naitche

These experiences started when I was 11 and were very much more pronounced, impossible to hide from those close to me. Much less as I aged. Life style likely accounts for a lot there. I did contact the only paranormal researcher I could find in Australia with a view to participating, but after asking a few questions decided the head of that was very biased to non scientific theories and no help to me, nor I to him. I never left my name or gave personal information. Long ago now. I may have watched too many movies, or just become more cynical, but submitting myself as a guinea pig these days isn't going to happen. I have those instances too. I can and do brush those off, same as you did. Maybe they could be included too, but if there is doubt its best to attribute it to coincidence or extrapolation. It would be too easy to see connections where there are none and loose sight of reality. Some thing I witness often in others who have experienced weird things. The dream of my friend I also wrote off, and another involving my Grand fathers death by drowning till they confirmed. I only count what is physically evidenced, or can't be easily explained otherwise. Of the instances I put in the category of weird /spooky, there is either unexplained physical evidence, or an inescapable certainty with out evidence. Because those instances are always born out, and there is an intensity to the feeling that brings a nervous agitation or energy not usual to my self. eg. a surprise visit to a friend in my late teens. I found him at the gate to his house as I approached but as he did an intense fear over took me. He invited me in, saying his parents were getting Married that afternoon and prepping. I said not a good time, I'd come back another. He insisted I come in and they would happy to see me. I did not want to enter the gate, let alone the house. Trying to find an explanation for my fear, all I could think was there was going to be an explosion. The house was all electric and I told myself it was ridiculous and stupid, just go in. I did, but was so over come with fear I couldn't excuse myself fast enough and walked away berating myself an idiot for how I must have acted, asking myself where I could expect a damn explosion of all things. My friends father died within days, driving a forklift into power lines. I had no liking for the man as an abusive father and suspected Pedophile (confirmed by one of his daughters years later) I had no idea what was happening, why, or what I expected other than EXPLOSION!! It isn't nice.

You can't make the claim, with out rational explanation to back it up. I'm well aware of that. Never the less, I believe it to be so and can't dissuade myself.

You think my father would not have understood that very well? We didn't document anything to get statistics. The data was presented. The statistical mind analyzed it, and was forced to accept the results. I don't need to prove anything to myself, just accept it. Understanding it would be better. As for proving evidence for others others, Why? When anything you offer is going to be met with a dismissal of your rational processes or accusations of charlatanism. Either way, a discredit to you. I don't know of homes where incandescent bulbs are used anymore. They were affected less reliably. Electric Jugs and toasters were more often like 30 out of 50. Reliably enough that when challenged on my refusal to put on the jug, because "the element will blow and I'll be blamed for not covering the it". more often than not I could demonstrate. I don't own a toaster and won't touch one belonging to anyone else. The feeling I would never describe as funny. I've had those too, the fear for some one thats some times justified and other times not. This is different. Less a fear or discomfort. Not the same as considering what if...and then worrying about it. Its a knowing. I understand coincidence and accept a lot under that heading.

If this was experienced once, sure. Multiple times with similar outcome each time is less tenable. But its the easiest explanation for those who never have, and the logical one for those who turn to science 1st. For such a person experiencing it 1st hand, the contradiction is pretty unnerving. I will go out on limb here, and open myself to the ridicule of science minded people for the holes in our understanding of physics. Yeah, so much for the 'advantage'. I'm not trying to 'prove' anything and have no intention of doing so. I experience this, though not restricted to negative out comes, And more measurable effects witnessed by many others. I can not use electrical items with filaments or elements , like toasters, old filament light bulbs, or old Aussie style electric water jugs(kettle). They blow when I use them. There will be periods where it happens every time, then other periods when I can get away with it once in a while. I could flick a light on, only to have the whole fixture come crashing down. Not much fun for a kid and not much of an evolutionary advantage, though it did literally save my neck one time at pub with friends when the window i was sitting under came crashing down on my seat. I had been sitting there, involved and occupied fully with the company when I became aware of the frosted window behind me. I felt very uncomfortable with it all of a sudden. Tried to brush the feeling off, ignore or excuse it. after about 2 minutes of failing to do so, I figured it was easier to move seats since there was a spare so did. The pane fell in about 30 seconds later. Many other less dramatic instances, and many more when I could have made use of fore knowledge but had none. Most recent experience was the death of a long time friend from those early years. I hadn't seen them for 15 years. I dreamed I was in a busy crowd at dusk, facing this person who was slightly turned away from me. There were no words spoken, but I understood they were 'going' . I felt upset, and made myself wake from the dream. They died suddenly two days later. My father was a mathematician, pioneer of computing sciences and very knowledgeable re; physics. So a huge skeptic. He had to accept there was more he didn't understand. I refused to go near a Computer for years, after constantly being reminded it was a 'sensitive piece of electronic equipment.' before I noted that this effect seems limited to filament type items. Since neither of us believe in 'woo' or magic, We could only (and I still only can) put it down to holes in science yet to be filled.

'Energy' for want of a better word, I think there there is some thing to that. What I've no idea. It does sound very close though to how I experience it.

Makes more sense than anything else I've heard. Sorry. Not the 'evolutionary advantage' we are told it would give, if there was any truth to it, is it? You Didn't do it. You could not have changed it, with out knowing what 'IT' was. In that context, the feeling you experience isn't some thing you know what to do with. Does it 'feel' like the expression of an energy you can't release? A nervous energy with out any context but the certainty of trauma ? In similar context, thats the best I can describe it. In other contexts, the 'energy' also seems a feature. The negativity of it doesn't always apply in my case, though there is never any sense I have control or choice in its expression.

I would allow it to dry out between watering, not water on very cold days and avoid wetting leaves or moving again until its recovered . Recovery could be slow if days are still cold. If it must be moved, gradual change to conditions it will face will reduce shock.

Has the move out doors been recent? Looks stretched towards light. If the move was sudden and recent, there could be shock and 'sunburn'. Have leaves been watered in full sunlight? Should be a good chance of recovery for either of those. Maybe a fertilizer boost to help. Otherwise,

One of our Orb spiders. We get these making webs every night between the fruit trees. If we walk through the web, they rebuild the next night leaving a space for us pass through with out breaking the web.

Yes. Those you speak for, while un-representative of, are seen as the source of opposition to the legitimacy of individual perspectives. In pursuit of a perfect 'state' of Humanity, Where all peoples are valued equally. You will not accept the value or validity of any who don't recognize the superior position of your own state, until all are subject to the same. That is bigotry and a gross misunderstanding of what diversity is. It is subjective, as are all experience and relationships, to the unique perspectives that have been accorded the individual. About time we re-corrected the language of bigotry as redefined by CRT adherents to better reflect its reality, instead of promoting its bias as a legitimate virtue for the extermination of peoples who are the result of their own subjective realities. Look to the causes of bigotry, not the results for your cure. Change and elimination are not the same. Totally agree we all want to see more acceptance of our Human environment. I figure a good place to start is by putting it out there. You assume relationships where none are a given to define your objective, and show bigotry under every other bed. I agree we all want to see more acceptance of our Human environment. I figure the best place to start is by putting it out there. Subjectively. Not taking it away with misplaced objectives. C.T. catches us up into a double negative.

From a behavioral perspective of nature vs nurture. We learn from patterns and are most receptive to their recognition early in life when they build the foundations to interpret our reality and the responses that will 'favor' our existence within the reality to which we were born. Deviation from the patterns our reality is based on after the more formative years are not as readily received or integrated, unless the psych has also been primed to recognize that patterns vary with environment, and how to navigate and integrate the realities of alternate perspectives. Nurture. If alternative foundational patterns are missing or not sufficiently re-enforced after the more formative period, and I am working with that animal, I can expect limited adaptation or acceptance to a new set of expectations I am trying to put in place. Thats Nature. If I'm trying to alter the responses I'm being given (fear, frustration, anger and resistance, maybe disgust?) opposition is seldom my best option, more often re-enforcing the behavior. I'm validating opposition. I'm far better off and will proceed much faster by observing where the discomfort or opposition begins and what sets it off, then demonstrating an alternative response that by passes the dis-ease. New behavioral patterns are more readily integrated once the benefits or reward is clear, but I have to bring about its demonstration first, before arousal to states of fear, anger etc because those are not receptive states. I won't eliminate those states. They are caused by environment and foundations laid. I can alter perception of the environment, by laying down additional patterns and re-enforcing them, by which to determine its reality against its 'beliefs'. I am disgusted by the thought of eating escargot. For all the biological reasons one experiences disgust. I don't transfer that disgust to people who eat it. Eating it disgusts me. I could likely learn to eat it, or at least moderate my disgust at the thought, but I'm not in a position where there is any clear benefit to try. As long as there is no expectation I enjoy it too, theres nothing to oppose in those who do. Extinguishing my disgust is not so simple as opposing it. There needs to be demonstration of the benefits to doing so, and familiarity with . I am not going to be receptive to those in any state of arousal to unjustified opposition. Opposition seldom results in integration, only reduction. I have researched preparation of Escargot. Familiarity with the subject eases the disgust and and would likely over come it, if I saw the need to re-enforce my familiarity.

The objective, to achieve a state of being that serves Humanity in pursuit of knowledge. Its creation is objective, it has margins or boundaries of what is legitimate or valid to its state. The purpose served is Objective. Property or membership serving that state must adhere to those bonds, for legitimate or valid recognition. Values are/were brought to science subjectively, and influence the directions taken in science. Not the science itself which is an objective state- that should 'Object' to values contrary to its purpose. So yes, I think all value judgements are Subjective- of the states/beings served or suppressed in their application. White supremacy is not the purpose or objective of science. Its supporting membership may subjectively support white supremacy, but the science does not- Not if objective and subjective values are correctly applied. A non white person is Objectively not white. No other objective applies. Only subjective values.

Which can only be done through discrediting science of its base, or supporting environment.

C.T is based on Objective assumptions where subjective realistically applies. Science is the Objective here, or should be. Applying a secondary objective to science, such as white supremacist, blurs the line between the reality of science, and its environment. Definition of its margins by furthering its Objective (elimination white supremacy within) can only reduce its value or property, by excluding environment. Drawing connections where they don't belong. White supremacy and other bigotries are environmental. They exist in the environment science occupies, so will affect its direction to some extent while those environmental problems remain. They should not be confused with the scientific objective itself. The value people people(s) might find in pursuit of science is subjective. So is the experience and opportunity. So yes, there will be evidence of its existence in science, if you assume that connection to be part of its Objective. But these forms of oppression have nothing to do with the Objective of Science and no matter how much you try to reduce their influence, you can only reduce the value recognized to science, if its value is to be judged with that double negative. You introduce a negative bias to the values found within its objective. Not science. Belief.

Yes. The nature of Reality still eludes. We haven't found the language to express it easily, though its in front of us. If poetry makes it easier to bear- i believe I have a workable duality. No reality without subjectivity. Property. The Objective is to state. A single value, subtracted from all relationships beyond its being, as defined. One. Reality. Subject to direction. Of the property that directs its definition in statehood. A single reality of opposing values in balance. All value is Subjective. To relationship. The Objective is beyond relationship. They exist in balance, or in entropy, depending on which application correctly benefits the 'true' objective served. Because incorrect application is belief, or cognitive dissonance. Not sustainable reality. The difference matters, to the reality or Objective you 'Realy' serve. I haven't found anything to discredit this yet. My definitions don't seem to negate or contradict anything already understood as far as I can see. Just expand recognition.

I think there is only Objective, or Subjective. The identified group is the object/reality to which the value accrues, increasing its domain in application of positive response to the relationship recognized/achieved, or tipping the balance towards the negative and entropy when value is applied Objectively.

Apologies. You are right of course. Finding the words I need while applying what I see to separate fields doesn't come easy to me. In this context, I believe its constituent properties would have been more apt. I might find the more inclusive term holds in any context, so thank you.

Good question. Hope my language skills are up to it. It has measurable properties inherent to its definition. Those measurements are subject to the electrons existence. I am assuming those are expressed as an electron due to past actions or value expression attributed subjectively to other phenomena or objective. Yes, very much. I'm just trying to imagine the lack of pattern or continuity and the effects of that on the mind. Incapable of forming a self construct, yes I can easily imagine that. I was thinking with out recognition or familiarity with external conditions to maintain integrity of being, the only constant would be 'self'. Trying to imagine how the subject could possibly respond to that.

No reality with out constituent parts to express the values relative to its being. Subjectivity is imperative to direct any expression of reality To observe some thing 'objectively' is to separate your 'self' from relationship to to the object, not the object from its relationships. It will remain an object while independently defined. The relationships it has or can form, are all subject to its constituents and the values expressed to define its being. A duality. No reality with out subjectivity- An expression of values, in relationship to something. A value must be expressed, subjectively. A rock is an object. It does not form or deteriorate independently, but by the subjective expression of its constituent parts. Its being is dependent on subjective values. Form follows function.

An interesting thought. Or Maybe, the sense of self would be increased with little opportunity to familiarize or recognize place or relationship within their reality or environment. I don't believe that consciousness is required for subjectivity, only for its recognition. ie a computer is an objective reality. Its value is One, reality, subtracted from its realtionships to any other objective reality, Its environment. Any other measurable value, beyond that existence is subjective. Components, ownership, brand, damage are all relative. The computer is still subject to time, weather, damage, components and use etc. whether or not its conscious of those. Its objective identification as a computer is independent of all other values beyond its being One. All beyond self/ identification is relative, external reality. Including the housing. They are conditions of an existence or reality to which the object is subject to. Environment.

The objective is always and only that. One. Reality. Separated out from all relationship beyond its singularity of being. Only the Value is Subjective. In relationship. A measure of value accrued in relation to one object, towards its Objective or purpose.

I'm pretty sure the objective remains just that, and any measurement is always subjective. It appears to me that this supports and is demonstrated by evolutionary biophysics at all levels, and can account for much of human behavior depending on the perspective assumed in reality. The Objectives provides that.

The Subjective/ Direction, always leads the potential of an objective reality for positive growth. A value must be recognized, and expressed, for the existence of a measurable state. Form follows function.

There are no longer clear margins between the objective and the subjective realities. Subjectivity(or direction) is sacrificed indefinitely to 'fix' the state/form into a state of entropy.