Dave Moore

Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About Dave Moore

  • Rank
  1. I never was given the chance to provide any evidence. Now, I simply have run out of time. Nothing to say any more.
  2. Us, us us. We, we, we. Speak for yourself. You aren't a child (I'm assuming). You think you are a team. Did you notice that? BS power politics. I can prove subjective reality is a better explanation. That would be either a positive or negative .But you don't want an explanation. You are in love with your ignorance. "Please, oh please, Anything but an explanation!" Next?
  3. No one here can prove I'm wrong. It isn't that I've had any opportunity to present my work. Interestingly, no one cares. I didn't lay out my explanation beyond a paragraph or two that was misunderstood but not clarfified. You all (and I mean ALL) after so many of my posts, have only attacked and belittled and yet... you are attacking the idea, not the ex[planation, because it never was presented. You feel confident as a group, as if safe in your numbers, but never examine the fact that your minds were made up long ago, and you can't learn any more. It is childish behavior. If you examine the thread and other related ones, you will see that you have written far more about what you bet I am saying than what I'm trying to have the opportunity to say. What I expect as an answer to this comment is, "Because you don't know what you're talking anout1" And what did I talk about? Nothing yet. Nothing in terms of an explanation. I find that ridiculous for grown-ups who would claim to be open minded. All I see is a lot of childish behavior. I could normally understand how difficult it might be to explain a different way of seeing things, because it's very hard to grasp this explanation. People might politely say, "I just don't get it! Sorry!". But here, I am dealing with aggressive and not particularly curious people who pretend they know a lot more than they do. I can explain why I say subjective reality makes sense. That won't happen though. Will it? Not in a blue moon. Maybe just one of you, someone with a few ounces of integrity, will ask me, "Okay, I will stick with your explanation until I find a problem with it." That's not what this forum is for, is it? I thought it was like this: 1) Make a claim. 2) Discuss explanation. 3) Find weaknesses in Explanation (or not). 4) Adjust thinking if necessary to accommodate new information. Not complicated. Real science, not BS power politics.
  4. The value of those books would not be available to most people. You might as well burn them. I still "read" the books (audiobooks). They have value to me and people like me. I never understood them the first time I read them. It all seemed like a lot of nonsense. I could never have known whether they represented a real knowledge or a clever ruse. They are far from a ruse. It was so cool to go back and read them and discover they made complete sense. It's funny. For 99% of the readers, they are just colorful and fanciful fiction. Only a very few see through that. As Don Juan was known to have said, the world is a far more mysterious place than you think. I never would have imagined how true that would turn out to be. The hypnosis of everyday reality is a truly effective trap. There is so much more. I used to be enthralled by mystery of the paranormal and claims of UFOs or Chupacabras, or any number of strange things. Then one day thirteen years ago, I lost all interest in those things. Once I knew those things were no different from a trip to the Dairy Queen, I lost all interest, Now, just pondering the miracle of the taste of good food, or the scent of Summer in the morning through an open window, I can't understand any more what it was I had spent so many years seeking. I read the link supplied. That isn't how I get information. It is possible to find truth in the words of a fool. It doesn't matter whether that article was "true". Fiction is as useful as documented "truth". The knowledge was real. It is obvious to one who knows. If you know subjective reality, you realize that the human subconscious is not inside your skull, but is constantly displayed in the features of what appears to be an objective world (and the memories thereof). This causes coincidences and supposed paranormal occurrences. One begins to see and experience these things as a matter of course. Believe it, or not. And incidentally, if you find yourself mocking me or talking down to me, such as comparing me to Castaneda in terms of what I might write,I am okay with that. It has nothing to do with me and everything to do with your inability to come to terms with something that you can't understand. This is typically what I've experienced here. I have no doubt it will continue as long as it provides you with some entertainment. I'm done pretending reactions I am not really experiencing. let us see how so many of you deal with the fact that your posts seem childish. I have produced some active threads. Nothing has been learned by the readers, but they keep coming. Perhaps they themselves might wonder why. We all perceive threats at different levels. A threat of an opposing belief system often creates an attitude of discrimination in the larger group. No true intellectual work is produced, while one liners, jokes, and other reactions abound. I could and would spend many hours explaining my knowledge to anyone. However, the chance anyone here would show the least curiosity or involvement is near nil. I wonder what so many of you are doing here. None so far have followed up on the beginnings of my explanations. Everyone so far wants it all handed to them in a nutshell. a five minute description of reality and consciousness. This thread is about the nature of reality if it is about precognition. To most here, it is a quick trip to google and a link dropped and a one liner response. If you all disbelieve in precognition, that it's been "proven" to be non-existent, and you won't even listen to an explanation you're purpose here must be something else. It's fun to mock, to discount, to belittle. I think adults do this more than children. It's okay with me, albeit boring. Ask yourself, though, why do you do it?
  5. Practice, to write a book.
  6. Have you ever asked yourself what the "world" would be like if you knew you were personally projecting it? I find that most people have no capacity for this particular kind of imagination. As soon as they are asked to do so, they immediately show me that they are failing. It took me years to do it well. One 'forgets" that the world would not be physically contiguous. Any objective test would be useless in describing what was really going on. Only the individual's subjective experience would be applicable. Belief is very important. In a subjective reality, belief is projected and it always manifests the closest perceptions to the subject's existing paradigm. I listened to an audiobook last night. Castaneda's Separate Reality. I think. I had read these books in my late teens and early adulthood, and later, during the nineties. It was only after an experience in 2004, which I call my "awakening", and during the following years. that I realized that those books were far from fiction. Before, I had no reference to qualify Don Juan's knowledge but it became obvious that Castaneda's teacher was a real shaman who possessed real knowledge. I realized that all of those who doubted Castaneda's writings were true were absolutely unqualified to know the difference. Don Juan never used the term, "subjective reality". Instead, he said that each of us has our own reality, that there was no common world, and that dreams were as real as waking life. He taught Castaneda to see another description and also to know that no description was the right one. All descriptions were arbitrary. Belief is a strange thing. It is no more than a description imposed on each of us. Within the realm of our imposed beliefs, we are trapped. We can't any longer see outside of our boxes. Only intense retraining can provide an escape from out world view that only objective conformity of beliefs is a true description of reality. This training that loosens the bonds of materialism (mine was self-imposed) always seems to culminate in a mental shift that has various names throughout the world. But in essence, whether Buddhism, Indian Shamanism, or Australian Aborigine Dreamtime, among many others, the mental shift is noted as a very defined experience that reveals a new subjective reality. This happens in an instant, I can tell you. Afterwards, it is no longer difficult to imagine what would be true if subjective reality were true. Your difficulty in understanding these things is natural. As children, we are forced to see our invisible playmates as a feature of imagination. Abused children often retain subjective paradigms into adulthood due to the lack of appeal of the supplied objective "training". They end up many times in mental hospitals. Their personal realities are called into question. Our benevolent mental health system then labels them as mentally ill. It is no wonder everyone I've met here "knows" I am wrong. None can imagine how I see reality, and like the mental health system, they do the only thing they know to do. They dismiss everything I say as a lot of hokum. I wouldn't expect any other response. You all have to dismiss the established knowledge of thousands of years of study of the human mind by intelligent and insightful cultures. The Aborigines in particular have survived for 50,000 years of more without any change in their culture. Only recently has their culture been dismembered by modern man encroaching in their lands and treating them in the same way our ancestors did the American Indian. My point is that such cultures as the Tribal Indians of Mexico and Australia and Northern India have spent eons working out very specific guidelines for understanding reality. These teachings are not religious in nature. They are gateways to a more meaningful reality that is far more sensible than Western man's scientific method. Science is useful in doing one thing well. It stabilizes belief through language and mathematics and by collective agreement, it becomes a powerful tool that can accomplish a lot of control over technology. The flip side is that it also limits the human mind. It hypnotizes us to believe no other knowledge can exist. It promote arrogance concerning what is real and what isn't. I It strangles off any competing paradigms, calling them superstitious or quacks, or whatever derogatory term would by attachment imply uselessness and childish thinking. Until you begin to look within rather than outward, no true understanding will arrive.
  7. Ten oz: The burden is too great. I am nearly blind now. I have to use bold typw just to see the monitor, which is a 50 inch screen. I know exactly why I can't get anyone to listen and it has nothing to do with me. It has to do with the (completely normal) entrenchment of those who would not allow me to explain my knowledge of belief as relates to subjective reality. That would take more effort than anyone here would put out----- not to say that as a judgement. When dealing with belief, one is always limited by the experiences of the one he is trying to convince. It is completely normal. I've said a few times, I would work very hard to explain my knowledge to anyone, nut this hasn't happened yet. It's useless to talk about something that doesn't exist in most people's realities. Innate knowledge arises out of an awakening experience. Such an experience is very rare. Before I had this experience many years ago, I was as hard-boiled an objective science type guy as could be found. What was so strange was the way my mind changed at the time. It was a really new and wonderful experience. I can't describe it in words, but I can say, it was nothing like I had ever experienced before. You can look up "Kundalini Awakening" and get an idea, but unless it happens to you, it's useless to explain. I can say this: Those who have it understand what I write about without hesitation. They fully embrace the concept of subjective reality without equivocation. It's very odd. If you read about it, it just sounds nutty. It's not religious, although many people who experience it are Buddhists. There is this other way of seeing things and it isn't about not being discriminating. I am still very discriminating but I am able to imagine much more than I ever could before the awakening. And I only found out this experience even had a name within the last couple of months. I have been writing on this forum knowing well nobody here would get it. I did it for practice writing for a book. Now it's getting harder to write. I will have to switch to a recording device. Even the bold text is hard to make out.
  8. Bender, Ten oz., I have no idea what the odds are and you know what I mean. Further, my own work in examining subjective reality and what that reveals tells me that it is enough circumstantial evidence to trump objective reality as the truth. I am comparing the two realities. I have favored subjective reality due to my experience. You are both convinced that objective proof is the only way to prove subjective reality, and you are dead wrong about that. I should say, for obvious reasons, but I don't think you will see that. The circumstamtial evidence has led me to a means to use objective evidence, but as said many times, I haven't yet been able to tell my tale, so to speak, due to a lack of interest by anyone here. So be it. I don't care that much. I know what I know.
  9. I agree with all comments that speak of human nature and people exaggerating and misremembering. I know that accounts for the vast majority of supposed precognitive dreams. I, however have had truly precognitive dreams--- three earthquakes. one nuclear poser plant leak. They stand as extremely good examples of what ought to be accepted as anomalous dreams. Particularly, as I sai, because I have always mentioned them to another person as unusually strong dreams, and I have not ever done this and nothing happened. They are qualitatively different in nature. The two strongest, the Algiers earthquake and the nuke leak, were unique in character. Since I myself am sure of this, but can't prove it, I would ask, what reason would anyone even comment on a precognition thread. No conclusive proof exists for it. Go ahead and talk about how you see no evidence for it. I KNOW. And if you don't believe me, that's fine. But I am presenting good examples of what would constitute precognitive dreams. I keep getting responses like, "Most precognitive dreams this or that..." I agree. Now what? I'm lying? Then why respond? These are significant examples. Unless I'm lying. I am not, but you have to assume some things on a forum. Otherwise, what use is it to comment at all? But I seem to get a lot of people who can't accept the possibility that precognition exists, citing a million examples of false positives. I KNOW. I AGREE. Now what?
  10. Going back to Phi for All's comment----I agree no proof exists, except anecdotal. It's like pain. Does pain exist? I doubt it. Prove to me it does! I have experienced both pain and precognitive dreams. I have heard of experiments that found statistical proof that telepathy does exist, and one would have to call their tests faulty in each case to say there's no such thing. I have heard that a drawing chosen to send from one lead-lined boioth to another often was "picked up" by the receiver in ADVANCE of the sender even seeing it. I am not making these claims, but I certainly wonder if researchers who went to the trouble of building those booths were so stupid that they didn't use accurate clocks, or ensure other protocols. It is a shame that when a critic says they see no proof of such things, they really mean they are discounting the evidence offered by GUESSING the researchers were using pseudo-science or worse, when there isn't any proof of that happening. And cherry-picking some obscure experiments that were faulty is no proof that all of them were.
  11. As I have said already, the nuke plant was the one closest to me in the world. Only about one and a half hours away. I was with a group touring the facilities. an alarm sounded, and we were told we had to evacuate. I've had other precognitive dreams, about earthquakes, but one in particular stood out. That dream was when I was in Stockholm around 1980. I dreamed I was running, panicked, with a lot of other people through the streets of what appeared to be z Muslim city. The ground was shaking. tt was (very) bright daylight. The dream was unusually intense. I woke up, still feeling the panic. I had never done this before, and haven't since, but I actually woke my wife to tell her about my amazingly real dream. The following day, about 1;00 in the afternoon, the largest earthquake in Algerian history destroyed something like 20,000 homes and killed a lot of people. I understand how many dreams would not rise to the level of being considered scientifically fitting the description of being truly anomalous. I also know I can't prove I'm not lying. It's almost, if not completely impossible, to prove a dream was precognitive because one would have to record the information in advance of the event to the satisfaction of a researcher, meaning a completely unnatural and mentally oppressive environment within which to dream. But these two examples are among the best you will find despite their lacking absolute proof. It is the net impact of many claims over thousands of years that might steer one into spending a good portion of their lives studying the phenomenon. I am sure you must be somewhat aware of this if you have studied the topic? I can explain why we can dream of future events, and also why they are so hard to prove, but no one here has the patience to listen, I have found, time and time again.
  12. So you are saying my dream about the nuke plant was not precognitive? It's in the comment with the bold type.
  13. Don't you have anything constructive to say? What do you think about precognition? If you don't have any interest in this subject, what on Earth are you doing here? If you think I'm lying, then what use is it to say anything. Does anyone have anything intelligent to say about precognition?
  14. All three of you--- a classic circle jerk.
  15. Strange, why do you even attempt to comment here, so far from anything you understand? Why don't you actually ask me questions or respond to my answers? Picked up an idea? My explanation is unassailable. You can't find fault. you only sat things that indicate judgement at every turn. Attack my ideas, here, publicly. Let your intellect lead the way, not your prejudices.