Synchronicity

Member
  • Content count

    391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Synchronicity

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
    Norman, Oklahoma
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,256 profile views
  1. Most gurus offering transmissions will tell you - when it doesn’t work - that it was unsuccessful due to your level of consciousness. This is just an excuse. A person who’s good enough at transmissions will be able to give them to people regardless of where they’re at consciously. For example, a doctor can provide a patient with a vaccine no matter what level of consciousness the patient is at. Furthermore, the vaccine causes effective changes regardless of the patient’s consciousness. Transmissions work within the relative domain just like vaccines do. So just as an effective vaccine can significantly effect people regardless of their consciousness, so too would an effective transmission. So I would say, stay away from transmissions unless and until you find someone who can give it you like handing out a pen. You don’t even need to schedule a session to be handed a pen because it’s so immediate. No waste of time, no waste of money I’ve seen this done multiple times under casual experiments but I’m not going to source out information until it’s out of the experimental phase. It has to stand independent of placebo
  2. I’d advise people not to pay for transmission sessions. It’s too experimental of a service to be considered a fully-formed product yet and plus, there’s people who do them for free so that you can try some sessions without wasting money.
  3. This isn’t an original idea of Leo’s. Study General and Special Relativity. Relative time isn’t even a controversial subject like you’re making it sound. Mainstream science has accepted the relativity of time for about a century now (since Einstein). Astronauts experience time moving approximately 0.005 seconds slower per six months than people down on Earth. This has been measured and verified already. And that’s just one very subtle example. GPS systems wouldn’t work without accounting for the relativity of time https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/do-astronauts-age-slower-than-people-on-earth-2015-8%3famp
  4. They’re each competing for the remainder of their own lives. That’s their common prize. You’re being overly-literal about what constitutes a common prize. I don’t have to literally syphon off your life like a vampire to win more life. Just surviving the encounter wins me the prize of more life because my life continues. Yes, I can agree with this point. I would say this is a good synthesis of our discussion. I can see the value of your point about focusing on innovative areas where no competition is present and not letting competition be a distraction to that innovation. I guess then that the remaining question is, do we throw away competition entirely so that we don’t get in the way of innovation or does humanity still need some competition in order for certain areas to thrive? I would say a balance is probably best but you may have a different solution. We’d just have to find which is ultimately healthier. Mods, hopefully this discussion of healthy competitiveness hasn’t thrown off the thread’s topic too much. I think it still applies
  5. Yes true. However, the rest of their life isn’t something they had before the competition. So you could say you’re competing for that extra life which, by your definition, would make it a prize precisely because that’s not something they already had. And that’s working within your narrow definition of what a prize is which is already unnecessarily narrow. The OP already provided you some examples of healthy competition where the participants push each other and create value in each other rather than pulling a zero-sum. But you denied that any form of competition is capable of this because it’s something you have to directly experience yourself to understand. I’ll give you a couple examples anyhow... I’ve had multiple friends go through a type of “biggest loser” competition where they pushed either to see who could best improve their health and well-being. When each of them saw how much the other was improving, it increased their excitement and effort to improve their own health even more I’ve also helped kids out at summer camps and - on your valuable note of creativity - you’d be surprised how much healthy competition can increase creativity. The kids had a ton of fun creating the most helpful boat to get everyone across a river to an island to feed the wildlife there. The biggest sturdiest boat that could get the most resources across won. Each person wanted to create the most resourceful means of transportation. This pushed everyone to outdo each other which came up with a better boat as the result then if they had just built their own without any effort. So there are examples where competition increases effort, excitement, well-being, creativity and even unity. The kids worked together more in unison to provide their best work. This is a feeling you have to directly experience to fully understand. Also, the idea that “all competition is bad and non-competition is good” sounds too black-and-white and too dualistic. Life is a Nondualistic spectrum of unified grey. So I’d invite you to expand your horizons. Otherwise, this discussion isn’t going to be valuable to either party.
  6. I see what you’re saying. But that’s not quite nuanced enough for my liking. The dark alley situation can be considered a form of competition. It’s competition for survival. If you win, you and your family survive. If the criminal wins, you don’t. Also, competition isn’t inherently bad or based on ignorance. There are situations where it’s healthy. See my angle?
  7. In addition to my above comment, note that Orange competitiveness is healthy in sports. Red competitiveness is healthy in a life-and-death situation where your well-being or that of others is threatened. After all, it’s not healthy to be with your family, facing a criminal in a dark alley and have an Orange attitude of “may the best win.” No, just take the guy down and save your family at all costs.
  8. Stage Orange: “Let’s have a fair competition. May the best man win!” Stage Red: “No mercy! Attack his weaknesses! Do whatever it takes to come out on top” So Stage Orange likes to win under optimal conditions (while the opponent is at their best). Stage Red just likes to win [period]
  9. I sense Joy in your words at the possibility of exploring this religion, so I’d let those sparks fly and go for it. See where it leads
  10. Crystal meth read or watch some stories from people who became addicted
  11. @Gesundheit While Solipsism is true I agree with you that it’s not the Absolute Truth like most on this forum claim. There are in fact ways to disprove its Absolute-ness but this forum is too close-minded for me to share that. The method has nothing to do with meditation or psychedelics and so, it’s just unverifiable story-telling to everyone here. And so, it’s of no value for me to share. So why bring it up in the first place? Well because my point is that I agree with you that there’s a way to disprove it although your indirect experience method isn’t quite it. So that’s the area where we may disagree. Anyways, this forum’s not gonna receive what you just said very well. Your contemplation here will be called “mental masturbation” so I personally think you’re wasting your time here with this forum. Your pearls won’t have any value here so cast them somewhere in which they will.
  12. An effective entity removal can be done without pay, without appointment, and without your knowledge (isolation of placebo). $700 isn’t worth it nor is it necessary to compensate the psychic for the amount of work they’d be doing (even if they’re legit).
  13. Training to be a pro athlete can take up to a couple decades of training and even then, only a few make it. Learning these paranormal skills is even more difficult and - on top of that - even more reliant on a base of talent (“psychic gifts”). So it’s not nearly as easy or passive as many psychics claim it is. It really requires a full career of commitment. With that said, I’m experimenting with a course to help people develop these for free. I don’t think money can realistically be charged for this type of work yet since it’s still an extremely experimental field. Spiritual Awakening tends to be much easier (though still difficult) and far more practical. But I still offer this type of practice for anyone who’s interested. Ultimately, no path is better than any other. But I can’t make any promises. I need to be realistic about the high level of commitment and low level of likelihood for developing any of these skills.
  14. Yes, there are things you can be certain about. One example is that there’s an experience happening right now. People can debate over whether the experience is real or not but it’s still happening. That much is certain
  15. As cliche as this answer sounds, the only permanent thing is the now itself (or the changing itself). The content within that now is always changing. I understand why that doesn’t sit well but certain realizations can be uncomfortable to egoic-based preferences and the mind.