Depersonalization Support Forum banner

SPOOKY STUFF... psychic psycho

1154 Views 41 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  agentcooper
i wasnt sure what forum this would fit best in.. maybe spiritual but i guess this is an ok place.

i picked up gav from the airport last night and later we had dinner then decided to take a walk downtown. it was around 10 pm... and since it was easter sunday the place was a ghosttown... well.. as far as regular humans go. for some reason there were a surprising number of wierdos and crackheads and creeps walking around. gav and i didnt say much to each other while on the walk.. just holding hands while gav smoked a ciggy. we passed alot of wierdos that harassed us a bit but we didnt say anything just kept walking, when up ahead of us came this guy. certianly not your average joe. young guy about maybe 20 years old... all dirty with his clothes all torn and he was talking to himself out loud. definately schitzo but the scary part was that he was walking exactly like something out of THE RING or NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD.

i was like HOLY SH!T. :shock: but we both put our heads down and kept walking. but then he wouldnt let us pass. he was laughing and talking to himself and staring at us. we had to snake around the guy and as we did his talking got louder and scarier but we kept going faster this time... and when we got about 30 feet from the guy he shouted "GAVIN!!"

we both froze in our feet and turned around and he was staring at us and smiling this insane smile and he yelled again "GAVIN!!!!!"

then he started coming after us!! we took off and eventually lost him but needless to say we were both really shaken. there is NO WAY that he could have known gavs name. we tried to figure out any way that he could have known it.. gav checked for his wallet.. it was there. he wasnt at the resturant or around us at any other time.. and i hadnt spoken gavs name at all that night not even at the airport cause we call each other by pet names of course not by our real names. there is NO WAY he could have known gavs name at all.

personally... i believe in demons. i believe there is alot of sh!t that cant be explained. i believe that (and im sure most will dissagree especially in here) schitsofrenics talk to ghosts and demons and other phenoms that we cant see. if anyone knows anything about necro and the paranormal.. then they can understand what im getting at. gav doenst believe in it and hes very logical.. but he was more shaken than i was. he tried to make every heads or tails out of the situation but always came up short. there was nothing that could explain it. :shock:
See less See more
1 - 5 of 42 Posts
I think it's funny how so many people are willing to disregard the notion of the "supernatural" on the sole premise that it is something that science can't, as yet, explain. Even when no other explanations present themselves. SB has already said that they she didn't call Gavin by name. I'm sure they would have jumped on this as the first likely explanation of how this bizarre man knew his name. I'm sure they would have exhaustively examined every possible verbal exchange they had, in the hopes of gleaning a "Gavin" or a "Gav" or some derivation thereof, just to set their minds at ease.

The principles of quantum physics, and thus the dictates of science, and hence the tenets of rational thought, are as follows:

1. Anything is possible. Given infinite time, a sparrow could fly unimpeded through a 50 foot thick concrete wall.

2. Particles (electrons for example), literally "know" whether people are watching them or not and can make decisions based on this knowledge. Macrosize and extrapolate this idea using the laws of statistics and it opens up a whole new world of thought.

3. A particle can create itself by borrowing the energy from an equation and then pay the energy back to the equation so that it can borrow it in the first place.

Make sense? Sound logical? Well, neither does some guy knowing Gavin's name out of the blue.

I'm all for scepticism...nay, even cynicism. But when there is no other explanation...look further. That's why maxims like Occam's Razor are often misused. When reducing toward a conclusion from a plurality of possibilities, the possibilities that have not yet been discovered are inevitably discarded. There is still so much we don't know.

See less See more
Monkeydust said:
I am not saying that categorically they are impossible, not at all - but it requires argument and evidence to support any such viewpoint, neither of which have been or can as yet be presented by anyone making supernatural claims.
I agree. But people do categorically say that it's impossible, whereby i see a "supernatural" (supernatural in this case meaning, "all that science does not yet know") explanation as the most probable. And it's all about probability.

The fact of the matter is that our ability to empirically test everything is hindered by the infancy of our apparati. We haven't the ability yet, to test for things like this, because neither the theory, nor the technology are there yet.

It would be like cavemen testing for radio waves. We need to evolve...but in that evolution we, as a species should, at the very least, realize that we know very very little.

Martinelv said:
I think it's funny how so many people are willing to disregard the notion of the "supernatural" on the sole premise that it is something that science can't, as yet, explain
First, why is it funny ?
Well, i meant funny as in odd, not as in ha-ha.

Never in the history of paranormal investigations has anything 'spooky' been proved to be other than selective induction (noting the hits, ignoring the misses), illusion, misunderstanding or fraud.
First of all, are you really such an expert in this field to make this claim, Martin? And secondly, if it were "proved", wouldn't it then move out of that field and into that of recognized science, and only then wouldn't it be subjected to "proper scientific" study? I mean, that's where this stuff comes from. It's the very definition of paranormal. Not scientifically explainable, according to Webster's dictionary. If science wasn't a malleable edifice, we'd still be buying condos at the "edge of the earth", for a place closest to the sun. Or cowering in fear of Zeus when lighting flew from the sky. And as for those kooks who preached these ideas in the first place...only then would they be lauded as visionaries.

Question: What's the difference between genius and insanity?

Answer: A few centuries.

Genetic engeneering, probing the brain to elicit predictible responses, cloning, space travel, radio waves, television waves, microwaves, atom bombs, the predictions of certain natural phenomenon. These are all things that would have been thought of as wacky, had you brought them up over some mutton and mead back in the good ol' days while sitting around the funeral pyre.

It reminds me of the story of that priest or whatever he was during that battle way back when, when he told everyone that if they didn't stop the fighting he would unleash his God-like powers at a certain time the next day. Everyone laughed at him, until he turned the sky black in mid-day, and sent everyone running back to their caves in fright. He wasn't magic. He just accurately predicted a solar eclipse.

How can we, in our scientific infancy, proclaim to know what's possible and what's impossible?

I mean, i agree...i believe in the scientific method. It's tried and true. But outside experiment lie things we simply can't test because we don't know how to test them yet. We are not the Gods we think we are.

1. Anything is possible. Given infinite time, a sparrow could fly unimpeded through a 50 foot thick concrete wall
This, to paraphrase Homeskooled, is Pop-Quantum Theory, and you are talking about two different things anyway. While Quantum theory indicates that anything 'may' be possible (at the quantum level) it doesn't mean that it 'is' possible if, and this is this is important, the universe existed for an infinate length of time (oh, hang on, you said that), but which accoring to current cosmology, it certainly won't, or has not.
In Quantum Theory, as it stands today, everything eventually will happen. There is no "maybe" about it. It is simply a question of probability and time. And it isn't just on the quantum level, although granted the odds are astronomically more likely that say, a photon will tunnel through a concentrated gravitational mass, as opposed to an entire living thing (the sparrow, for instance), having the unfathomably unlikely fortune of flying through a concrete wall.

In fact, there is the many-worlds theory which postulates that absolutely everything that can happen, will happen, as the infinite amount of bifurcations take reality on an endless roller-coaster ride through space. And so, temporally or spatially, all is possible in this universe...or multi-verse, or whatever the hell it's called.

Now, what this has to do with the price of bread in Mexico or, more pressingly, the whole gav/sb encounter with that man, is that in a world such as this, where anything WILL happen, we should not relegate ourselves to the position that only things we know about can happen, and everything else is phooey. Quite frankly, such ideas are pure Newtonian in their terrestrial arrogance.

If this were the case, we'd see mountains spontaneously disappearing (as is 'possible') or you'd slip through the pavement (which is possible
Dammit Martin, quit thinking like a human! If you close your eyes do you know for certain that the world still exists? Where does the world go when you sleep? Prove to me that it still exists when you're off in La La Land, having anal sex with 800 lbs. gorillas or whatever it is you do in your dreams. One has to think outside of the box.

For example, if you did "slip through the pavement", where do you think you'd go? You certainly wouldn't be on here typing about it, and so by de facto logic, we can clearly say that none of us has slipped through pavement. But that doesn't mean it hasn't happened. People go missing all the time. Maybe this is what the problem is. Maybe there's a mass of people slipping through the pavement and we should inform some sort of international body about it. Perhaps that's why there's always a single shoe laying by the side of the road. It's always seemed absurd to me that people would constantly be chucking shoes out the window while driving. And why only one? What good is the other shoe going to do if the other one is laying at the side of the road? Unless you're totally unconcerned with how silly you'll look having two different shoes that don't even match. But i'd imagine the proportion of people who would be unconcerned with such fashion faux pas would be drastically lower than the amount of shoes i've seen by the side of the road. And so, maybe they are slipping through the pavement.

Particles (electrons for example), literally "know" whether people are watching them or not and can make decisions based on this knowledge
You're talking about the Uncertinty Principle here, yes ? If so, what you have said is a human emotive. Sub-atomic particles do not 'know' whether they we looking at them - rather, the direct act of observation (human or not) interferes with their action.
You are mistaken, my dear Martin. Sub-atomic particles DO know whether we are looking at them. Or at least they exhibit the same tendencies that a cognizant entity would exhibit. I'm not speaking about the Uncertainty relation. That restricts our ability to measure both momentum and position, and you're right in the sense that this hinders our ability to accurately monitor these things, as they are fundamentally unreconcilable given their sub-Planck like length. However, tests can and have been conducted on electrons which infers their actions from various experiments, and time and time again, it shows that the wave function collapses once the "world at large" knows about their decisions.

To put this more clearly, this means that sub-atomic particles act as though they are waves until they are measured, and then they become particles. This is really a mind-boggling revelation, in that it shows how tenuous our reality really is. In fact, i find it oddly comforting to know that the cold, bleak world that some people try to paint, is actually bubbling with mystery, and we are simply unable to comprehend it because the harder we look, the murkier the water becomes. I also find the fact that ANYTHING is possible quite comforting as i've always found eternity a rather unsettling idea. The idea of something lasting forever. But if time is no object...if we were to die and become energy trapped in a black swirling mass of gravity...trapped in a neutron star...trapped even by the weight of the universe itself...there is still an absolute certainty that one day, somewhere, somehow, we will free ourselves.

Anyway, i'm getting enormously off-topic. If anyone is interested in all this, i'd highly recommend John Gribben's Search of Schrodinger's Cat for reading or downloading Richard Feynman's UCLA lectures on quantum theory. That particular book by Gribben is written for the layman so it's quite lucid and easy to follow. The Feynman lectures are entertaining but a little more in depth. Also, the University of Colorado has a great physics web site, and actually lets you do experiments online through flash or java or whatever the hell utility they use.

Now, just to clarify things. I'm not saying that this whole incident most certainly did happen through some sort of cosmic quackery. I'm just saying that we never really know. Anything is possible. And i'm also aware of the extreme unlikelihood of all the examples i mentioned above, and that all things being equal, a Newtonian universe is precisely the kind we live in day-to-day, and for all intents and purpose, Relativity, Quantum Physics, and the multi-dimensions of String Theory, are all things i don't have to worry a whole lot about. I realize that 99 times out of a hundred, at the very least[/], a person will be delusional rather than prophetic...lucky, rather than destined...crazy rather than genius. But we shouldn't be too hasty. There's much more to this world than meets the eye.

See less See more
Martinelv said:
As the saintly Richard Dawkins suggest...'sure, keep an open mind, but not such an open mind that our brains fall out'. I'm going to have that quote on my gravestone...unless I die in an manner where my skull is torn open and my brains do actually fall out. I'm not that insensitive, although it would be a final and delicious act of irony on my part.
Now, that would be funny. But not quite as funny as having in my will that when i die, my body must be thrown to the sharks while everyone stands around watching them rip me to shreds. I mean, i suppose it would be quite horrible for my loved ones, but it would almost be worth it just to hear them say, "God, what a lunatic this guy was."

Privateer said:
I do technically have one of the most common names in America, but still...
Nonsense! I can't think of a single person i know named "Privateer".
1 - 5 of 42 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.