Marisa Ryan, Certified Psychic Medium Tackles Big Picture Questions |398|

nice. I'm starting to believe that materialistic science and what you're calling social skepticism can really only be understood as a social engineering project. I don't think this takes anything away from what you're saying regarding dogmatism and willful ignorance, but I just don't think that totally explains what's really going on especially when we look at all the Shadow government projects that presupposed the existence of an extended consciousness.

No no Alex, it does not take anything away from what I am saying, based upon what you suggest. In fact - what you express there is at the core of the article (the lede is indeed buried, LOL!). As a former Intelligence officer and one trained in counter-intelligence, I often spot the craft woven into the fabric of this social engineering project. You put it correctly. From the article:

The social skeptic is a catalyseur, a third party exploitation specialist fomenting conflict between the public and science.
...bearing an agenda which employs Bernaysian Engineering of Beliefs; leveraging fake a priori deduction methods combined with biased and risk-bearing stacked provisional abductive reasoning, both employed as a masquerade of science method in order to enforce on the general public, a belief set as being scientific, when it is not.
Social Skepticism derives its name from the similar set of practices employed by the political-counter-intelligence socialist control agencies of Eastern Europe (KI, Okhrana, AVH or East German Stasi), during the 1953 – 1983 era of the Cold War. They combine these social control methodologies with effective tactics of oppressive Abrahamism which they observe as their precedent. It is an organized method of Social Engineering Tradecraft characterized by specific and consistent actions, proven effective in Cold War era or socialist societies, which now resides at the core of Modern American Social Skepticism.

But - I do not think that these engineers reside in the government. They love smart-but-dumb players. People smart enough to do the work, but not smart enough to spot what is going on or raise ethical questions. They place those players into the government roles.
 
Superpsi solves the mediumship communication/reincarnation paradox.
No it does not. Not only does it fail to explain those matters, it also introduces bigger issues - such as the complete lack of evidence for superpsi, it doesn't exist as a phenomenon in its own right. It only exists as a magical incantation, a linguistic recitation.
 
Have you checked out Dewey B. Larson's stuff here? Plenty on the site including whole books.
Is this something you have explored? It takes so much effort to get into anything like this, and there is undoubtedly a lot of quack physics out there - whether this is an example or not!
One of his books doesn't start very promisingly:
The consequences of the reversal of direction (in the context of a fixed reference system) that takes place at unit distance were explained in a general way in Chapter 8 of Volume I. As brought out there, the most significant of these consequences is that establishment of an equilibrium between gravitation and the progression of the natural reference system becomes possible.
What the hell does that mean? The link to Volume 1 doesn't work.

Like most people, I can soon get overwhelmed by equations, but it would be good to see some equations in a book that purports to superscede physics. Tell me a bit about what you got out of reading his stuff?

David
 
Last edited:
No it does not. Not only does it fail to explain those matters, it also introduces bigger issues - such as the complete lack of evidence for superpsi, it doesn't exist as a phenomenon in its own right. It only exists as a magical incantation, a linguistic recitation.
I guess the real point is that when you discover a new area of science - such as , or such as electromagnetism was in its earliest days, there are a variety of ways in which it can be understood, and it is usually best to use Occam's Razor. I mean the survival of consciousness after death used to be taken for granted, but that changed when science gradually supplied evidence that each mind is sealed off inside the brain. Really, once you introduce the concept of ψ or even super-ψ that whole web of inference should be dismantled. This brings me on to The Ethical Skeptic:
...bearing an agenda which employs Bernaysian Engineering of Beliefs; leveraging fake a priori deduction methods combined with biased and risk-bearing stacked provisional abductive reasoning, both employed as a masquerade of science method in order to enforce on the general public, a belief set as being scientific, when it is not.

That rang a bell with me, because it sounds remarkably similar to tome of the things that I read about in connection with medical science - manipulation done mainly by Big Pharma.... and so called Climate Change.

TES - I'd really like you to start a new thread in "Consciousness and Science" or "Extended Consciousness" devoted to the idea of Social Skepticism. Does it extend, for example, to my realisation that The Intelligent Design crowd have a very strong scientific case, which is squashed?

I do hope, though, that you are not a fundamental Christian at heart - I mean I just feel that the real truths are bigger than any religion.

David
 
Last edited:
Is this something you have explored? It takes so much effort to get into anything like this, and there is undoubtedly a lot of quack physics out there - whether this is an example or not!
One of his books doesn't start very promisingly:

What the hell does that mean? The link to Volume 1 doesn't work.

Like most people, I can soon get overwhelmed by equations, but it would be good to see some equations in a book that purports to superscede physics. Tell me a bit about what you got out of reading his stuff?

David

David, I should perhaps have mentioned that the best place to start is possibly Larson's Beyond Newton: An Explanation of Gravitation. This link will take you to the frontispiece and you can navigate to the sections of that volume from the links at the bottom; thereafter, I find it best to navigate from the links at the top left of the sections (at least one of the links at the bottom doesn't seem to work).

I didn't say that I thought his theory to be true: only asked if you'd ever checked out the site on The Reciprocal System of Theory. In later books, he tends to assume that the reader has been through his prior ones, and maybe that's the reason you seem mystified by what he said. Not that I'm claiming to have understood all his materials, mind you. But I am intrigued and am slowly ploughing through the materials.

The interesting thing is that the Reciprocal System (RS, later updated to RS2 by others) purports to provide an explanation for everything, and that includes things like psi phenomena. I'd recommend reading Beyond Newton before you jump to the conclusion that Larson was a nutcase. Maybe he was, but as I said, I'm finding his ideas intriguing and for me the jury's still out.
 
No no Alex, it does not take anything away from what I am saying, based upon what you suggest. In fact - what you express there is at the core of the article (the lede is indeed buried, LOL!). As a former Intelligence officer and one trained in counter-intelligence, I often spot the craft woven into the fabric of this social engineering project. You put it correctly. From the article:

The social skeptic is a catalyseur, a third party exploitation specialist fomenting conflict between the public and science.
...bearing an agenda which employs Bernaysian Engineering of Beliefs; leveraging fake a priori deduction methods combined with biased and risk-bearing stacked provisional abductive reasoning, both employed as a masquerade of science method in order to enforce on the general public, a belief set as being scientific, when it is not.
Social Skepticism derives its name from the similar set of practices employed by the political-counter-intelligence socialist control agencies of Eastern Europe (KI, Okhrana, AVH or East German Stasi), during the 1953 – 1983 era of the Cold War. They combine these social control methodologies with effective tactics of oppressive Abrahamism which they observe as their precedent. It is an organized method of Social Engineering Tradecraft characterized by specific and consistent actions, proven effective in Cold War era or socialist societies, which now resides at the core of Modern American Social Skepticism.

But - I do not think that these engineers reside in the government. They love smart-but-dumb players. People smart enough to do the work, but not smart enough to spot what is going on or raise ethical questions. They place those players into the government roles.
awesome. thx for persisting with this as it has drawn me further into yr excellent blog:

The Ethical Skeptic is written so as to filter out the average Reditt waif or subscriber to Skeptical Inquirer; those who fell prey to their doctrines, precisely because they could not fathom philosophical rigor in the first place. This material, while not purposefully abstruse, is also not going to be simply (read that as ‘equivocally’) worded, nor compromised in such a way as to pretense talking down to another level. If you cannot comprehend this material, then neither are you developmentally ready to receive its tenets.
 
No no Alex, it does not take anything away from what I am saying, based upon what you suggest. In fact - what you express there is at the core of the article (the lede is indeed buried, LOL!). As a former Intelligence officer and one trained in counter-intelligence, I often spot the craft woven into the fabric of this social engineering project. You put it correctly. From the article:

The social skeptic is a catalyseur, a third party exploitation specialist fomenting conflict between the public and science.
...bearing an agenda which employs Bernaysian Engineering of Beliefs; leveraging fake a priori deduction methods combined with biased and risk-bearing stacked provisional abductive reasoning, both employed as a masquerade of science method in order to enforce on the general public, a belief set as being scientific, when it is not.
Social Skepticism derives its name from the similar set of practices employed by the political-counter-intelligence socialist control agencies of Eastern Europe (KI, Okhrana, AVH or East German Stasi), during the 1953 – 1983 era of the Cold War. They combine these social control methodologies with effective tactics of oppressive Abrahamism which they observe as their precedent. It is an organized method of Social Engineering Tradecraft characterized by specific and consistent actions, proven effective in Cold War era or socialist societies, which now resides at the core of Modern American Social Skepticism.

But - I do not think that these engineers reside in the government. They love smart-but-dumb players. People smart enough to do the work, but not smart enough to spot what is going on or raise ethical questions. They place those players into the government roles.
wow... great stuff.

When social control, change or conformance agents subject science to a state of being their lap-dog, serving specific agendas, such agents err in regard to the philosophical basis of science, skepticism. They are not bad scientists, rather bad philosophers, seeking a socialized goal. They are social skeptics.

They ‘establish’ their method correctness by armchair or social debunking ghosts, homeopathy, Bigfoot and UFO’s and then ply this false-method... into directing what everyone else can do with their body, doctor, voting, research, thoughts, nation, open-mind, rights, political choices, faith choice and their health. They could care less about the topic under discussion; their focus is upon you.

brilliant.

social-skeptic.jpg
https://i0.wp.com/theethicalskeptic...17/07/Tree-of-Knowledge-Obfuscation.png?ssl=1
 
Last edited:
No it does not. Not only does it fail to explain those matters, it also introduces bigger issues - such as the complete lack of evidence for superpsi, it doesn't exist as a phenomenon in its own right. It only exists as a magical incantation, a linguistic recitation.
wow... spot on. why is superpsi even still a thing?
 
Alex, you asked for us to pop in. Hey, it's been a while since I've been on the forum. I've still been listening this whole time still (this isn't about me though I've heard all the shows from when I first caught up with the first 70 or so shows, and then onward to today).

Your show has morphed a few times in this journey. It's been really interesrting to see the twists and turns. My gut instinct says longer shows are better. I've seen you extend yourself into a few longer ones in the last year. At about the 1 hour mark everyone's guard is down enough for the real conversation to start. I'd have loved to hear this one for another hour or two. I loved the experiences the guest had and would have liked to hear the two of you explore a few other questions that might have twisted and turned to unexpected places. I know youe style is to drill down, unpack, and not speculate so much so - I get it! But hey, it was a great show anyway - informative and relaxed.

Keep it up Alex! I'm always excited when I see another episode has emerged "from the hopper".
thanks for reconnecting... and for this valuable feedback. I hear you re the long-form versus short-form thing. I thnk there are pluses and minuses to both. where I'm at right now is to not to force it too much one way or another... which in my case means to let things go a little bit longer than I have in the past :-)
 
Hey everybody,

Touching base and saying, "I'm still here"
awesome. Thanks for reconnecting
[/QUOTE]
Of course we're getting multiple conflicting accounts about the subtle realities because they're all an amalgam of the experiencer and the experienced. [/QUOTE]
nice. thx.
 
TES - I'd really like you to start a new thread in "Consciousness and Science" or "Extended Consciousness" devoted to the idea of Social Skepticism. Does it extend, for example, to my realisation that The Intelligent Design crowd have a very strong scientific case, which is squashed?

I do hope, though, that you are not a fundamental Christian at heart - I mean I just feel that the real truths are bigger than any religion.

David

David, thanks. I have studied a number of challenging phenomena over the years, either paid for such lab study, written the study design, paid for the field research, or just done more than the fake skeptic 3 minutes of Skeptic's Dictionary web research. What you cite resides virtually at the core of my endeavor. There is a commonality to what is deemed in Ethical Skepticism, as the Embargo Hypothesis. Ultimately it can all be triangulated to a concealed model of our origins and consciousness, which for some reason must be quashed at all costs. Abrahamism no longer is sufficient as a blinding doctrine - so monist nihilism is being enforced as the replacement for Abrahamism in this role.

But I do not know what that model is just yet. No, I rejected fundamentalist Christianity just as I rejected monist nihilism. I am an ignostic. Which you can read about - in your leisure - here. That will set your (understandable) mind at ease. The post regularly pisses off fundamentalists and fake atheists alike. :)
 
wow... spot on. why is superpsi even still a thing?

Because it's one thing that explains a number of things, and is therefore a more parsimonious explanation than there being a number of things with no readily apparent connection. Some might see as truly "magical incantation" or "linguistic recitation" that which relies on the almost materialistic explanation that there are really ghosts and spirits and ETs etc.; it might be so, but personally, I have a certain amount of doubt about it.

None of which is to say that we don't survive death; only that paranormal activity is something attributable to the living rather than the literally dead, spirits, or ETs.

I lean to the view that once we are dead, no useful purpose is served by communication with the living. To my mind, it would interfere with Karma and the imperative to learn from life.
 
shared w/ me on FB:

Alex, the psychic medium you interviewed who said we live parallel lives is Julia Assante I believe. As for a soul’s ability to occupy multiple bodies, Dr. Michael Newton’s book “Journey of Souls” deals with that. According to Newton’s findings our earthly bodies only occupy something like 20% of our soul energy, with the other 80% on the other side. According to this theory the only bodies that can contain the full 100% of soul energy on earth would be the likes of Christ or the Buddha.

I loved the show. It felt in some ways like a return to the Skeptiko of old.
My favorite shows, the most illuminating and at the same time most challenging and confusing have been the ones delving into mediumship.

It's funny, but while listening, I was struck by two conflicting emotions.

On the one hand, I felt a sincere trust that what Marisa was conveying was both truthful and compelling. The implications of which run so very deep, and require one to consider how best to approach the task of weeding the conceptual gardens we have built for ourselves about the nature of reality.

On the other hand, I felt a quite strong but vague resistance to some of Marisa's firm conclusions on the information she has gleaned from a source I have no recourse to explore or question on my own.

I was left wondering if my resistance was because of my own personal blind attachment to certain of the traditions I have explored deeply and derived much from over the years. Traditions encompassing both western and eastern mysticism, and in particular where they cross over and seem to blend into one.

It wasn't that any of her assertions or conclusions directly challenged them, but the general sense I got of the landscape she was painting left me struggling to see how I could fit them in.

Her statement that time "moved faster" over there I found challenging. My appreciation for time as a relative construct (relative to the observer) left me floundering as to what she might mean. The fact that those who have crossed over seem to have access to information about our future is profoundly interesting, but "time moving faster" for them does nothing to illuminate the issue. If anything, it confounds it.

I concluded that maybe by saying "time moves faster" she may have been simply trying to convey that it is simply totally different over there. But I could be wrong, and she may be fully confident that it indeed does move faster over there, and I would find this very challenging.

She also said that categorically, we cannot live simultaneous lives, because we can only live one life fully at any one time. Now I also do not believe that we live more than one life at a time, but I cannot rule it out. In this assertion of hers, I was challenged not by the fact that she didn't believe it was possible, but more the fact that I was not convinced by her reasoning. I feel she perhaps did not fully grasp the philosophical boundaries of the issue, neither its possibilities nor limitations - which is fine, and totally understandable - I imagine most people haven't spent too much time twisting their noodles on the physics or the math of the issue.

The only reason this is an issue for me is that I feel I do have a grasp of the philosophical issue (albeit a weak one), and if I accept at face value her assertion, then this would raise more problems for me than it resolves.

I have thought about this in some depth, and see no reason why a soul cannot live a thousand different lives at the same time, or even in the same year (e.g. 1975) and be fully 100% present and exclusive in each one.

It does not require a fragmenting of the soul, or dividing consciousness between multiple different personas. Time seems to be an obstacle only to us down here immersed in the 3 (or 4) dimensional world we are in. Why for example could I not be reincarnated in 1000BC, as easily as 2019AD? Why not be reincarnated twice in 1975, and even meet myself, shake hands, have a relationship with myself.

After death, I might remember both lives.

The idea that 1000AD is sometime way in the distant past is only true for us here in our present in 2019. It is relative. The idea that this "NOW" (2019) is the only one for everyone is not at all implicit. Time truly is relative.

Anyway, I feel her dismissal of the idea was based on a misunderstanding of the implications. Again this is fine as we are not all physicists, but it does leave me as an aspiring map maker of the landscape of reality wondering whether I need to wrestle with this assertion or not.

I also struggled to find any moral imperatives that might be gleaned from the information Marisa provided. The moral question has seemed to me for so long an absolutely pivotal one. Not in any religious fundamentalist fashion, but as a guiding principle. The moral dimension seems to be present in all of the central themes of our lives, not just as a social construct, but as a deeply intuited and felt experience. Empathy, compassion, anger, aggression etc. These colour so much of our lives, and indeed seem often to form the both the foundations and reasons for our lives.

I loved Marisa, and value tremendously all of the information she most graciously shared. I am not at all questioning the veracity of any of what she shared, only the potential implications. After all, shes a medium, not necessarily a philosopher.

Thanks again,

I am so very humbled, challenged and deeply grateful for Marisa's information.
 
I see your point. It is certainly true that a certain level of pragmatism is necessary. I think Alex makes a good point, too, if the medium claims that they are getting information from a dead person and this has been independently verified and controlled for, the medium really would have no reason to lie about how they are getting their information, so maybe we should take their word for it, since it seems hard to prove either way.
Thinking further about this issue, I would put it like this:

1) Assuming materialism, the prior probability of consciousness extending after death is 0.0001 (say).
2) Assuming the existence of any form of ψ, the prior probability of extending consciousness after death must be much higher - 0.5 (say).

Therefore while it is reasonable to seek tortuous alternatives to life after death given assumption 1, it is completely irrational to seek such alternatives given assumption 2!

David
 
It wasn't that any of her assertions or conclusions directly challenged them, but the general sense I got of the landscape she was painting left me struggling to see how I could fit them in.

Her statement that time "moved faster" over there I found challenging. My appreciation for time as a relative construct (relative to the observer) left me floundering as to what she might mean. The fact that those who have crossed over seem to have access to information about our future is profoundly interesting, but "time moving faster" for them does nothing to illuminate the issue. If anything, it confounds it.
Remember that a number of NDEers say that time does not exist 'out there'. My interpretation of that is that they can see the whole timeline but that they have a separate time axis in which to live.

Perhaps it is worth remembering that Marisa is a medium, she hasn't done an in depth study of conditions out there!

BTW Where is Marisa - so far she has only made the one introductory post :(

David
 
On another note, though Nolan's research is potentially groundbreaking, I'm not entirely sure how much I trust Linda Moulton Howe. I'm not saying that she's making it up, but some of the things that she reports just stretches the bounds of credibility. Stargate portals, government documents proving that the gods in ancient mythology were aliens, the universe is powered by reincarnated souls? She also claims that there are remnants of ancient civilizations in Antartica. It's just a little too much to swallow.
 
Remember that a number of NDEers say that time does not exist 'out there'. My interpretation of that is that they can see the whole timeline but that they have a separate time axis in which to live.

Perhaps it is worth remembering that Marisa is a medium, she hasn't done an in depth study of conditions out there!

BTW Where is Marisa - so far she has only made the one introductory post :(

David

Yes, time "not existing" makes sense in terms of those over there being able to access our futures as well as our pasts, time not being a limitation for them as it is for us here. Or time moving from a linear, 1 dimensional, endlessly marching forward aspect of reality, to a 2 or dimensional or even 3 dimensional reality, where the freedom to explore it is exponentially increased.
Time moving at a faster rate though does not seem to help. Perhaps them operating at a faster rate through time would make sense, but certainly not time itself moving faster.
 
Back
Top