the rate upon which people perceive is purely based on the mind.. the speed of movement is simply set, that cannot change.. if i look straight then look left i cant speed that up faster than humanly possible.. same with moving muscles. there is a set speed, the laws of physics are to blame for that limitation.
But the ability of the mind being able to speed up, or slow things around you CAN be developed.
ever experience huge adrenaline rushes and one punch seems to take forever? well, the world isnt slowing down around you. your brain is perceiving things faster.. if the brain were to perceive things faster than your eyes. there would be many moments of no vision whatsoever.. so our eyes see 100% of the time they are open.. our minds only consciously consider a fraction of it at a relaxed state. Drugs can effect this.
Dareb wrote:
well im confident that it does exist.. lesbian assassins main error here is to debunk beliefs based on her own But she already stated that significant scientific study has gone into this, and it's all said the same thing. I have no doubt whatsoever that she'll find that proof. However, if the phenomenon exists, you should be able to find a well-documented case as easily as I believe Lexy can find 100 times as much well-documented science against it. Lummox JR | |
But you are completely and verifiably wrong. If you say "the sky is always orange" not a single person will agree with you or even admit that you could be right. Not only can we all see the sky and notice that it's not orange, we've all talked to other people about it and have no reason to doubt our eyes. The evidence is strong that the hypothetical opinion is simply unbelievable, and not a single rational person will admit any shred of doubt about it.
Similarly, there is a plethora of evidence against subliminal messaging. Any time they've tried it in a clinical study, it just doesn't work. We don't care how strong your convictions are.. no matter how much you repeat that you believe in it, we have a considerable amount of evidence on our side that your belief is false. Anyone that admits you could be right is an irrational person. You seem to want people to have an "open mind" towards your opinions. We do. We're willing to look at all of the evidence and reach our conclusions in a reasonable manner. Give us the same courtesy. LOOK at the evidence--any of it--and come to a conclusion. You're the one who's not stopping to consider that you could be wrong. -AbyssDragon (Heh, that last line reminded me of one from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.) | |
But the sky might be orange, no matter how vastly and incomprehensibly unlikely a possibility that is, so it must be worth arguing over!
| |
yet she has posted no urls based on this, until she does its only her opinion.
what im stating is my opinion. and there is an URL posted in here that fortifies it. | |
Dareb wrote:
the rate upon which people perceive is purely based on the mind.. the speed of movement is simply set, that cannot change.. if i look straight then look left i cant speed that up faster than humanly possible.. same with moving muscles. there is a set speed, the laws of physics are to blame for that limitation. But the laws of physics are what I'm getting at. The limitations on our eyes that make us perceive 8 frames per second are mostly physical. But the ability of the mind being able to speed up, or slow things around you CAN be developed. The one punch taking forever isn't drawing out what you see, though; it's affecting your perception of the motion you see from the changes already visible in 8-fps vision. You're able to pay attention to more of the details of what you've seen, but you're not getting any extra visual information, like a higher frame rate. It also seems to take forever because the number of decisions you're able to cycle through is greater in a short period of time than it would normally be; that affects perception of time. The change in blood and oxygen flow to the brain would also strongly affect perception of time. But the neurons in our retinas can only shuffle images along at a certain speed. | |
the sky is orange.. in many areas..
its called pollution. and sometimes it gets orange when the sun sets | |
If i were in mexico city and i said the sky was orange all the time.. i would be correct.. but id say its brown too.
| |
yes, but what im saying is that our eyes always process at a speed our minds cant normally comprehend
| |
Dareb wrote:
yet she has posted no urls based on this, until she does its only her opinion. The only URL anyone has posted is AbyssDragon, and his joins me in my position of debunking submiminal messages! This is what you always do... demand evidence, then ignore it. I'd post a hundred URLs, but I know you'd act like they weren't there and keep saying, "You're just stating opinion without proof." This is what you always do. I studied subliminal messages as part of both high school and university level psychology courses. All the books say the same thing. Of course, your response to this will be, "Universities foster conformity" or something about people and their comfort zones... but that's just another way to write off evidence. You demand other people have evidence to back up their opinions, but all you have as "proof" of your opinion is that you keep saying it's proven. And for what you're saying about people not wanting to believe the unbelievable... that is the single most false statement I've ever read. People want to believe. People need to believe. The average person on the street can make themselves believe anything in no time flat. In that regard, they're not much different than you. | |
Dareb wrote:
yes, but what im saying is that our eyes always process at a speed our minds cant normally comprehend You seem to be missing what I'm saying, which is that the eyes can't deliver more images than the 8 fps we see. Our eyes are a low-speed video camera and our brain compensates with the way it interprets motion. The bottleneck is the eye, not the brain. Lummox JR | |
Dareb wrote:
the sky is orange.. in many areas.. You're splitting hairs now. The daytime color of the sky is blue, all things being equal. Although you're speaking of special cases, that doesn't mean that's analogous to your thoughts on subliminal messages that some people are capable of seeing at almost 24 ot 60 frames per second (or that all are, but some are capable of perceiving at almost that rate and others aren't). Doesn't happen; can't happen. I think what you're trying to do here is use a false analogy; you're trying to say that if the sky can sometimes be orange, even though in most cases it isn't, then subliminal messages can work on some people. But these are two completely different things. The reasons subliminal messages fail are physiological and can't be overcome using human eyes. Lummox JR | |
the URL clearly states that people receive the stimuli without seeing it directly. Thats the whole idea i was trying to make, subliminal messages work, and i was always saying to an extent. i had never said that they WERENT limited or that EVERYONE is susceptible.. read it again you will be annoyed at the fact that i ignored nothing.
| |
to be absolutely downright nitpickingly irritatingly accute
the sky never has a direct permanent color.. its the sky, all colors are simply certain rays reflecting differently. The sky is translucent and clear. | |
So. what your saying is that what we perceive movement only because our brain fills in the blanks?
id agree with that but ive experienced otherwise | |
Dareb wrote:
So. what your saying is that what we perceive movement only because our brain fills in the blanks? That's precisely what I'm saying. Our brains do a great deal of filling in. We see in 8 frames per second; they're not precisely analagous to movie frames, though, because they're "smooth". Motion blur is also included in what we see. Based on this, the brain can extrapolate in a rather sophisticated manner. However, it's not capable of extracting a subliminally-implanted image from a set of frames moving too much faster than 8 fps, because the way the image changes is different. id agree with that but ive experienced otherwise But what you're referring to is the memory of your own perception. Lummox JR | |
how about we start trying to solve arguments differently from now on...
Consider anything another man says as fake.. even psychiatrists, consider what they say to have no basis or fact.. And base some thoughts on personal experiences, whether they be contradicting the psychiatrists teachers or previous news ads youve seen.. Then compare your personal experiences (especially when you alter your senses (through drugs or mental focus) to what psychiatrists, doctors and scientists say.. psychiatrists can be wrong, many well educated people used to think the world was flat.. some people still believe it. I dont know absolutely because Ive taken other peoples word for it, evidence or not, evidence can be incorrect. :D People close their minds simply because there is no evidence, this should not be done.. People should be cautious but also be open minded. | |
Everything is the color it is because of the way it reflects, refracts, or absorbs light... that's what color is... you might as well say that everything is colorless, and nothing has permanent color. You'd be red if I shined a red light on you.
| |
does it come on MTV? what?!
| |
They're "always" based on actual events? No, not really. Many urban legends are decidedly ridiculous in fact. Urban legends are usually based strictly on imagination. Because we observe crazy, strange coincidences in life all the time, humans have a certain "Wow, really?" response that can override our BS detectors if we're not careful. Urban legends are usually just outlandish enough to sound like they could be true.
I've found people will believe the most bizarre, unbelievable stuff they can find if given reason enough to do so. Even you have professed beliefs in what many would call unbelievable. (That's not to put down your beliefs or anything; it's just to state perspective.) I think a big reason people tend to believe the unbelievable is that when we hear something bizarre, it often sets off our problem-solving instincts to try to figure out how it's possible, or how someone might view their perspective on the world as internally consistent. We fill in the details, even if we do so skimpily in a way that wouldn't really work, not unlike the chain of events in a Wile E. Coyote cartoon.
Lummox JR