gengar

Yes, but simulation theory is probably still true, because the argument is sound; namely that any Universe has the power and intelligence to create a new reality, and therefore, according to Murphy's law, since we have infinite time, intelligence and space, we are always inside an infinite chain of realities, whether simulated, or our universe is inside a black hole of another universe, etc. Those "background realities" don't actually exist, since all that exists is the foreground, however the illusion of the Universe, which is all that the universe is, is just one universe in an infinite Russian doll of background universes. This fact simply follows out of the logic that reality is infinite. if you somehow escape this current universe, you will always reach a new universe. This logic of simulation theory is actually correct; however it doesn't explain reality itself, since all that reality is is of course the absolute. but the illusion of an infinite Russian doll chain of universes has to be there, because there is no reason that it is not. Maybe I'm not saying anything here, but I have a feeling it is, since it follows out of the logic of an infinite illusion. any universe has infinite intelligence > which will create another infinite illusion inside of it, forever repeating this process. Like I said the logic of simulation theory is actually correct, the error is just that it doesn't actually have to do with the nature of reality but only with the nature of the illusion.

Thank you. My question was more an epistemic one on how to know what is verified; how do you, Leo, actually know which online studies are authentic? how do we actually go about verifying sources like this for ourselves? How do we know if the studies are even real? We often overlook this process that seems to be obvious, but just like you asked "How do you know the holocaust happened" in the "How to know what is true" video, the answer is less obvious than it seems. I'm interested in formalizing how epistemic stuff like this works. Often when I'm reading an ancient book for example, let's say by Plato, sometimes I wonder, "How do I actually know a person called Plato actually existed and wrote this very book and it wasn't altered?" It seems that multiple chains of narration/transmission are always necessary for historical stuff like this to be verified. I'm interested in finding out more about the logic/formal process of epistemology and history. If I find some sources I will share them here.

See, that is what makes me even more skeptical, that the remote-viewing is conveniently connected to the UAP phenomena, two things that, by themselves, don't need to be connected with eachother for any reason. Yet their connection is of course that they are both enjoyed speculating and believed in by the new-age crowd. So how convenient that these two things end up being connected and that you can supposedly summon UAP using remote-viewing like you're summoning Epona in Zelda using your flute? It's not that I disbelieve in these things, and in fact, I want them to be true. I want nothing more than these things to be real, that we have some more innate power than our darwinistic, physicalist functions in this life, that are only made for survival in the physical. That we are not alone on this awful world full of egoes, that we are looked over by benevolent aliens with their alien technology. Yet precisely because I want that and am so interested, is why my stance is so skeptical. Otherwise I'll get lost in the current of fantasy which I have so much experience in already, believe me. We should try to falsify all this 100x times and if it turns out to be unfalsifiable, only then should we accept it to be true. Answer me this then: If remote-viewing is real and accessible, why don't companies like Leo's idea of T-rex scavenging already widely exist? If there is anything that incentivizes wide adoption of remote-viewing, it's profit seeking. If it's so easy to remote view, where are all these scavenging companies? Do you really think Leo was the first one with that idea? Where are the companies? It should be all over the news if such companies exists. That is how the flow of knowledge works. Yet it doesn't seem to be the case. Also, have you personally read the studies and the work of Dean Radin that Leo referenced? are they sound? Anyway, good luck with your efforts. Keep us posted with your work.

Thanks for the reference to Dean Radin, but you are making some very incorrect and even arrogant assumptions here - namely that I am not serious, and asking to be spoon fed the studies. Me asking for the studies is not because I want to skip the work because I am not serious, it's because efficient peer-reviewing of studies is necessary for efficient development of the collective consciousness on these issues. no serious scientist gatekeeps studies because other people "haven't put the work in" , which is what you're doing right now. he shares the studies so they can be quickly peer-reviewed so the truth can be found out. Imagine an archeologist demanding everyone to come to their site and do their own research on it because he "doesn't want to spoon feed people". Do you realize how unscientific this is? It should be quite obvious for a person of your stature so I'm again quite amazed at your childish stance on this. This work is not about effectiveness or effort, but about truth and nothing else. I admire you for your anti-pragmatism stance when it comes to truth but right now you are contradicting that. I'm kindly asking you to acknowledge this and take back your statement about me wanting to be spoon fed studies, and that it's unscientific of you to demand these silly gate-keeping ways of knowledge. Scientific knowledge is to be peer-reviewed and done so in the most efficient way possible. How childish of you to assume such things of me! Also, I'm not widely known with the official architecture of academia on the internet, which you clearly are. I could be wasting hours of my time going through unsound or even unauthentic sources. Asking you for some advice on which studies to find is normal - in the case that we are two truth-seekers of equal rank looking for empirical evidence on a matter. Clearly you don't see it this way; You assumed I was asking you as an inferior does to a superior when I was not. In assuming this you thought it'd be a good idea to gatekeep the studies from me and patronize me into doing my own work, like this is some kind of homework assignment. No, I was simply asking a fellow truth-seeker which studies he had studies to come to certain conclusions. How arrogant of you to assume otherwise! Leo, I'd like you to introspect in this and notice that you made many assumptions from my questions, presuming your own epistemic superiority and position as a superior to me. Admit to yourself that when discussing these things with your fellow forum members, your position should be as an equal and that you shouldn't default to a position of being a teacher. We're making a quest for empirical evidence here, you're not above that with your silly games of thinking everybody is lazy and unserious. You have no clue how serious or unserious other people are, especially when it comes to things you're no expert in. You're literally making wild claims to your audience of parapsychology existing, yet you slam me when asking for evidence, saying I should put the work in myself. Like you're not the one making these far-fetched claims to your audience. Your audience is large and I'm in a sense protecting them by pushing back against your wild claims. If they turn out to be true, that's that. But the fact you're slamming me for something as simple as asking for studies shows that you're already pretty far down the deep end. Clearly you've awakened further than most, at least, that is my assumption. But what you're doing right now is really bad, arrogant, childish and against raw truth-seeking. This is not a manner of metaphysics or spirituality, this is simply about studies of content of the universe. And since you're the one claiming, without showing much skepticism, that remote-viewing exists, the burden of extraordinary proof is on your shoulders, not mine. Again, -What mechanism do you postulate by which remote-viewing works in the universe? -It's not merely that new-age channels are also filled with bullshit, and that there is like a soup including elements of truth but also of bullshit, no, these elements are actively intertwined and used to prove eachother. On the Mishlove channel which you claim is great, remote-viewing, which you claim is sound, is actively used to prove Atlantean pseudo-history and the like. How is this not a dealbreaker for you? Yet you share it to your audience as a "great channel"? -What is your stance on the Stargate project being terminated by the CIA as described in this CIA report : https://fas.org/irp/program/collect/air1995.pdf And what does it say that Mishlove and his guests still cite the Stargate project as being proof of remote-viewing being real? Anyway, thanks again for the reference to Dean Radin. I'll do my best to make a research out of it, especially now that you've agitated me by claiming that I'm lazy asking to be spoon-fed (which is a radically childish notion for you to say anyway, but okay). If I make any conclusions I'll share them in this thread, with proper references, like it's supposed to be.

I've listened to multiple videos today from the channel including ones about remote viewing. while most seem interesting, there are also videos of pseudo-historical nature, like a woman "remote-viewing" into ancient "Atlantis" and describing the society she sees. This is radically different than a verifiable cases of remote viewing like successfully hitting a target. Why do these interesting, "boundary-pushing" science channels about things like parapsychology always still tend to go into fields of cookery like channeled accounts of Atlantis and ancient Egypt and the like, and other speculative pseudo-history of the like of Graham Hancock etc? It doesn't really give way to the scientific nature of the channel that it proclaims to have. Wikipedia also reports that the Stargate project (the CIA project that was launched to study remote viewing) was terminated because it didn't wield any tangible results. Wikipedia also reports that remote viewing is generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community. Notice that this is different from academia's mistake of how it views Consciousness, since that is a mistake of thinking and assumption - materialist theory of consciousness doesn't have anything to do with empirical evidence, but with philosophy, philosophy of science, dogma, group-think and a plain lack of consciousness. In contrast, however, are phenomena like remote viewing, which are to be studied and observed in an empirical manner. It's either true or not true based on the empirical evidence, which means we can give a lot more leeway to academia when studying these manners. @Leo Gura What makes you say that the evidence is sound for remote viewing? can you share any studies with me? I'm no scientific expert, so I would appreciate it if you did. This is no light manner. Also, if you claim remote viewing and, potentially other forms of parapsychology, to be real, what is the mechanism by which it manifests in the world? Do you hypothesize actual other dimensions like astral dimensions, which are often postulated in conjunction with these parapsychological phenomena, which often makes skeptical people's eyeballs roll, because of how new-agey that all seems to be?

@Leo Gura Wait, you actually believe in remote viewing? Isn't it clear that all that stuff is as BS as it comes? I thought you were doing elite level epistemology and know you come with this kind of cookery? I thought you cut through all those fantasies, the same way with your magic healing that didn't work out. I went through the same thing, but ended not being able to anything about my perpetual suffering. Isn't it clear that this world is entirely materialistic and naturalistic? I agree that in essence the universe is Consciousness and just a dream, and that no material substance actually exists; however the dream is entirely devoid of physical magic. How are you not humbled by the fact that your healing didn't work out, even though on psychedelics you were so clear that you could do it? Isn't it clear that this world is brutal and physical, and that all our human survival instincts and functions of consciousness are based on this? Just like World of Warcraft being in essence, simply electrical signals in the hardware, that fact has nothing to do with the rules of the virtual world. Just like WoW, our universe pertains to the rules of this world which are the physical laws, and all empirical evidence leads to this fact, right? how else could you return from a total Awakening where you have no body, are completely gone in the void, God, whatever, how many infinite levels of awakening you've shared to have had, yet always return to this body? because the body remains in it's physical state and no matter how hard you trip, you can do nothing about the physical state of the universe. Why else would you have to return? If you reach infinite Awakening, can't you just dream up whatever you want, yet you choose to return to your myopic existence as a human, which you don't have the highest opinion of anyway? (You've shared many times how stupid human existence is, and how better "Alien" levels of being are - clearly you're not above choosing to leave the human existence) What evidence do you have of remote viewing existing? I'm not saying it's impossible, but this requires extraordinary evidence and scientific reasoning that you haven't shared. What is your actual worldview on this?

Well that's exactly what I mean, it would be in an entirely different culture where there is no one investor making the risk of investment like our current stage orange culture. The huge risk investors have to make nowadays is precisely why games are shit and dumbed down, because lowering risk is a must if you're investing 150M. I could make the same argument you made against making the ancient pyramids. Only a madman would invest billions to make the pyramids. which is why they aren't made in our stage orange culture. The pyramids were a collectively funded piece of art, funded by the entire society that wasn't based on profit and investment, but purely for the sake of art and God. That's what I imagine, a culture in the future where beautiful videogames and the like are collectively funded and produced. Which won't happen until we see a cultural revolution.

I feel like you're eluding my point because I didn't mean that I think Omniscience means that you know the dick size of everyone on earth or something. We were talking about Nothingness, which is the Absolute. You claimed that Nothingness is impossible to grasp which surprised me since you claimed to have had omniscience of the Absolute. I always thought that that meant a 100% absolute understanding/grasping of the Absolute. But now you are saying it can't be grasped, which confuses me.

Then why did you claim Omniscience in the past? Omniscience implies that knowing is ultimate. Now are you saying that there are levels deeper than knowing. How is that possible since knowing and being are one and the same? If God is all all-powerful and all-knowing, he should know everything about himself including his origin.

The gameplay is what makes Morrowind so good, that you don't have quest markers and the like Skywind will probably make it so that you can play it that way, I hope they do

I hate Bethesda so much its unreal Imagine a culture where big games are made by non-profit organizations, purely as pieces of art for the people That's the only way such games will ever be made again Won't happen in our lifetime, something for the post-WW3 reconstruction era

The following is a testimony about my personal experience with male resentment, extreme ideologies, bad epistemology, and how the love for Truth can save you from it. It started out as a reply to Leo in another thread about male resentment. I want to add before I begin, if you are 30+, you have no idea how bad the ideological and epistemological nature is of young people. It's breaking down rates you wouldn't believe. People younger than 20 are even worse, I've heard. (im 25) virtually none of them subscribe to the vanilla liberal worldview anymore. You're a loser if you do. all the "cool kids" basically believe in anti-institutional, radical rhetoric, which often has a more far-right flair to it than far-left. All the kids are listening and watching Adin Ross and the like, who are a direct pipeline to Trumpism and other forms of hate. This is all in part thanks to a true failure of the liberal hegemony, with their lies, propaganda, capitalism, zionism and hyper competitive society, without any forms of shared epistemology or spirituality. They as the elites have failed the masses. And the masses, dumb, selfish and rat-like as they are still, do recognize when the elites have failed them, subconsciously. They recognize that the level of bullshit of the liberals has reached a critical point and they're no longer capable or worthy of ruling. And they are correct in that regard; just look at the Democrat party in the US; They're not even fighting Trump, who is literally doing all kinds of fascist things and takeovers as we speak. The liberals are so cucked to capital and their own nepotism, they have ENTIRELY lost the connection to the masses. But of course they are not solely to blame. The rise of radical falsehood, the breaking down of epistemology through the internet and its bad actors. So much of our collective mental structure is being destroyed. Again, if you're above a certain age, you have no idea whats coming. People of my age are already fucked in the head and like I said, the people who are like 10 years younger than me, I.E. generation Alpha, are completely batshit insane. Not all of them of course, but a lot more than you think. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ @Leo Gura said, in response to my question about whether his stance is that women have it easier than men in life: Yeah, I agree, from my experience. I thought your post implicitly agreed with OPs sentiment that men have it harder in absolute terms. Even though I went through a lot of resentment, I realized that sex for women is not their challenge. Their challenge is being more dependent than men are on other people, always being at risk of danger, being more emotionally volatile, and being at risk of the men they are dependant on leaving them. In hindsight I wonder how I could have been so juvenile to think so selfishly. I think it's the sheer cope with the pain of being unloved, and having to accept a lonely and sexless life, that in combination of being confronted with sick and extreme ideologies that are readily found and normalized on the regular internet nowadays, spread by people who want to rile you up and exploit you for fame and cash, can send you spiraling in very dark ways and twist your mind into ways you'd never seen yourself in before. What saved me was in part my curiosity and love for truth. Even though I went far in some rabbitholes like incel, far right, and even jihadi ideologies, I was always still curious about other points of view and other ideologies. I started studying other worldviews like leftism, communism, liberalism, world history, and how all these worldviews collide and/or differ at points. Also, no matter how deep I went in the maelstrom of hate and resentment, the core of my being was yet always aware that what I was doing was not right, and more importantly not true. I always had my deepest intuition telling me that any ideology, any thought system or worldview that was based on bias and emotion is blatantly not true. It may sound juvenile to you, but when you're on the verge of suicide, ridden with resentment and hate for yourself but also the world, it's a lot harder to fight the devil and his ideologies. Sometimes it felt like, "okay, I'm going to kill myself", and I would feel the deepest sense in my bones that I would go to hell afterwards. Especially this thought is what drew me to the jihadi ideology in the latter part of my "dark arc" , since it confirms my intuition that suicide would mean hell, but provides the alternative of fighting for the state and religion, and if you die for it it's a VIP ticket to heaven, with all of the women you'd ever want. Again, I know it sounds juvenile as fuck, but I was actively fighting my suicidal ideation with it. It was demonic ideals vs demonic ideals. Ever since I've accepted and commited to that i'll never again sacrifice truth for anything, even if it means killing myself, I feel like I've been freed from ideology and ideological hate. I still feel the remnants of it, and sometimes I still say vile things online out of impulse, which I am ashamed to say. But knowing I have love for Truth, and refrain from falling into obvious bullshit, I feel a lot better about myself I guess. Even though I'm stlil a completely broken man, even if I die, at least I will die having said, "God is Truth". I remember during my most tumultuous times, not knowing what God is, but knowing that Consciousness is eternal, being so afraid and so fed up, thinking about death, hell and the afterlife, and pain throughout my entire day, almost going insane, I said to myself at a point, "Truth is my God because Truth is God. No matter my fears, Truth is my God and I place all my faith in that, no matter what happens to me or what I will do." Because even when I don't know God, or know the Truth, I know that God is Truth, because that is the only thing it can be. Even if you know nothing, the Truth is there, and falsehood is bound to vanish, and the Truth remains. Ironically, that is a quote from the Quran. It filled me with delight that after all this, Leo started sharing quotes about Truth and the love for Truth, confirming my intuitions. Not that it would have mattered, since I already made my commitment, and realized how deep something like committing to Truth really is. It literally means the death of all your bullshit and ego games if you truly commit to it, and might even mean physical death. But it still was soothing seeing an epic seeker like Leo basically coming to the same conclusions. The last thing that I'd say is that, ironically, my delving into radical ideologies did have a self-redeeming quality to it, because I went so deep into it that I so to say, "came out of the other end". What I mean by that is actually something quite profound. I will elaborate: I was so deep into it that I was basically ready to kill people. If you rile yourself up this bad, you basically come to a point where you either do that stuff, or don't, realize the horrible nature of yourself, let it all go, knowing it's all bullshit and morally abhorrent. Contrast this with what I have seen a friend of me, one of my best friends that I have known since elementary, going through. He is truly stuck in far-right ideology, but not in the furthest ends of the kind. He follows people like Sam Hyde, extremely sneaky figures who sneak in their antisemitism and radical, hateful thought, in a cynical comical fashion. They somehow rationalize their views with being capable with morals, because they don't outright advocate for the holocaust, yet still dogwhistle all the time and basically change your worldview into thinking jews run the world and all that stuff. Candace owens comes to mind, a sneaky rat who isn't a blatant outspoken nazi, but still spouts the same rhetoric. The hate is very much there in those figures, but shrouded under veils of normalcy; fooling the follower into rationalizing the hate, internalizing it, and never coming to the conclusion that you've become a horrible person. Looking at my friend and hearing what he often shares with me and my friends it's obvious he really believes in Jewish world domination and the like. It makes my stomach turn, and makes me ashamed of myself, since I also shared those memes and jokes with him in a time we were both vulnerable. But because I'm just a more extreme person, both in my evilness and goodness, that I came out of the other end, I realized how evil I was and also how Good real truth and real epistemology is. I saw through that I never really believed in all the crap with my real mind, but only because I was in so much turmoil I was basically taken over by the hate and bullshit. It hurts to see my friend, who is very high-iq, being turned in a far-right ideologue, even though we both came from liberal, well off parents, he even more than I. I don't know what kind of trauma he went through to have to latch onto this hate for the West, and to do so not in a far-leftist way but in a far-right way. I used to envy him in elementary school, because he got with the girl that I was in love with but rejected me. I always thought that I was special, that I was rightful to be hateful, more than other people. Now I see my delusion. I don't know what to do honestly. I'm thinking of, for the love of Truth and him, just aggressively try to wake him up by calling out his bullshit, giving evidence why Sam Hyde is a nazi and that it's not just liberal propaganda that he is (he literally believes that, it's honestly baffling how such a high iq person can have such a bad epistemology). Even though it might end our friendship, it's the best thing I can do. TL:DR; Falsehood is everywhere, the ego loves falsehood because of pain and emotions, God is Truth, and the love for Truth should be held onto, no matter what it means for your ego and your life.

This post implies that you agree that women suffer less than men. Is this your stance?

>10.000 years ago, if you were a male, you were hunting all day with your group, you were fit, you were socializing and at night time you had sex with a female. Why are you assuming there weren't low value guys at that time that got nothing? If you look at documentaries following monkey tribes, it's clear there's always been a hierarchy with the men at the bottom getting nothing. >I'm exagerating some things here but bottom line is if you are male nowadays life is not easy for you. The most basic thing such as sex is like you are trying to climb Mountain Everest. Do you think women are also having less sex, but are just better at handling it, or is it just an increase in hypergamy? one of the two has to be true at least, or both at varying degrees, otherwise it's a logical impossibility that men are having less sex but women aren't. I'm interested in your take on it. I used to be filled with raged to my core about it, and sometimes still am, but it's just my ego making postmortem convulsions, having realized it is totally over for me. I do feel a sense of rage still, of it being so hard for men nowadays, and the disgust that women have for average men; all propaganda induced by our hyperconsumerist, hypercompetitive society. The mistake is to think it's all womens fault. It's no ones fault; just the collective ego of society doing its thing. It's no wonder figures like Andrew Tate rise up, simply filling a void of demand for a catalyst that allows a young man to sacrifice truth and morality to be more successful with money and women, if he's not dumb enough to disclose his mentality at least. It's like turning to the dark side of the force. I'm glad I didn't go through with it, although I sometimes fear that if I didn't have my disabilities and crippling anxiety and brain fog, I'd be one of the most horrible men alive, indulging in unethical business, pimping and manipulating women for sex, dominating men, all to feed my ego and distract from my deep-rooted beliefs of being unlovable and unattractive. Hell, maybe I'd even be a rapist. Probably not though, But I've seen dark depths of my soul that genuinely scare me. In that regard I'm glad God smote me with my issues, humbling my ego to degrees I've never known. My success breaking down has allowed me to hold on to my love for Truth. Getting lost in pleasure and success would have certainly driven me off that path. Although I often hear the devils voice telling me to jump off a cliff, that in the next life all will be better and I'll get everything I've ever dreamed of. The suffering and loneliness is becoming unbearable and I feel like I'm slowly but surely going mad. I don't think I'll make it here any longer; I need to get out of the city and to a remote spiritual location, out in beautiful nature; and live the rest of my days as an ascetic, renouncing all wordly pleasure. I think it's the only way to keep the Devil in the hole.

Peak soul Don't believe Morrowind runs on that lil thinkpad though