25 Sep 2018, 10:08 am
25 Sep 2018, 10:12 am
rdos wrote:
NorthWind wrote:
rdos wrote:
I thought you read the thread? How could you miss that it is mostly her that follows me around? Selective reading?
That's precisely what I meant by it not being clear what is going on. Your online communication with her is described very vaguely and it is not clear how (besides you sensing it) you would know that all her accounts are actually by one and the same person or how color code, like system or whichever facebook bugs you think you utilize are true communication and not just you seeing a pattern where there is none.
If one sees the lack of evidence that the online interaction is real and doesn't believe in mind-to-mind communication one possible conclusion is that you are obsessing about her, you are following her around and you imagine she is following you around too and you imagine she's interested in you too -> stalking.
But it is also becoming more and more clear that you may not get close enough to her in person to actually see her and you might often only 'know' you're following her or she's following you because you sense her presence in which case this would more be the conclusion at which one arrives:
rdos wrote:
I think people here need to become a bit more logical.
There is a need to either accept or reject the spiritual dimension. If somebody rejects the mind-to-mind communication or the direction sense, then it makes absolutely no sense to start to talk about stalking. Then it must simply be a fantasy in my brain, and so the woman is not where I assume she is, and there can be no stalking. Anything else is just completely illogical.
There is a need to either accept or reject the spiritual dimension. If somebody rejects the mind-to-mind communication or the direction sense, then it makes absolutely no sense to start to talk about stalking. Then it must simply be a fantasy in my brain, and so the woman is not where I assume she is, and there can be no stalking. Anything else is just completely illogical.
But I do not think the reason why stalking is brought up is a lack of people being logical but it's because it's not completely obvious how often you really follow her (close enough to see her) or just walk somewhere and sense she's there but you do not see her(no real life evidence she's actually there).
If you'd actually follow her and know you're following her for another reason than because you can sense it, it'd still be stalking and it'd still be possible without mind-to-mind connection simply by knowing her habits and which places she frequents often enough. But it seems more like you only think she's nearby because you can sense it, which means there's no evidence that she is.
Some NDs simply are too binary. You cannot understand this with binary thinking. It's all about probabilities.
At the moment, we are out about an hour each morning, and then usually a little longer in the evening. We use a few different paths, and sometimes I propose a path I want to take, and sometimes I let her decide by her initial position. The distance differs. Sometimes she will hide close to where I will pass, and then we might be quite close. Sometimes I will even decide to stay for a while at those places.
I'm not sure what that has to do with anything I said. I've seen hints in your previous posts that you 'know' you're near her because you sense it. I'd interpret this post the same way, but I can't be absolutely certain.
I'd hope that this:
rdos wrote:
But you need to believe in the spiritual dimension of things for it to be potential stalking. You cannot stalk something that doesn't exist. So, which is it?
confirms that, without the existence of the spiritual dimension your interactions with her and you following her around would automatically be nonexistent.
The nonexistence of the spiritual dimension itself would not make a real person you follow around non-existent (and thus not stalking either), only a person you can't see is near you, but can sense is near you. I think the later option is what is the case but in some of your posts it is not completely obvious if you are sensing or seeing her when you think you are near each other.
25 Sep 2018, 10:16 am
25 Sep 2018, 10:23 am
Fnord wrote:
I used to run a test. I called it "What's In The Box?"
First, I would select three objects. Then I would place all three in a container ("The Box"). Then I would place the container in a random location. There would be only one "box" at a time.
The rules were simple:
1. Tell me what is in the container, what kind of container they're in, and where the container is located.
2. Do not ask or otherwise "fish" for hints.
3. You get 1 chance; this is not a game of "20 Questions".
4. Be exact and specific; do not rely on synonyms, puns, or subjective definitions of words.
5. You may use any alleged "Psychic" or "Spiritual" means at your disposal (i.e., Ouija board, telemancy, telepathy, et cetera).
6. The first person with the correct answer would have received $100 in cash.
Here are some examples:
- An empty ketchup bottle, a pair of reading glasses, and a wingnut inside a paper bag above the suspended ceiling at the public library.
- A bicycle tyre, a bag of sunflower seeds, and a screwdriver in a garbage bag in my garage.
- A blue feather, a glass marble, and a stick of gum in a medicine bottle buried in my back yard.
I ran this contest for 20 years. No one ever won. No one even came close. Everyone tried to circumvent the rules.
I no longer run this contest. "The Amazing Randi" ran a similar contest, and offered one million US dollars for anyone who could demonstrate "psychic" abilities in front of professional witnesses (e.g., stage magicians, scientists, engineers, et cetera). A version of the challenge was first issued in 1964. Over a thousand people applied to take it, but none were successful. The challenge was terminated in 2015.
There is no valid empirical proof of "psychic abilities", a "spiritual dimension", or a "supernatural realm".
Deal with it.
First, I would select three objects. Then I would place all three in a container ("The Box"). Then I would place the container in a random location. There would be only one "box" at a time.
The rules were simple:
1. Tell me what is in the container, what kind of container they're in, and where the container is located.
2. Do not ask or otherwise "fish" for hints.
3. You get 1 chance; this is not a game of "20 Questions".
4. Be exact and specific; do not rely on synonyms, puns, or subjective definitions of words.
5. You may use any alleged "Psychic" or "Spiritual" means at your disposal (i.e., Ouija board, telemancy, telepathy, et cetera).
6. The first person with the correct answer would have received $100 in cash.
Here are some examples:
- An empty ketchup bottle, a pair of reading glasses, and a wingnut inside a paper bag above the suspended ceiling at the public library.
- A bicycle tyre, a bag of sunflower seeds, and a screwdriver in a garbage bag in my garage.
- A blue feather, a glass marble, and a stick of gum in a medicine bottle buried in my back yard.
I ran this contest for 20 years. No one ever won. No one even came close. Everyone tried to circumvent the rules.
I no longer run this contest. "The Amazing Randi" ran a similar contest, and offered one million US dollars for anyone who could demonstrate "psychic" abilities in front of professional witnesses (e.g., stage magicians, scientists, engineers, et cetera). A version of the challenge was first issued in 1964. Over a thousand people applied to take it, but none were successful. The challenge was terminated in 2015.
There is no valid empirical proof of "psychic abilities", a "spiritual dimension", or a "supernatural realm".
Deal with it.
For lack of a better word: AMEN
25 Sep 2018, 10:25 am
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
25 Sep 2018, 11:10 am
rdos isn’t completely delusional. The metaphysical/spiritual realm exists and is simply beyond our normal range of perception of the electromagnetic spectrum. Mind to mind communication also exists - sometimes you just Know what someone is thinking or going to say.. thoughts, intentions/meditations, prayers - all of these things have real power.
But advanced telepathy as an ND trait? A sixth “directional sense,” etc = Nope!
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
25 Sep 2018, 11:58 am
^ I don't believe in any of it, so I'm covered.
25 Sep 2018, 12:37 pm
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,106
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
25 Sep 2018, 12:59 pm
25 Sep 2018, 1:23 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
rdos wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
But I don’t think it’s appropriate to donate sperm with the hopes that you make NT’s lives difficult with a low functioning ASD child.
We need to make sure the ND genes survive, so a great initiative. You are doing no good in this area, so be grateful somebody else does a better job.
Shame on you Goldfish for being gay and refusing to spread your seed and superior autistic genes! You should at least be grateful that others are lying and wishing ill on others!
I need a gallon of brain bleach after reading this thread
mrspock wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
mrspock wrote:
since i lack a formal diagnosis its not illegal nor is there any way to stop it and in what way is it dishonest nts do all they can to make us miserable and this is karma baby
This is a really messed up way to think.
Agreed. Someone needs to learn that only his own reactions to and thoughts about NT’s can make him miserable. NT’s do not go out of their way to make him, or any of us, feel miserable.*
*Aside from the occasional bully. Some people are just jerks.
do u think people on the spectrum should be legally banned from reproduction just curious
You're missing the point - leaving aside your spiteful attitude towards NTs - how well do you think a low functioning autistic child will fare with parents that are completely unprepared for and ignorant of his needs? The kid will likely pay the biggest price for your recklessness and dishonesty.
OK how is it reckless or dishonest? If you don't think that people on the spectrum should be banned from reproduction then you should have NO problem with it.
25 Sep 2018, 1:29 pm
25 Sep 2018, 1:32 pm
25 Sep 2018, 1:46 pm
25 Sep 2018, 1:49 pm
25 Sep 2018, 2:13 pm
25 Sep 2018, 2:14 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Advice regarding girlfriend |
30 Oct 2024, 8:33 am |
| Does anyone else want a girlfriend just for social occasions |
02 Jan 2025, 5:32 am |
| Republican makes Tammy Baldwin’s girlfriend an issue |
02 Nov 2024, 5:14 pm |
| Getting Lost |
15 Jan 2025, 6:38 pm |
