't have ready access to the book, I do have ready access to scientific journals.

 

Unfortunately, my university library does not have a copy of the book, which makes it difficult for me to browse for its references. If I have time to go to a book store, I may look for it, and flip through a bit.

[Michael Mooney]

Here's a link to a few pages previewing The Intention Experiment in which Popp confirms the results of intention.

And this is one of many such confirmations from a wide ranging scope of experiments done by well credentialed scientists.

 

The Intention Experiment: Using Your ... - Google Books

 

Michael

[Erasmus00]

Here's a link to a few pages previewing The Intention Experiment in which Popp confirms the results of intention.

And this is one of many such confirmations from a wide ranging scope of experiments done by well credentialed scientists.

 

The book is not a scientific journal, and none of the details of how the analysis and technical details of the experiment have been included. To be clear- what I am looking for is a detailed, technical summary of the methods used and results of the experiment. It seems as if most of the experiments discussed in the book are not yet published in actual scientific journals.

[Michael Mooney]

My last link was in direct reply to your statement:

 

As far as I know, Fritz-Albert Popp's experiments are entirely about the first, and he has not been involved in the second....

(2. the hypothesis that intention has an effect on biophoton production.)

 

He has in fact been "involved in the second" as referenced by McTaggart in the pages linked.

 

If you ever do get around to reading the book, I would be very interested in your *informed critique* as a scientist as to the validity of the experiments... which are explained in minute detail in the book... more so than the average reader would find interesting but very detailed for the scrutiny of critical scientists like you.

 

michael

[Larv]

Then after a few more years of meditation I found the mystic realm which transcends "personal identity." Then I became a transpersonal counselor... and a meditation teacher.

Michael, if you don't mind a few skeptical-but-sincere questions, just so I can get a handle on what you're saying: How is this any different from finding Jesus and praying to God, I mean in the thematic sense of true belief? Would I need to be a true believer in transpersonal psychology to access any of its benefits? And do you regard the ego as a good thing or a bad thing?

 

In this realm one realizes that ones cultural conditioning is like robotic programing, and ultimately, one can not be FREE until the illusion of personal identity (and all its program) is transcended.

Isn't this also what Scientology claims to offer. Why isn't transpersonal psychology just another belief system that preys on mental weakness and insecurity? Could you take a skeptic like me and therapeutically lift me up to my Truer Self and make me a better person?

 

And, finally, the big one: Is transpersonal psychology open to scientific inquiry?

 

Respectfully, a larval being.

[Michael Mooney]

Larv:

]Michael, if you don't mind a few skeptical-but-sincere questions, just so I can get a handle on what you're saying: How is this any different from finding Jesus and praying to God, I mean in the thematic sense of true belief? Would I need to be a true believer in transpersonal psychology to access any of its benefits? And do you regard the ego as a good thing or a bad thing?

 

Gnosis is direct, immediate knowing, not belief, as in religious "belief."** Transpersonal psych (TP) is a legitimate field of psychology, the study of the human psyche, including its experience of "enlightenment/gnosis," various kinds of temporary "peak experiences," the sense of being spiritually "one with The Universe" as in harmony with nature and/or with cosmos as one Intelligent Being ("Kosmos" as per integral philosophy.)

 

The ego (as I use it) is one's sense of personal identity. A "healthy ego" for functioning in the world is the focus of most psychology. The focus of TP, as above transcends personal identity, exploring the "human potential" for evolution of consciousness beyond ego as stated previously in this thread as the belief:

"This is who I am. This is what I want. To the extent my desires are not fulfilled, I am unhappy and experience suffering... and spread it around as personal discontent or worse."

 

Isn't this also what Scientology claims to offer. Why isn't transpersonal psychology just another belief system that preys on mental weakness and insecurity? Could you take a skeptic like me and therapeutically lift me up to my Truer Self and make me a better person?

 

I have no respect for Scientology. It seems like a form of brainwashing to me, a re-programing rather than the de-programing I experienced as part of my "breakthrough." (De-programing the above quoted 'this is who I am' identity/belief.)

A piece I wrote, "Gnosis: Beyond Belief" quoted below ** will address why gnosis is not just another belief.

And, finally, the big one: Is transpersonal psychology open to scientific inquiry?

 

It is open to it but at present, "scientific inquiry" does not encompass the "sacred science" of direct experience of gnosis, as quoted in point #9 of the link on "Mystic Traditions":

 

9. Finally, mystics of all traditions agree that their teachings about the Ultimate Nature of Reality should not be taken on faith alone. Just as scientific theories can be verified by anyone willing to perform appropriate experiments, mystical teachings can be verified by anyone willing to engage in appropriate spiritual practices and disciplines. (This, incidentally, is why we at the Center believe mystical teachings and practices are rightly said to constitute a science of the sacred.)

 

** (A page from my website, which will remain undisclosed in this forum... to avoid the ridicule a site on enlightenment draws in a science forum!)

 

GNOSIS: BEYOND BELIEF

 

What do you know for sure? I don't mean facts, empirical knowledge. I mean Truth, beyond mere belief, gnosis , which is direct knowing. There is no way that the mind, the tool of empirical knowledge, can reach gnosis, which is the unity of the individual and the Infinite, Consciousness Itself.

 

What "I" know is that I Am One , Universal Consciousness. This is our true identity in Unity as the Omnipresent Consciousness. As individual forms, human beings, of course we are this one and that one, but we are transformed by gnosis in unity.

 

The "first born" from Unity Consciousness, from transcendence as Source or Creator, into individuality as "this one"...the primordial manifestation from the causal plane of pure Being into doing or creating...is LOVE. The very impulse to create, once established in true identity as Creator- here- now ...is motivated by LOVE.

This is not the romantic love of personal attachment but the inevitable manifestation of unity consciousness into individual forms. Knowing we are One Consciousness gives birth to Universal Love in all our relationships.

 

Surrender of identification with ego is the "transitional" phase in this birthing process. But this can not be done by the ego. Ego manages our "worldly affairs", but this surrender is a spiritual matter...a transcendence of "matter" and ego's concerns.

For some, ego must be at the "end of its rope"...despairing of worldly vanities and the whole gamut of conflicts as "separate identities". For others their Path of spiritual intent finally delivers them into the grace of gnosis like the dawn of a new day after a mercifully short "dark night of the soul".

 

One way or another our destiny is to outgrow the petty limitations of our egocentric identities and become conscious of this omnipresent consciousness... Who we truly are!

Thanks for your inquiry.

Hope this addresses it sufficiently. If not, I am open to more sincere questioning.

 

Michael

[Larv]

GNOSIS: BEYOND BELIEF

 

What do you know for sure? I don't mean facts, empirical knowledge. I mean Truth, beyond mere belief, gnosis , which is direct knowing. There is no way that the mind, the tool of empirical knowledge, can reach gnosis, which is the unity of the individual and the Infinite, Consciousness Itself…One way or another our destiny is to outgrow the petty limitations of our egocentric identities and become conscious of this omnipresent consciousness... Who we truly are!

Michael, this seems like a belief system to me, and not very far from Jesus and his omnipotent Father. Don’t you have to believe in gnosis and the “omnipresent consciousness” to get where you want to go? Is there a test for gnosis or a descriptive feeling one get when they join up with the omnipresent consciousness?

 

Maybe you have clinical results by way of personal testimony in support of TP? If it works for some people, and they truly believe it does, then who am I to question it? But I doubt that it would work on me, since I don’t have a spiritual appreciation for what you’re saying. Indeed I serious doubt that I even have a spirit. I’m pure ego, constrained by my superego from the right and corrupted by my id from the left. And I have enough trouble managing all of that without an omnipresent consciousness to deal with.

 

But, hey, I've always said that science know less that five percent of everything worth knowing, and half of what it knows is wrong.

[Boerseun]

Michael, or "mik I el", if that floats your boat, we quote sources in order to put an objective value to what we state.

 

The site you quoted from, your site, is called "Conscious Unity", and can be found here.

 

Everything you state and "explain" on that site probably makes perfect sense to you.

 

To me, however, it merely explains the agenda you're trying to push here with your mysticism and spirituality.

 

It also, unfortunately, makes it impossible for me to take anything you say seriously.

 

Mods, Admins and members in general - I invite you to visit Michael (or as he's known by his Spirit Name, "mik I el")'s website, where you will learn of such cool things as the Pyramids of Egypt predicting a Global Awakening in 2013/2014 - whatever that might mean. I suppose we have to wait and see.

[Larv]

From wiki’s account of TP:

Criticisms of transpersonal psychology

 

Criticisms of transpersonal psychology have come from several commentators. One of the earliest criticisms of the field was issued by the Humanistic psychologist Rollo May, who disputed the conceptual foundations of transpersonal psychology (Aanstos, Serling & Greening, 2000:25). Another early criticism regarded the relationship between Transpersonal Psychology and the ideas of William James. Although the ideas of James are central to the Transpersonal field, Alexander (1980) thought that Transpersonal Psychology did not have a clear understanding of the negative dimensions of consciousness (such as evil) expressed in James' philosophy. This serious criticism has been absorbed by later Transpersonal theory, which has been more willing to reflect on these important dimensions of human existence (Daniels, 2005). Criticism has also come from the cognitive psychologist, and humanist, Albert Ellis (1989) who has questioned transpersonal psychology's scientific status and its relationship to religion and mysticism. Friedman (2000) has criticized the field of Transpersonal psychology for being underdeveloped as a field of science, placing it at the intersection between the broader domain of inquiry known as transpersonal studies (which may include a number of unscientific approaches) and the scientific discipline of psychology.

So, Michael, please explain why TP is NOT a religious cult of mysticism. Have you ever heard of Lifespring or Vistar?

[Michael Mooney]

Well, my lack of computer savvy finally caught up with me in a big way, along with Boerseuns' intense hostile intention to support his belief that mysticism in general and transpersonal psychology in particular are "bullshit."

 

I had avoided mention and linking of my website on a science forum for just this reason:

... (A page from my website, which will remain undisclosed in this forum... to avoid the ridicule a site on enlightenment draws in a science forum!)...

 

But Boerseun immediately tracked it down and blatently violated my intent to keep it undisclosed here. So now I can expect nothing but ridicule on this site and more infractions at every mention of or commentary on "spirituality"... gagged as "preaching" on this site, even tho it is a legitimate part of transpersonal psych.

 

For the info of anyone visiting my site, I have not published on it for years, ever since a computer nerd, while cleaning out viruses, installed a "new and better publishing program" which I never learned to use.

 

So, much of it would have been updated with new information and deeper insights, if I were not competeley lame and disabled as a "webmaster."

 

I did spend a week on top of Mount Shasta on a Vision Quest for clarification of the pyramid prophecy, so those who believe there is no Universal Spirit to answer the sincere inquiry of such a quest will yuk it up with Boerseun over how ridiculous any "prophecy" is, given that materialistic cause and effect is the one and only reality in a universe devoid of intelligence (as a whole) and Spirit being of course simply more "bullshit."

 

I guess that will just about do it for me on this site.

 

Keep your eyes open and your ear to the rail for this "global awakening" thing. We will know by early 2014 whether it is "bullshit" or not.

 

If there is a full on global awakening... read general enlightenment... by then, I will expect a full apology from all those who ridicule the possibility on this site. If not I will publicly eat crow here and on my website (assuming I learn how to publish on it again.)

 

This may be my last post... or not... or I may be suspended for its preachy content anyway. If I am banned permanently for "preaching", I request one post after 2014 to either gloat (in good humor, of course) or apologize for the deluded belief that "Kosmos" answered my quest for clarification of the Great Pyramid prophecy.

 

Thanks... if so granted.

Michael

[Michael Mooney]

A little history behind my last infraction for direct reply to Larv's inquiries in his last post as follows:

 

Michael, if you don't mind a few skeptical-but-sincere questions, just so I can get a handle on what you're saying: How is this any different from finding Jesus and praying to God, I mean in the thematic sense of true belief? Would I need to be a true believer in transpersonal psychology to access any of its benefits? And do you regard the ego as a good thing or a bad thing?

 

He was asking about how I saw the difference between "this" (gnosis) and religious belief, as above. My piece on gnosis vs mere belief was a direct answer to his inquiry. Yet the gag rule against talking about direct experience of a universal conscious presence (called "preaching" here) gave me another 'citation/infraction' and the warning that I will be banned if I keep on "preaching."

 

Here again is an overlooked (avoided) "square one" starting point for communication between empirical science and gnosis/mysticism...

As I challenged Boerseun twice, without reply:

"Everything you "believe" about the world has come from your perception of it and your reasoning based on those perceptions.

 

Likewise mystics directly perceive that Ultimate Reality which was the subject of my last link. Your obviously hostile bigotry against the latter is based on your absolute certainty that your perceptions and reasoning reflect The Truth, while mystics' direct perception of the realm transcending materialism.empiricism is delude "bullshit."

My gnostic experience is no different *in principle* than the direct experience of sensation and perception upon which empirical science is based.

"Belief" as per religious doctrines (and "preaching" such doctrines) is a whole different animal, and the staff of this site does not understand the difference.

Larv:

... Why isn't transpersonal psychology just another belief system that preys on mental weakness and insecurity? Could you take a skeptic like me and therapeutically lift me up to my Truer Self and make me a better person?

 

Why? is because belief and gnosis are not the same. I did not directly answer the second question, but... no. One can point a finger at the moon, but no one can take another to it.

 

And, finally, the big one: Is transpersonal psychology open to scientific inquiry?

 

Just to be clear TP is a legitimate part of modern psychology.

For every critic (in the mold of Boerseun's mentality.... prejudice/bigotry) there are a host of psychologists who welcome the study of the psychology of spiritual experience as distinguished from religious belief.

 

"Comparative Religions" is usually a required course of study in TP, and all psychologists credentialed in TP know the difference between religious doctrine and the direct experience of epiphany.

 

I wish I could say the same for the staff who make the rules for this site!

 

Michael

[Boerseun]

"Everything you "believe" about the world has come from your perception of it and your reasoning based on those perceptions.

 

Likewise mystics directly perceive that Ultimate Reality which was the subject of my last link. Your obviously hostile bigotry against the latter is based on your absolute certainty that your perceptions and reasoning reflect The Truth, while mystics' direct perception of the realm transcending materialism.empiricism is delude "bullshit."

Michael, if you challenged me with the above twice, I apologize - I didn't see it.

 

Yet, in the smallish hope that we might just salvage a soul busily scurrying down the Path of Irrationality, the following:

 

Everything I believe about the world having come from my perception of it, and my reasoning based on those perceptions, is simply not true. From a scientist's point of view, things aren't so simple. You see, scientists understand the risk of interference with samples, and the dangers of their own prejudice and bias soiling experiments thereby destroying any value the experiment might have. That's one of the reasons that the methodology of experiments are rigidly followed, and the experiments themselves are so designed as to remove all personal bias of the experimenters. The double-blind test comes to mind.

 

And then, of course, being a good scientist and respecting the nature of objective results, we accept the results of the experiment, whether we like it or not. If we did not do that, and molded the world according to what we would like it to be, then we might as well hang up our hats and call it a day.

 

And that's my whole point. Your "mystical reality" will be an individual and unique thing to each and every body. You have a certain impression of what it is. Yet, you're telling me it's ineffable, you can't describe it. But you know that my impression of it is simply wrong, because it's not the same as yours. I hope by now you understand how worthless this entire concept is in a Scientific sense. It's not a tangible concept. Most likely, it's a concept that merely exist in your mind. And in your mind only. The "Grand Awakening" as discussed by so many self-styled "mystics" and New Agers in general might be a completely different thing in their heads - the only point of comparison might merely be that you simply happen to use the same funky terminology for it. There is no proof at all that you're all actually talking about the same thing. Ineffibility has its drawbacks, apparently.

 

Lastly, as to your Pyramid Vision:

Please understand that its not anybody here at Hypography's intent to mock you. But we have seen loonies and kooks of all flavours over the years trying to convince us of things that smell very much like this Vision you had about the pyramid and the 2013/14 "Wave" hitting planet Earth. Dates differ, objects differ. One guy reckons he had a vision of the moon blowing up in 2021, and we will all be sorry for calling him a nut when it does. Another guy was Tutankamen reincarnated on the web. Another guy was Abraham Lincoln. Another guy reckons that his Vision had China disappear in a massive wave in 2018. So it's very hard, very hard indeed, to take somebody serious who had a "Vision", with the only witness being him or herself. And the sad thing then is that he spends the rest of his life trying to convince other of this. With what we know of science and neurology in particular, GAHD's assertion a few posts back about a neurological malfunction still beats the living stuffing out of Occam's Katana Sword in comparison.

 

I am more than willing to accept your challenge about 2014. But it's impossible for us to know whether your vision has come true without a detailed and complete set of predictions. How will we know if it has come to pass? How will you know if it has come to pass? What wil the signs be? What should we be looking for? And finally, how do we reconcile this vision with the guy who had a vision about the Earth being utterly destroyed in 2012?

 

So, finally - no. We don't mock New Agers. They do a perfectly good job of it themselves.