In Dennis L Erlich  wrote:
> There is quantifiable evidence the physical world exists.  There is no
> quantifiable evidence that your dream exists anywhere but in your
> mind.

      Sorry Dennis, there is evidence of all kinds that we collect from
our conscious experience of ourselves and the world and our experiments.
An actual physical universe out there is only one way of explaining it.

      The dreamball theory explains it just as well.

      And explains paranormal phenomenon as well.

      What I am saying is that the meatball theory is not a forgone
conclusion, it is one model for things that people have observed in
their consciousness.

      There is another theory, the dreamball theory, that suggests
experimentation to present evidence of its predictions, which the
meatball theory could not touch.

      Thus those that are interested or suspect that the paranormal stuff
exists, now have a theory to work with that offers experiments that
promise results, and if they do the experiments and they get the
results, then that is more evidence that the meatball theory is passe.

      If they do the experiments and do not get the results, then back to
the old drawing board.

>>>>     You have evidence you are not dreaming the physical universe?
> Evidence to prove a negative?  I'm afraid you lost me.

      Sorry it was a confusing double negative.

      You are quite correct, and that's the point, YOU are asking me to
provide evidence the physical universe does not exist.

      I am asking you to provide evidence it does.

      We both agree that SOMETHING exists for sure, namely ourselves and
our conscious experiences.

      I just want some evidence that what I see in my consciousness
actually exists out there, rather than does not exist, as we both agree
it doesn't in a dream, Right?

      Is that clear and scientifically fair?

      We both see something, you say what we see represents something
actually out there, and I say please show me any evidence at all for the
something actually out there.

> If y'all can say there is no evidence the physical universe exists,
> and that you have some kind of evidence that everything is a dream, I
> think I'll pass on reading act.

      Ok, Dennis start writing up the evidence that you know about that
suggests that the phyiscal universe is not just a co hallucination
amongst many dreamers.

      I am asking you to show evidence for a positive.

> Homer, that is a very good metaphor guess.  But calling it reality is
> not something I can accept.  If it's not quantifiable, it's just a
> guess.

      IT IS A THEORY, as is the meatball THEORY.

      But each theory leads to experiments that can be done that suggest

      The dreamball theory can be tested, the physical theory can not.

      For example the dreamball theory says you can exteriorize, and here
is one way to do it .......

      If it works, then you have evidence for the dreamball theory.  and
AGAINST the meatball theory, because the meatball theory doesn't allow
for exteriorization.

      What experiment can the physical theory suggest that can be tested
to see if results come about that the dreamball theory could not support
or would predict otherwise?

> I guessing that in your view any quantifiable evidence that the
> physical universe exists would be part of your dream.  So trying to
> talk about evidence with you is a wasted activity.

      Yes, it would be virtual reality showing itself to be consistent.

      So here is the deep philosophical question, you are good at these,
so let's see if you can give me a God's honest answer to them.

      *IF* the physical universe is actual and not virtual, could there
be any evidence to support that?

      *IF* the phyiscal universe is virtual and not actual, could there
be any evidence to support that?

> Please don't use the word "science" in connection with your guesses
> about the nature of existence.  It don't fit.

      Sorry, you are wrong, science is observation, theory, prediction,
experiment and results.

      I see my consciousness, it shows me a landscape.

      That's the start of science.

      The waking landscape purports to be actual rather than virtual
but so do dream landscapes.

      I have learned that dream landscapes are not actual but only

      So why on Earth would I forgonely conclude that waking landscapes
are actual but not virtual too?

      So we got two theories, actual or vitual.

      Science now leads us to invent experiments that would indicate one
or the other.

      This is pure science at its best.

> If I ever see anyone with powerz like you say, I may change my
> opinion.  Til then I'll stick with the measurable.

      If the physical universe is virtual, you can measure
it with virtual instruments all day long and get good workable

      They are still virtual.

      But what measurement are you going to do that will determine
if virtual or actual?

      Do you believe in actual just because you want to?

      If so, even you will admit that is not good science.

      So why exactly do you believe the PU is actual not a dream?

> What is this "real thing" of which you speak?  You say above that the
> real thing doesn't really exist.

      Yes we need to clear up reality and actuality.

      I will try to do better with my choice of words.

      Reality is what we think is true.  Actuality is what is true.

      It's the difference between a dream and the waking state.

      In a dream, the dream is real to me, but nothing actual
is going on but my dream.  Once I become lucid in the dream
and know I am dreaming, then the dream may still be very real
to me, but I know it isn't actual.

      In the waking state, the dream is also real to me, but we have been
taught that something actual is also going on.  The physical apple on
the table exists even if no one is around to dream it.

      Last night I was feeling up a gorgeous chick in a dream, but was
there an actual live feeling physical chick there?


      Dreams are a kind of hallucination, where we experience something
as real in our consciousness, which in fact is not actually out there.

      You claim the waking state is not a dream, that the PU is actually
out there.

      I say you have no absolute evidence for this.

      I say for all the evidence you have of anything at all, it is still
possible that the PU is a dream and doesn't actually exist.

      Do you not understand the problem before us?

> And the human mind is capable of infinite self-delusion.

      Yes, and I am one step back from that delusion.

      I don't BELIEVE the PU is virtual, he way you DO BELIEVE the PU is
actual.  It is you my friend who are in danger of delusion about

      I am merely asking for your evidence that just because you see
something in your consciousness, that it is actually there.

      We are both looking at a TV set, you think its a real time picture
of the PU, I think its a video play back created by God.

> But it's just a beautiful metaphor.  Because I can measure and
> quantify water.
> Not so with God or your dreamy worldview.

      False, you can measure a full exteriorization, but only your own.

      It would seem you might be refusing to consider the possibilities,
and do the experiments necessary to provide the evidence of the
dreamball theory.  You are sitting back and telling me to provide it for

      You may think it so unlikely as to not be worth your while to try
the experiments to see if there is any outcome of interest, but that is
not good science.

      Lots of people have reported being exterior.  It is easy to claim
they are all deluded because none of them ever provided YOU with
evidence they were actually out and could see around them.

      But that certainly is not good science.

      Others have had enough apparently paranormal shit happen that they
are very interested in the matter, in getting the evidence we all
require to believe something.

      But if they are stuck in the meatball theory, they do not have a
workable context in which to understand those powers, as the meatball
theory says they are impossible.

      On the other hand, if they know and understand the dreamball theory
in detail, they have a context that not only accounts for everything in
the meatball theory, but also accounts for a lot more.

      The meatball theory is a subset of the dreamball theory, just as
Einsteinian relativity is a subset of Newtonian relativity.

      The honest researcher will not believe either theory, but
test both to his satisfaction.

      The dreamball theory has not been honestly tested
by the meatballs, they expect everyone else to do the
work and then prove it to them.

      Sorry good scientists do their own work, its called peer

      Even a full exteriorization with perception doesn't absolutely
disqualify the meatball theory, but once one starts to exteriorize out
of space and time into eternity, then the meatball theory has a hard
time standing up to what can be directly observed as to the genesis of
space and time.


> D

Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY    In the Line of Duty
Thu Jan 28 18:53:33 EST 2010