.ll 72
.fo off
.co on 
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))
 
.ce ADR - 158
.ce
 
.ce Copyright (C) Homer Wilson Smith
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
 
======================================================================== 171
Resent-Date:  Thu, 20 Apr 89 01:26:47 EDT
Resent-From:  "Homer W. Smith" 
Resent-To:    adore-l@ualtavm
Date:         Wed, 08 Mar 89 01:27:25 EST
From:         "Homer W. Smith" 
Subject:      obe
To:           skeptic@yorkvm1

Old SKEPTICS-L.   Those who have already read this, trash it.


----------------------------Original message----------------------------


     The following posting is insulting and unworthy of comment,
but for those of you who are true skeptics I will do so anyway.

>
>And, by the way, I have seen plenty of books that claimed to teach people how t
>experience out-of-body travels and people who have claimed to have them.  There
>_have_ been studies which have set up problems like reading a piece of paper on
> a
>high shelf or inside a closed box.  They have come up with nada.

     They have come up with nada, because the person was not able
to do it.

And it isn't
>because "nobody who could really get out of their body would ever let you know
>it".  I'm sure if your dubious assumptions were true, there would be plenty of
>people who would be willing to use the ability for personal gain.

     Yes and there will be.  But it has not cought on yet.  In the
first place, mankind is miles below being able to get out in a
fully self determined exteriorization.  Years of regimentation, and
threats against his body have convinced him he is a body to the point
that exteriorization seems like a fairy tale.

     Further, greed and avarice born of fear for the body and its
well being act like glue to a being keeping him well within his head
lest something happen to the body.  It is the desparate effort to
survive at all costs AS A BODY that keeps the being glued to his head.
At least that item would have to be handled before further progress
would be made.

     You see if you want to get out because you want be done with
bodies, you are much more likely to succeed than if you want to
get out so that you can better be in.

Your scenari
>just allows a convenient way to keep believing in these unproven superstitions.

     An unproven superstition is an oxymoron of sorts.  You have not
proven the absence of Immortality and exteriorization, and I have not
proven the presence of it.  That leaves us both open to further
investigation.

>Are you so frightened by reality that you need to invent an entirely alternate
>one?
>
     This is insulting.  If I have invented my memory of the past
3 trillion years, fine.  I may have also invented my memory of
this posting.

     From the tone of your posting it seems to me that it is you
who are terrified of your possible Immortality and freedom.

     We are all afraid of death, except for liars or course,
but only some of us are afraid of Immoratlity and freedom from the need
to have a body.


     The following posting is a very reasoned posting and I am honored
to comment on it.


>Such experiments would not distinguish out-of-body travel from other
>hypotheses such as remote viewing (clairvoyance) or telepathy.

     The assumption  here is that remote viewing is easily
explainable by electromagnetic relay between bodies at
different places.  Or am I mistaken.

     I agree though that being out of a body, and merely looking
at a distant spot with remote viewing would be indistinguishable,
and maybe they are not different.  But this is not to say that
we really are in a body.  The viewpoint from within a body would
be just another form of remote viewing from where ever the spirit
really is in space/time/eternity.

>   Can anyone think of ways to empirically distinguish out-of-body
>travel from clairvoyance/telepathy?  A first thought might be for a
>traveling "spirit" to causally interact with the physical environment
>distant from the body, but that result could be achieved by psychokinesis.
>Another idea would be to somehow observe something leaving the body.

     Your own statements lead to the conclusion that maybe the
spririt is not IN the body and so would not be perceived as leaving it.
Maybe the viewpoint from within the body and the feeling of control
we have over it is just remote viewing and telekenesis exercised
from where ever the spirit really is in space/time/eternity.

     The point is, we believe we are IN a body because it LOOKS
to us like we are IN a body.  If we get out of our body and
travel to Moscow and it LOOKS like we are in Red Square, who is
to say this is just remote viewing?  In both cases we look like
we are somewehre.  Why say one is right and the other is remote
viewing?  Eternity knows no spatial positioning.  A spirit
can see from anywhere to anywhere.  He is neither in nor out of
a body, but choosing to view as if from a body or from Moscow.
It is a simpler theory.

     Of course how he would do all this viewing without
the physical universe mechanism like eyes there to explain it will
drive some people up a tree, but that is where they belong anyhow,
so we needn't worry about it.  We can view them from a chipmunk.

>
>The assumption that memory is not stored in the brain presents a great
>deal of trouble in explaining the results of a very large body of
>experimental evidence (e.g., memory impairment from neural damage,
>memory inducement from neural stimulation).

    It is true that if a spirit plays the game of being one of
the figures in the arcade game, then if that figure gets crushed
and is no longer able to function, the abilities that the
spirit assigned to those functions will also cease to work.

     Thus exterioization involves more than just getting out of
a body, but also disentangling ones ABILITIES from the abilities
that a body has.   Bodies do not have that many abilities,
so people find full exteriorization rather exhilarating as they
expand out to their natural 195 mile wide size and start spreading
their wings again.

>   This is just one piece of evidence against "past lives."

>A more complete case can be found in Paul Edwards' four-part
>"The Case Against Reincarnation" which appeared in Free Inquiry
>magazine (Fall 1986, Winter 1986/87, Spring 1987, and Summer 1987
>issues, i.e., vol. 6 no. 4 and vol. 7 nos. 1-3).

     References will not save you from my direct experiences.

     All the books in the world that claim I do not exist will not
change my mind that in fact I do exist.  Just so with exteriorization.
If you have been out, you know it.  You remember WHY you forgot and
why all the rest of the world is still asleep.

     I once had a friend who said, if someone had the power to
walk down the street and make all the garbage disappear every day,
people would love him.  In fact people would crucify him.

     Actually if he could make garbage disappear, he could probably
make people hearts disappear too, so he would be rather safe.
But he would have to take on the whole world, and those that liked
him would look to him for all the answers to all the problems.

     Being a superman is not fun in the midst of a whole world
of sleeping supermen.

     You would LIKE to be able to get out of your body, no?

     Continue to study it, but don't get too snotty about how
you know it all, because it is your own hope you are stomping on.

     It is very much a spiritual matter.  Getting out of ones
body leads to awareness of Immortality and Divinity.  Most are
not ready for this.  Thus being in a body and believing the
Dust in the Winders is a safe solution.
 Homer W. Smith      adore-l@ualtavm      4/20/89 obe