Project Confirmation Bias

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

I never watched these guys when they had a show, but I gave their YouTube channel a shot. 

The first video I watched irked me because they immediately did the fucking flashlight (torch) trick.

* Which is unscrewing the flashlight enough to no longer fully connect and then set it down. Inevitably it randomly makes contact due to vibrations or expansion/contraction. 

And while they claim it is the timing is all that matters it still seems slight of hand to not disclose you unscrewed the flashlight while left on..

But then his sink turned on while sleeping, which ALSO has a scientific explanation, but could also not... right?

That it picks while they are there to happen is the thing that gets me. 

But on the video used, The Satanic Portal Kansas House.

By the end of their experience with their devices they became convinced they were talking to a demon pretending to be a little girl.

And while the proof they provided like; electromagnetic disruptions, randomly chosen words, and radio signals were compelling, it's not rigorously tested. 

If you pay attention to the selection, timing, and interpret what the distorted voices say you see whatever narrative you are expecting.

******************************

And I think you can test it. Prove or disprove. 

Could you go to a day care with colorful animal painted walls built in the last 10 years at night and declare it haunted by spirits?

Is there a component where belief changes the outcome of the word selection and experience?

The Experiment:

Divide the ghost hunters into 2 groups to test the same mundane location, such as suggested above.

Group one:

Tell them, "The place you're going to although new, carries a dark history."

Then make up something about a girl that went missing, was later found deceased, and that her spirit is said to still be there. 

Group Two:

Tell them, "We Are trying to test if a non haunted location can be determined haunted using ghost hunting tools."

Hypothesis: 

Both groups will experience "activity," but the one with a specific belief about the place will have a more specific and real feeling encounter. Where as the test Group of debunker's experience will be more random, while still doing the same things.

The theory being the seemingly precise answers (if beyond confirmation bias or editing) are more a product of the HUMAN MIND influencing what the random devices generate then it is otherworldly, and it can happen anywhere you want it to with belief. The more sincere the belief, the more compelling the results.

[Sirius]

Suppose someone proposed to get to know you. What if that person said to you “The best way of getting to know you is for me to remain aloof from you. I will break you up into pieces and analyze your parts. I want to examine all the little facts of your life with a computer. I am going to learn how to predict your every move. Furthermore, to prove that I have obtained this real power of knowledge of you, I will gain total control over you, and make you behave as I choose.” Would you rush to reveal yourself to a person making such a proposal? You’d probably be amused or horrified.

Yet that is exactly the stance that science takes towards nature. It calls it “objective “ and values detachment over intimacy, analysis over experience, prediction over involvement, and control over dialogue. Women have sometimes recognized this set of values in their male friends. In fact, some modern philosophers have proposed that the supposed objectivity of science is no more than a rationalization of masculine values.

Secrets Revealed: The Mind and its Mysteries as Viewed by Edgar Cayce
Henry Reed

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

You underlined it, so it MUST BE as important as a Devil's Tower made of potatoes. 
 

In fact, some modern philosophers have proposed that the supposed objectivity of science is no more than a rationalization of masculine values.

Lol. Well, if some guy said Edgar Cayce said it!!!

He's gonna reborn in Nebraska in 2158, you know!

Intuition is DEFINITELY more female, especially the impending doom warnings in advance, or picking out subtext and subtly mocking it in passing, and any other dated and emotionally sexist thought roles it wishes to impose on a skeptic approach towards the supernatural.

Here's something though.

Try being an "intuitive materialist."

Right now im testing our connection to a hypothetical self-created collective unconscious web, its more agnostic than youd think. Very Jungian actually.

But I am sick of these things being tested by a confirmation bias and the proof being like Pareidolia. I want it tested to rule out the human componant.

And I really do wonder how much of that interprets or even influences the results. It kinda reverses what people generally think does it, but its open to our own divine abilities.  

So instead of recoiling at materialism, answer if you think it is possible TO MAKE UP a ghost story or haunting, and get the same thing to happen so long as they truly believe it?

And couldn't that completely undermine the narrative of the supernatural?  Reverse the premise to people being the poltergeist catalysts. 

I tested a "ghost hunter app" and asked whatever "digi-spirit" available to give me answers to what Sirius is seriously on about.

The results were: 



I really dont know what that means, unless those words mean anything significant? 

Guess I'll need "intuition," confirmation bias, or schizoaffective disorder to put it together... :)

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

But if you want a REAL occult conversation with no Edgar "Charlatan" Cayce noob stuff dumbing it down, here you go...

I seek to test this quote where our supernatural or "numinous" experience and abilities are concerned:



And see if there is something else beyond confirmation bias and pareidolia.  Do we influence the EVPs, PS Box, or electromagnetic disturbances read by these devices?

FYI, i think that needs a channel to happen. It needs something conductive to direct causal outcomes.  It doesn't really need to be anything but a passive channel to work. But a priori part of existence and/or template to exploit nonetheless. Even if that is an entanglement like ability, the priori allows for the spooky action.

It works like the sphere in Sphere. It"s the channel to conjure paradise or killer jellyfish. 

Beyond that, I also want to test if things like poltergeists are thought into existence through belief alone, and what is the "cause" it manifests. What really creates the shit flying off the shelf? 

I've seen it, but dont like "ghosts" as an answer anymore than "undiscovered ability for telekinesis." 

Is it from the mystical unseen universe? 
or is it just humans doing something we haven't realized the universe allows us to do yet? 

Something like Peter J. Carroll and Norman Vincent Peele trying to control a number generator programmed to be random.

[Sirius]

One phenomena doesn't invalidate the other, you create the dualities. It's your bias.

The answer is always it depends and I know that may suck, it depends on the time the place the people etc etc, anything else is reduction. It's going to be a circular argument.

There was a dice in the chat, old chat, I rolled threes for a week straight trying to get sixes..ask tsk, maybe he remembers. it was easter last year. he probably has logs somehwere.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

I guess its a matter of faith.

I watched the ghost shows.
Then read the real stories.

Like their story about Sarah Winchester and who she actually was are night and day apart.

What her mystery house actually was, and the lore associated with it, are night and day apart. 

All a creation of turning her weird house built for her arthritis in mind into an attraction and adding funhouse or symbolic elements after she died. A carnival creation catering to tourists. 

in realty. 

No ghosts.
No psychic.
No curse. 
No seances.
She wasn't even superstitious.

Just an heiress with enough money to blow on a ridiculous house, or impulsively blow on several properties. Opened it to family a lot. 

Oddities are either added later, or a result of earthquake damage in 1906. Like some doors to nowhere, when large sections collapsed. 

Yet all ghost hunters go in with the bullshit narrative and experienced the bullshit narrative. And every door closing or precise word to the story confirmed its truth to them.

Sometimes It's even enough to be beyond reasonable doubt or like a horoscope. If not deceptive editing, it is way too coincidental. Too direct and immediate. Almost lke they must influence the parlor trick with the false narrative being believed.  Induced the vocabulary.

So I want to know, if it is something, how do we know our faith in the supernatural isn't really what closes the door or spits out correct names? 

Could the lore itself linger at the location and even "make it shine" like The Overlook Hotel.

While someones faith forever can hold both true, that they get a false narrative to consistently say what they expect says more than a supernatural occurance happening.

[Sirius]

Yes no? We have to look at specific cases and beyond pop culture and TV, anything that comes from the broadcast era is highly suspect and after that allot of noise and the people are doing it for profit. Books are a good resource because they often contain multiple cases, not just whatever fits into a set time frame and looks appealing on a screen. Best resource is lived experience.

When it comes to lived experience as far as 'seeing' entities the best explanation I have come up with is that the mind fills in the blanks from what we sense by whatever mechanism it is sensed with. Who knows maybe it's even accurate. Often the descriptions are universal across cultures and that has to make you go hmmm. It depends on what is happening though, all this is hard generalizing.

I have seen some entities coming down the stairs that always follow the same path towards me and they look the same every time, those I think are some kind of tulpa and not actual entities and they don't bother the animals either. They also only appear when follow certain practices.

Other apparitions upsets anyone and everything around, but mostly it's not scary, there is not always a sense of danger. I have seen the cats be curious.

Like with this thing, one of the cats instantly ran towards it. It was spinning around constantly and flying about the kitchen and then flew up above the counter and up into the cupboards. The cat kept mowing and looking for it where it saw it last until I picked it up and showed it was gone.



Other times I have seen them frightened and instantly running away.

edit: forgot, no on faith, faith is only relevant on interpretation, unless you never had any kind of experience in which case I guess you could fall into the "i want to believe" crowd

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Now that you bring up apparitions, im going to add something else that agrees with you its both.  And the previous covers only part of a greater phenomenon..

Apparitions that are beyond "in your head" may not be so supernatural or beyond scientific explanation. 

<<< Insert Pseudoscience >>>

For apparitions I lean towards "defect of the temporal fabric." Time is experienced by our computational program linearly, but time doesnt flow, lt exists in all frames simultaneously. 

And the 4D block framework just says they exist simultaneously, it does not imply the future or past has already happened in any one way. 

This ties with my (in)determinism matrix world view in the question thread.

In my chaos driven 4D block universe, free will still is an illusion, but it doesnt mean the illusion is necessarily predetermined for you. If you get that. 

This doesnt really take the surprise away and allows for a free illusion, but could also allow for temporal glitches (like apparitions always doing the same thing - as if they're stuck in that past) or possible futures to bleed through - without necessarily violating physical law.   

In metaphysical terms the "shine" of the place, or even belief is all part the "local subsystem entropy level."  And influences how distorted it is.. including glitches of space/time itself. 

1. The universe is a divine program of a priori parameters
2. Our phenomenal version of the program exists in a 4D Block universe of past, present, and future at once. 
3. We are native to a linear real time computational observer frame of this universe.
4a. All possibillities for our block universe to take exist as a selcted vibrational mode of a higher dimensional manifold (the form of the architect, creator, master, and programmer) 
4b. Entropy is a malleable 4D manifestation of its existence. 
5a. Intention (and true faith in perturbing a system) is the way we influence the ordering of chaos.
5b. This can happen intentionally or unintentionally.
5c. This ability does not suggest we are removed from our native real time observer role or that we create the entropic system. Merely influence upon its potential collapse. 
  
And doing it all like organic computers running in a divine program of set parameters that are not based on our real time apprehension of the universe we experience. 

Because entropy is "a priori" (encoding from before the universe) its the thing that also moves us around it or interferes with its obversational frame. 

 If that makes any sense to anyone.

The Hard part was merging "indeterminism," "divine matrices," "no free will," "no true self," and "explaining the supernatural" in one theory. 

* This took hours of editing for no one to really care.

[Sirius]

'free illusion' that is hilarious, I like. Sounds like standard new age stuff, there is no issue.. Science is stuck, we need new philosophies or theories whatever. It's all good.

I don't agree with 3 "We are limited to a linear computational observation of this universe." that's just what you are used to. 'you' not implying you personally, I can't be part of that we. It's curious you still hold that belief considering your other knowledge. I can be very presumptuous  here, but that would make your 'digi-spirits" message reality.

My dysgraphia is acting up so probably not gonna respond again right now. Doing allot of edits here.

good talk, you get a flower

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Oh, I'm not done editing mine yet. But thanks! 

I had fun with baseless pseudoscience and mashing crap together in this attempted theory for a running interactive (matrix-like) divine program.