Shorerider said:
Let's hope they stay in your mind. Can't wait for the day I have contact with a Leprechaun, Mermaid, Sasquatch, Loch Ness monster or Unicorn.
Are you serious! Taking "Ayahuasca" will lead you to see all sorts of things because it is hallucinogenic. Once you're done puking your guts and uncontrollably colon squirting, you're likely to see a spirit or two. But this is a "mind altering" concoction. I've never taken drugs, but I'm sure many on here will be willing to share what they've seen on a high. If you see something on a trip does that mean it exists?
There is more to life than any of us will ever understand, and I'm a spiritual person. BUT when you come on here saying that you have evidence (EVIDENCE IS PROOF) of a F'n Demon and beat around the bush about posting it, well that's just BS.
I'm done here, what a waste of my time.
SR.
Ahh. I see where you're coming from. Remember when I posted that defending the economic/political/social/cultural foundation of your society and mind is not the same thing as seeing objective truth? You're a positivist materialist.
Hallucinogenic is a term made up by materialists to discount the effects of substances (many natural and made by plants) that shift the mode of the mind so that it becomes capable of seeing what it can't otherwise see under normal conditions. There is nothing about many entheogens (mind-expanding) substances that produces 'hallucinations'. Hallucinations are manifestations of non-material (or partly non-material) reality - but the posivist regime in control of the West labels these experiences in such a way as to convince people that they are not real. This is one of the primary ways that the West manages to stay focused on science, technology, computer tech, etc. Materialist ideals have their power and reality (computers are cool), but this does not mean that the non-materialist beliefs of the past (and present) are not valid. They are just pushed aside in the name of the Western scientific agenda. And I'm not just saying this - I have a very strong belief that I understand what I am talking about in this paragraph.
If you really look into it, you will learn that terms like leprechaun, elf, etc. were created in the distant past to refer to things which were very real to the people creating the terms. We mock these kinds of terms now, but many people don't understand that the terms were very real in their time, and they refer to something which exists which is much different from modern day conceptions of the terms.
In 700-1000 years, the term "C++" might be thought of as a superstition/myth with no objective reality - a mythical language controlling artificial interconnected machines around the world. It's kind of the same way with leprechaun or fairy. 1,000 years ago people could see fairys more often because they weren't trained by society not to see them. But what they saw was very different from what most modern people think they saw.
As for no photos, I'm been trying to post them for the past 2 hours, but until someone tells me the limitations or rules for posting photos, I can't get past the 'this format is not accepted warning". Why the hang-up on "evidence" and "proof", anyway? Who cares if I am using the mainstream definitions of the terms, even if you are right, which I am not convinced that you are. If can't use the word "evidence" as a lesser form of proof that needs to be added to to create "proof", what term can I use?
And I actually have much stronger evidence for the existence of daemons than the photos, but I don't share that with people like materialists because they will attack me socially, economically, culturally, etc - all in the name of promoting the advancement of the West in the direction of technology and science. If you don't think this is a valid truth, then what exactly are you doing right now to me?
I call a demon a daemon for a very particular reason - to distance a daemon from the modern Western understanding of a demon.
There is, as you claim, much more to life and existence that is amazing and wonderous (if dangerous). I was just attempting to show people a small piece of that.