Misidentification

[Guest]

Are you sure that's a hallucination? Maybe the driver drove up you driveway and then left thinking he was in the wrong place and then returned when he realized he had the right place all along? As a driver I've done that before myself : )

[David NC]

Antefoot, thank you for sharing. I could not imagine having to deal with something like that on a daily basis, though a lot of us probably experience something like that every so often, maybe not visually. I have heard my name called before and even answer only to find out there is no one in the warehouse. What causes things like that I do not know. It is truly unusual that if you had bigfoot on your mind a lot that your brain would not bring that into play. I have always thought that different sensory hallucinations were caused by something similar to your brain doing what it normally would do when you are asleep and in a dream state but it just does it while your are awake, maybe not. I do believe that there are some things in this world we will never be able to get under a microscope or even really get a true grasp of the concept of whys and hows, at least not in my lifetime. I wish you well on dealing with if not understanding what causes them.

[Incorrigible1]

I had an hallucination once.

As I recall, you mentioned hearing/witnessing a "cat fight" outside your window, but the cats were not visible.

 

Is that not a possible hallucination?

[hiflier]

Hello Sasfooty,

That is strange and one has to wonder about such things. I was driving in Mass. in the early 90's one day while listening to a college radio station doing a beg-a-thon and thanking one of their chief sponsors, Poland Springs. Not ten seconds later one of the big green Poland Springs trucks came over the rise in the road toward me. Since then the incidences of things happening in twos has been frequent and pretty unbelievable. Looking back on my life at times before even the 90's I see many, many occurances where things have occured in twos- never in threes. I pay attention now and it's pretty wierd what goes on.

Edited July 23, 2014 by hiflier

[Sasfooty]

Are you sure that's a hallucination? Maybe the driver drove up you driveway and then left thinking he was in the wrong place and then returned when he realized he had the right place all along? As a driver I've done that before myself : )

 

No, actually I don't think it was an hallucination. I think it was precognition. The driver is one of Hubby's friends, so he knew where he was going. Also, I was looking at the book, when I saw him the first time. The scene was there in the place of the book for a second, but I could still see it in my mind after it was gone. The friend had just bought the blue truck that day & I had never seen it before.

[Wingman1]

Hi Sasfooty,

I agree that it seems to be more precognition than hallucination. The human brain is capable of so much and yes science has mapped

a considerable portion of the brain, but still has no idea of it's full potential. That potential will no doubt be wondrous if it is ever tapped

in to. I am looking forward to the new movie called "Lucy" that will be opening soon, and I am interested to see what their interpretation

of a fully 100% unlocked brain is capable of. I would have to imagine that there is probably a good reason that we can only use 10% of

our brain. I am still trying to figure out the 10% of what I have rattling around in my skull!

[Incorrigible1]

http://psychology.about.com/od/biopsychology/a/10-percent-of-brain-myth.htm

 

"You know, you're only using 10 percent of your brain. Just imagine what you could accomplish if you used the other 90 percent!"

Chances are high that you have heard someone make a similar comment at some time or another. The popularly and widely spread belief that we only use or have access to 10 percent of our brain's power is often used to speculate about the extent of human abilities if only we could utilize our brain's full capacity.

 

In reality, this claim is 100 percent myth. We use all of our brain. The only instances where there are unused regions of the brain are those in which brain damage or disease has destroyed certain regions.

The Origins of the Myth

Researchers suggest that this popular urban legend has existed since at least the early 1900s. It may have been influenced by people misunderstanding or misinterpreting neurological research. The 10 percent myth may have emerged from the writings of psychologist and philosopher William James. In his 1908 book, The Energies of Men, he wrote, "We are making use of only a small part of our possible mental and physical resources."

 

The myth has perpetuated much like other urban legends. Movies depict characters capable of remarkable feats when the supposedly unused 90 percent of their brains are "unlocked." Well-intentioned people such as motivational speakers or teachers often cite the 10 percent myth as a way to demonstrate that all people should strive to live up to their full potential. Unfortunately, less well-meaning people have also used the myth to promote and sell products and services that they claim will unlock your brain's hidden abilities.

[Guest]

Antefoot, thank you for sharing. I could not imagine having to deal with something like that on a daily basis, though a lot of us probably experience something like that every so often, maybe not visually. I have heard my name called before and even answer only to find out there is no one in the warehouse. What causes things like that I do not know. It is truly unusual that if you had bigfoot on your mind a lot that your brain would not bring that into play. I have always thought that different sensory hallucinations were caused by something similar to your brain doing what it normally would do when you are asleep and in a dream state but it just does it while your are awake, maybe not. I do believe that there are some things in this world we will never be able to get under a microscope or even really get a true grasp of the concept of whys and hows, at least not in my lifetime. I wish you well on dealing with if not understanding what causes them.

When I was younger it was pretty bad sometimes. Now it's mostly just annoying. I suspect that I don't hallucinate about bigfoot because I have always had plenty on my mind besides bigfoot. My interest in forteana (supernatural stuff) is probably a direct result of my hallucinations. A long history of ghosts and zombies and music from out of the air is likely to encourage even the slightest interest in psychics, ghost, aliens, and even bigfoot and other cryptozoological phenomena. The new meds seem to be doing a good job right now. : )

[dmaker]

The fact that I do not think the evidence is compelling (or even evidence, some of it) does change that. I still do not toss out the bigfoot idea out of hand though. I simply say there is an insufficiency of evidence.

 

"Proof" is not a tangible in science. Falsifying a claim is easier to do. If a claim is not falsified, science considers it to be potentially true.

Exactly. But what you will never get DWA to understand is that scientific evidence must be falsifiable in the first place. Something has to be testable and verifiable and falsifiable. It has to be something that can logically or realistically be proven wrong. Hence anecdotes do not qualify. This is a very simple concept, but since it precludes the bulk of alleged bigfoot evidence from the scientific method, DWA will pretend that it's not true or perhaps respond with an example of how one would investigate an anecdote. Which, of course, is no where near the same thing as falsifying something using the scientific method. 

Edited July 23, 2014 by dmaker

[Guest]

No, actually I don't think it was an hallucination. I think it was precognition. The driver is one of Hubby's friends, so he knew where he was going. Also, I was looking at the book, when I saw him the first time. The scene was there in the place of the book for a second, but I could still see it in my mind after it was gone. The friend had just bought the blue truck that day & I had never seen it before.

I thought about that toobut since I don't actually believe in precognition, I decided not to bring it up. Never know what will set some people off. I like the idea of precognition and think there is some scientific hypotheses (not to be confused with theory)that are probing the possibility that the future may actually have an impact on the past or present. It's science like that that keeps me interested in the fortean stuff I like to read.

Hi Sasfooty,

I agree that it seems to be more precognition than hallucination. The human brain is capable of so much and yes science has mapped

a considerable portion of the brain, but still has no idea of it's full potential. That potential will no doubt be wondrous if it is ever tapped

in to. I am looking forward to the new movie called "Lucy" that will be opening soon, and I am interested to see what their interpretation

of a fully 100% unlocked brain is capable of. I would have to imagine that there is probably a good reason that we can only use 10% of

our brain. I am still trying to figure out the 10% of what I have rattling around in my skull!

The scientific consensus is that we use 100% of our brain. There is also the consensus that we are unaware of most of what happens in our brains because most of it is subconscious. A large part of our brain is actively involved in operating the body and its metabolism. We are always using our whole brain. Now can we use our brain in such a way as to do incredible new things? That's fully possible.

Exactly. But what you will never get DWA to understand is that scientific evidence must be falsifiable in the first place. Something has to be testable and verifiable and falsifiable. It has to be something that can logically or realistically be proven wrong. Hence anecdotes do not qualify. This is a very simple concept, but since it disqualifies the bulk of alleged bigfoot evidence from the scientific method, DWA will pretend that it's not true or perhaps respond with an example of how one would investigate an anecdote. Which, of course, is no where near the same thing as falsifying something using the scientific method. 

Alas,this is true. I suspect many on this forum similarly do not understand this about science. It is what makes science really fascinating to me.

[Guest DWA]

So I've been reading about bigfoot for forty years for what? I certainly can fathom a real bigfoot. I hope that bigfoot is real. I even have my own ideas about how bigfoot evolved and lives today. I also have standards which I have adopted from my readings about science. I do not claim bigfoot is real nor do I claim bigfoot is unreal. I do pose questions and some here become offended by those questions. That is all.

At least I admit I am fallible and not some all knowing perfect bigfoot hunter.

 

I don't know what you've been reading.  If you understand science, and have been reading the right things, you can't have the position you do.

 

I'm not going to address dmaker.  Except to say he is so far out in the woods on this that it will be harder to get him out of there than it would be to find bigfoot in there.  (How many times have I cogently and conclusively refuted his statement about falsifiability?  Oh right, I'm not going to address him.)

 

I've never seen any field in which so many people with so many hifalutin attitudes about science understand so very little about how it works.  It's really rather remarkable.  But this is how denial works.

Edited July 23, 2014 by DWA

[dmaker]

^^ And once again instead of actually trying to explain a position, you just blurt out that you understand science better than anyone else while ironically demonstrating exactly the opposite.

[Guest DWA]

Down, sharkie.  Down!

[Sasfooty]

I thought about that too but since I don't actually believe in precognition, I decided not to bring it up.

 

I guess that's kind of like "believing in bigfoot". I've never wasted time on "not believing in" anything. I figure we either know or we don't know. Once we've seen or experienced it, then we know...always & forever, & nothing anybody says or does can change what we know.

 

For instance, how do you know that what you are seeing & hearing isn't really there? Maybe you just have a gift for seeing & hearing a little more than the average person. Who is qualified to tell you that it's just your imagination?

 

They say "The veil is thinning". For some of us it's thinning faster than for others.

[Guest]

I don't know what you've been reading.  If you understand science, and have been reading the right things, you can't have the position you do.

 

I'm not going to address dmaker.  Except to say he is so far out in the woods on this that it will be harder to get him out of there than it would be to find bigfoot in there.  (How many times have I cogently and conclusively refuted his statement about falsifiability?  Oh right, I'm not going to address him.)

 

I've never seen any field in which so many people with so many hifalutin attitudes about science understand so very little about how it works.  It's really rather remarkable.  But this is how denial works.

You're right about one thing: "It's really rather remarkable.  But this is how denial works." you have been denying the scientific process all along claiming that scientists are doing it wrong. That is denial.