Heaven and Hell

[FritzDerochebrune]

Funny how you realize this obvious problem with my dream, but are blind to it with your own.

Dream-selfs don't exist. That's something completely different than dead relatives.

 

Except:

1) Any sexual content was secondary to the rest of it, there was a whole lot more that was either just random or completely innocent.

 

2) I didn't actually see it, I just got the book-style "and then the next morning...". Literally, my point of view shifted to reading a page from a book. So the sexual value was essentially zero. I only used the *censored* bit as a joke, the important part was being closer to her, not necessarily in bed.

Oh, so NOW it was a joke? It wasn't a funny one. The only thing funny is to see you turning everything how it suits you best. Well then, next time be honest about your dreams in stead of making things up. I didn't get it book-style, so my dream was completely different. You can't compare them.

 

Also note that Septim's "I cut off a piece at the end, but you got all the details you need." is a pretty strong hint that the removed part involved exactly the same thing.

Or he DID have that 'censored' bit that you 'joked' about.

 

But the point is that dream just represents my desires, not anything about the outside world (at least any hidden information from the outside world, like her feelings towards me). I saw what I did because it has been on my mind a lot lately, just like your grandfather (as well as a desire to be with him again) had been on your mind a lot after he died.

So let's see... That means I did desire to be with my grandpa, but not with my other grandpa and grandma when they died? My other grandpa died of cancer, after a long sickbed. Although I was glad he died (SO HE WOULDN'T SUFFER ANYMORE NOT BECAUSE I DIDN'T LIKE HIM), he has been on my mind all that time before and after his death. That would mean I would dream of him to, no? Well I didn't. And I have a perfect explenation for that: he didn't need to comfort me anymore. I knew he went to my relatives in Heaven.

 

Are you that emotionally damaged that you think only children want to be with the people they care about? I've lost three grandparents (the fourth died before I was born) without getting a chance to say goodbye. If there was any way I could talk to them, I would take it, and I'm sure they would feel the same way. If you don't understand this, you have some serious emotional problems, and probably aren't capable of forming a close relationship with anyone.

Well, there is a complete difference between a child of 12 years old and a grown up of 22 who doesn't believe in any religion, doesn't believe in spectral visists etc. Who would need the support of a dead relative?

 

It would be fairly easy for them to demonstrate that it's not just a random dream. Hidden information, for example, there are plenty of independently verifiable things that I don't know that they could tell me as proof of their identity (or at least that there is something supernatural going on). Returning every night would at least prove that it isn't just a random dream. And so on.

Dude, you can always say: my mind made that up. That's how normal dreams work. Your brains want to relax from working at day hours, so they begin mixing up information. You can always say your brain made it up. As of the returning dreams: do you really think ghosts any different than living people? They also don't have unlimited patience. And they can go to Heaven, wich would you prefer if you had the choice: Convince your stuborn grandchild that there is a Heaven, wich will take very long since he is hard to convince, or going there yourself, having fun and waiting until he shows up?

 

cya

 

Fritz

[Peregrine]

Dream-selfs don't exist. That's something completely different than dead relatives.

 

Wrong. I have been a character in my dreams countless times. I'm pretty sure I've even been a character from a third-person perspective, though I can't remember any exact occurances. My dream-self exists, and is not necessarily the same as my conscious self.

 

Oh, so NOW it was a joke? It wasn't a funny one. The only thing funny is to see you turning everything how it suits you best. Well then, next time be honest about your dreams in stead of making things up. I didn't get it book-style, so my dream was completely different. You can't compare them.

 

It's a joking reference to Septim's "I cut off a piece" implication that there was sex involved. And in my case, it's true, there was sex involved, I just didn't get to see it. So censor-worthy, but not obviously pornographic.

 

Or he DID have that 'censored' bit that you 'joked' about.

 

Since you're saying that's proof that MY dream is meaningless, it's also proof that his is meaningless. Thank you for arguing my case for me.

 

But the point is that dream just represents my desires, not anything about the outside world (at least any hidden information from the outside world, like her feelings towards me). I saw what I did because it has been on my mind a lot lately, just like your grandfather (as well as a desire to be with him again) had been on your mind a lot after he died.

So let's see... That means I did desire to be with my grandpa, but not with my other grandpa and grandma when they died? My other grandpa died of cancer, after a long sickbed. Although I was glad he died (SO HE WOULDN'T SUFFER ANYMORE NOT BECAUSE I DIDN'T LIKE HIM), he has been on my mind all that time before and after his death. That would mean I would dream of him to, no? Well I didn't. And I have a perfect explenation for that: he didn't need to comfort me anymore. I knew he went to my relatives in Heaven.

 

Repeat after me: dreams are RANDOM. They may include things that you think about while awake, or they may not. It's entirely random.

 

And since when are you talking about yourself? Are you admitting that Septim is also your account?

 

Are you that emotionally damaged that you think only children want to be with the people they care about? I've lost three grandparents (the fourth died before I was born) without getting a chance to say goodbye. If there was any way I could talk to them, I would take it, and I'm sure they would feel the same way. If you don't understand this, you have some serious emotional problems, and probably aren't capable of forming a close relationship with anyone.

Well, there is a complete difference between a child of 12 years old and a grown up of 22 who doesn't believe in any religion, doesn't believe in spectral visists etc. Who would need the support of a dead relative?

 

It's not about support, it's about wanting to have the dead person back. In my case, reinforced by the fact that I had unfinished business with them. If you had more than the emotional depth of a puddle, you would understand how someone could feel that way at ANY age. If someone you love dies and you don't want to see them again, you never loved them in the first place.

 

It would be fairly easy for them to demonstrate that it's not just a random dream. Hidden information, for example, there are plenty of independently verifiable things that I don't know that they could tell me as proof of their identity (or at least that there is something supernatural going on). Returning every night would at least prove that it isn't just a random dream. And so on.

Dude, you can always say: my mind made that up. That's how normal dreams work. Your brains want to relax from working at day hours, so they begin mixing up information. You can always say your brain made it up.

 

Funny how you realize "you can always say you made it up", but then you don't apply it consistently and say the same thing about the dreams you want to be true. And I gave examples of how they could prove themselves, hidden information being the main one. All it would take is one bit of independently verifiable information that I should not know to prove that there was something going on.

 

As of the returning dreams: do you really think ghosts any different than living people? They also don't have unlimited patience. And they can go to Heaven, wich would you prefer if you had the choice: Convince your stuborn grandchild that there is a Heaven, wich will take very long since he is hard to convince, or going there yourself, having fun and waiting until he shows up?

 

Think for a second. Most (if not all) religions make it clear that their afterlife is for eternity. If you're going to be in paradise for billions of years, why would you care about a few days? And by the standards of heaven, a billion years is the briefest moment.

[FritzDerochebrune]

Wrong. I have been a character in my dreams countless times. I'm pretty sure I've even been a character from a third-person perspective, though I can't remember any exact occurances. My dream-self exists, and is not necessarily the same as my conscious self.

Dude, that's something completely different. That's 3rd person dreaming, dream-selves, if they existed, are the connection between your dream and the real world. If you dreamt about that girl, she would see you in real life as a dream-self. However, since it isn't you personally, a dream-self can't be interacted with. Dream-selves are believed to be created by people who have paranormal powers in their dreams. However, since you don't fall under those people, you CERTAINLY don't have a dream-self. And I'm glad you don't.

As I said: 3rd person dreams are completely different than dream-selves. That's why I said they don't exist. However, 3rd person dreaming isn't a common thing either 'round these parts.

It's a joking reference to Septim's "I cut off a piece" implication that there was sex involved. And in my case, it's true, there was sex involved, I just didn't get to see it. So censor-worthy, but not obviously pornographic.

And now it wasn't a joke anymore? How often are you going to change your story, trying to make it all fit in your 'Great Statement'? And if you didn't get to see it, how did you know it happened?

Since you're saying that's proof that MY dream is meaningless, it's also proof that his is meaningless. hank you for arguing my case for me.

OR you are only taking bits of my arguement trying to find a way to win. As I clearly said before the dream could have been a message about Heaven and hell. Even with the censored part, it can still be a part of Heaven as he sees it. The Church didn't disprove these 'censored parts' until the 14th century, when heretic orders doing just those things tried to overthrow the Church, wich as you can see, failed miserably. The rule just was taken as a precaution. Nowadays it could be disbanded, but most Cristians don't want it.

Let's see: You had a 3rd person dream of you and a girl having censors.

Septim741 had a dream involving both misery and joy. Do these dreams look like each other? No. Stating your dream is nonsence does not mean his dream is nonsence.

Repeat after me: dreams are RANDOM. They may include things that you think about while awake, or they may not. It's entirely random.

So dreams are random? But visits of the dead aren't. And as you clearly stated before: Desires for a special person influence our dreams greatly. So they AREN'T RANDOM.

And since when are you talking about yourself? Are you admitting that Septim is also your account?

Since YOU and ninja_666 attack me for my dream, while I was stating his could be a vision.

 

It's not about support, it's about wanting to have the dead person back. In my case, reinforced by the fact that I had unfinished business with them. If you had more than the emotional depth of a puddle, you would understand how someone could feel that way at ANY age. If someone you love dies and you don't want to see them again, you never loved them in the first place.

Oh but it is about support. I don't know how it is where you live, but here we know we can't bring the dead back. Children need more support then adults. Emotional depth of a puddle? Well why don't you go all the way saying it's a dry puddle at once? I KNOW I WILL SEE THEM AGAIN IN HEAVEN, so I don't have to be sad about not seeing them again. Even more, my grandparents can be happy now, without pain, illnesses etc. That is why I am not sad about not seeing them again, because I WILL see them again. And I DID love them. But of course, you might not see them again.

Funny how you realize "you can always say you made it up", but then you don't apply it consistently and say the same thing about the dreams you want to be true. And I gave examples of how they could prove themselves, hidden information being the main one. All it would take is one bit of independently verifiable information that I should not know to prove that there was something going on.

The last time it was still Peregrine, not Fritz Derochebruen who constantly changed his story just as it fitted him best. Did anyone hack my account and place lots of nonsence or something?

Think for a second. Most (if not all) religions make it clear that their afterlife is for eternity. If you're going to be in paradise for billions of years, why would you care about a few days? And by the standards of heaven, a billion years is the briefest moment.

You might say that, but how would we experience a billion years in Heaven? Time flies if you're having fun.

Even more think about this: It has been proven that ghost are to weak to stay in this world for long. Only strong demonic ghost can stay here long. Only having people believe in them gives them power to stay here. That's why when there are ghosts haunting places, they do everything they can to make people believe. When priests do an exorcism, they must be sceptic: No ghost is haunting this place, I'm just here to bless this house,... If they would believe in a ghost haunting the house, they would just feed it and make it stronger.

That's another reason why your grandparents can't come to visit you. Since you have a faith-value of

-6000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 or something like that, their spirits would have been blasted into Heaven. A child, no matter if it has a religion or not, is always more vulnerable to seeing spirits, since it believes in more things like vampires (not to you, Peregrine: This does not mean vampires can visit them)

Now you'll probably respond: But there are no such things as ghosts and hauntings. It is all Cristian propaganda or just active immagination. Sience has proved there is no such thing as a ghost.

Then I'll say: wrong. first of all science hasn't proved or disproved the existance of paranormal things. The arguements against those things are mostly made out of fear, since science can't explain everything. Even if they aren't made out of fear, there is another explenation why science doesn't want to believe in ghosts. They can't explain it. The scientist thought they could explain everything. But they where dead wrong. Sometimes you notice small articles in the newspaper: Scientific explenation wrong.

 

cya

 

Fritz

[Karasuman]

"It has been proven that ghost are to weak to stay in this world for long. Only strong demonic ghost can stay here long."

 

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. What indisputable evidence do you have that proves ghosts exist? And even assuming ghosts do exist, what proof do you have that they are made stronger by one's belief in their existence? You're meandering from the point, making more and more wildly imaginative claims about ghosts, visions, and the supposedly proven things that inspire and empower them.

 

You haven't "won" anything, because you are basing your claims on ideas that almost no human could possibly hope to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. Do angels and devils exist? Possibly, but I wouldn't think to actually try telling someone that there's hard evidence that supports these things.

 

And if they did exist, in a dream world or otherwise, I certainly wouldn't be so bold and arrogant as to assume that I, as a human, know exactly what fuels them.

 

cya

 

 

 

Karasuman

[Peregrine]

Dude, that's something completely different. That's 3rd person dreaming, dream-selves, if they existed, are the connection between your dream and the real world. If you dreamt about that girl, she would see you in real life as a dream-self. However, since it isn't you personally, a dream-self can't be interacted with. Dream-selves are believed to be created by people who have paranormal powers in their dreams. However, since you don't fall under those people, you CERTAINLY don't have a dream-self. And I'm glad you don't.

As I said: 3rd person dreams are completely different than dream-selves. That's why I said they don't exist. However, 3rd person dreaming isn't a common thing either 'round these parts.

 

What the hell? Created by paranormal powers?

 

And what the hell? Can't be interacted with? I don't know about you, but I can interact witht he other characters in my dreams just fine. If those other characters represent real people, the real person of course has no knowledge of this. I don't know why you're taking this to mean some bizarre supernatural thing, I only used the term to mean "character in a dream", to make the dream part clear... since dream characters may be intended to represent a real person, but have significant differences.

 

And now it wasn't a joke anymore? How often are you going to change your story, trying to make it all fit in your 'Great Statement'? And if you didn't get to see it, how did you know it happened?

 

What the hell? The fact that you can nitpick my exact wording does not mean my story is changing.

 

And how I know it happened is very clear, if you would bother reading my posts: I saw it explicitly stated on a page from a book: "and they had sex".

 

OR you are only taking bits of my arguement trying to find a way to win. As I clearly said before the dream could have been a message about Heaven and hell. Even with the censored part, it can still be a part of Heaven as he sees it. The Church didn't disprove these 'censored parts' until the 14th century, when heretic orders doing just those things tried to overthrow the Church, wich as you can see, failed miserably. The rule just was taken as a precaution. Nowadays it could be disbanded, but most Cristians don't want it.

Let's see: You had a 3rd person dream of you and a girl having censors.

Septim741 had a dream involving both misery and joy. Do these dreams look like each other? No. Stating your dream is nonsence does not mean his dream is nonsence.

 

Both dreams had non-sexual content. I clearly stated that any sexual content was just a minor part of the overall dream. Thank you for demonstrating that you aren't even bothering to read what I say before commenting on it.

 

I had a dream involving various images and themes, including some sexual content.

Septim had a dream involving various images and themes, including some sexual content.

 

If you dismiss mine as simple fantasy, then you have to do the same to Septim's.

 

So dreams are random? But visits of the dead aren't. And as you clearly stated before: Desires for a special person influence our dreams greatly. So they AREN'T RANDOM.

 

Are you illiterate or something? I made it perfectly clear that while the selection of images for dreams is random, what images are available to be selected depends greatly on your conscious life. If you think a lot about someone/something while awake, it may or may not appear in your dreams, but it will do so essentially at random.

 

Oh but it is about support. I don't know how it is where you live, but here we know we can't bring the dead back. Children need more support then adults. Emotional depth of a puddle? Well why don't you go all the way saying it's a dry puddle at once? I KNOW I WILL SEE THEM AGAIN IN HEAVEN, so I don't have to be sad about not seeing them again. Even more, my grandparents can be happy now, without pain, illnesses etc. That is why I am not sad about not seeing them again, because I WILL see them again. And I DID love them. But of course, you might not see them again.

 

Are you honestly this emotionally damaged? ONE CONVERSATION with my grandparents would have priceless value. If you say otherwise about someone you claim to love, you don't love them.

 

And thank you for helping my argument even more. The fact that I don't believe in a heaven to see them again should make it more important for them to come see me. While you "know" that you will be able to resolve any lingering issues in heaven, I don't have that "knowledge". So we have two options:

 

1) My grandparents don't care about me enough to come back for a bit. I find this highly unlikely, and kind of insulting.

 

2) My grandparents are unable to come back, because the dead just stay dead. Since the dead returning is impossible, you didn't actually see your grandfather.

 

You might say that, but how would we experience a billion years in Heaven? Time flies if you're having fun.

 

I don't know how we would experience it. But I do know that no matter how much time you spend hanging around the real world, you miss nothing in heaven. You just don't understand the concept of INFINITY. To put this in mortal terms, imagine blinking an extra time before leaving to go do something you enjoy. To a person in heaven, spending an entire human lifetime on earth would be infinitely shorter.

Even more think about this: It has been proven that ghost are to weak to stay in this world for long. Only strong demonic ghost can stay here long. Only having people believe in them gives them power to stay here. That's why when there are ghosts haunting places, they do everything they can to make people believe. When priests do an exorcism, they must be sceptic: No ghost is haunting this place, I'm just here to bless this house,... If they would believe in a ghost haunting the house, they would just feed it and make it stronger.

 

Proven? You have got to be kidding. Please post links to credible scientific studies "proving" that ghosts even exist, never mind proving some difference between demonic ghosts and normal ghosts.

 

Of course you won't, because there isn't even the slightest bit of reliable empirical evidence for ghosts. When priests do an exorcism, the only thing at risk of getting stronger is the priest's bank account.

 

 

That's another reason why your grandparents can't come to visit you. Since you have a faith-value of

-6000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 or something like that, their spirits would have been blasted into Heaven. A child, no matter if it has a religion or not, is always more vulnerable to seeing spirits, since it believes in more things like vampires (not to you, Peregrine: This does not mean vampires can visit them)

 

Where are you getting this "rule" from? What is a "faith-value" and why does it produce a force on a spirit (and where is your proof that either even exists?)?

 

You know, I can invent nice-sounding stories too: the reason it wasn't really your grandfather is because the Dream Eater consumes all spirits that attempt to enter a living human's dream. Only the strongest atheist can disbelieve the Dream Eater hard enough to allow spirits into his dreams. Since you admit that you are not a devout atheist, your grandfather could enter your dream. Therefore your dream was nothing more than your imagination and wishful thinking.

 

 

Do you see how stupid this is? Deal with facts and reality, not pure speculation and wishful thinking. And stop presenting your wishful thinking as if it was solid fact.

Now you'll probably respond: But there are no such things as ghosts and hauntings. It is all Cristian propaganda or just active immagination. Sience has proved there is no such thing as a ghost.

 

Science has not proved there is no such thing as a ghost. It has only failed completely to find even the slightest bit of evidence for them. Basic rules of rational thinking take care of the rest, if there isn't even the slightest hint of proof that something exists, belief in it is irrational.

 

By your rules, science has also not proved there is no such thing as the Allmighty Hellbird. If you believe in ghosts simply because there is no counter-proof, you must also believe that I am god. And not just any god, but a very angry and sadistic god, who will eat your soul unless you give him all of your money. I eagerly await either the entire contents of your bank account, or your concession of defeat.

 

 

Then I'll say: wrong. first of all science hasn't proved or disproved the existance of paranormal things. The arguements against those things are mostly made out of fear, since science can't explain everything. Even if they aren't made out of fear, there is another explenation why science doesn't want to believe in ghosts. They can't explain it. The scientist thought they could explain everything. But they where dead wrong. Sometimes you notice small articles in the newspaper: Scientific explenation wrong.

 

No, the arguments agains them are made out of a complete lack of evidence. The idea that scientists hide the truth because they are too afraid of it is just stupid beyond belief. Not only am I not afraid of ghosts (why should I be?), but I would welcome proof of them for more practical reasons. If I somehow found proof of any supernatural entity, I would have fame and fortune beyond most people's dream.

 

Unfortunately for my private island mansion, the proof just doesn't exist.

[FritzDerochebrune]

What the hell? Created by paranormal powers?

And what the hell? Can't be interacted with? I don't know about you, but I can interact witht he other characters in my dreams just fine. If those other characters represent real people, the real person of course has no knowledge of this. I don't know why you're taking this to mean some bizarre supernatural thing, I only used the term to mean "character in a dream", to make the dream part clear... since dream characters may be intended to represent a real person, but have significant differences.

 

Read. Think. Just try to do that and probably you'll live to get old. Dream-selves are here in the real world. They look like us, act like us, and if powerfull, even smell like us. If you dream about your girlfriend and you where paranormal, there would be a chance she would be visited by an aperation of you in REAL-LIFE. Nobody knows how it exactly works, but I think it isn't real. For the last time: Dream-selves are not persons in your dream, if it is yourself or somebody else, it is no dream-selve.

What the hell? The fact that you can nitpick my exact wording does not mean my story is changing.

1 you say: I had *censored with her.

2 you say: I didn't have *censored with her.

3 you say: I had *censored with her but I didn't see it.

And how I know it happened is very clear, if you would bother reading my posts: I saw it explicitly stated on a page from a book: "and they had sex".

Nice story. But let me get this straight: it was a realistic dream, in book-form? How can you compare my dream, where I'm interaction in 1st person with others with your 3rd person 'realistic' book-dream? That's insulting.

Both dreams had non-sexual content. I clearly stated that any sexual content was just a minor part of the overall dream. Thank you for demonstrating that you aren't even bothering to read what I say before commenting on it.

I had a dream involving various images and themes, including some sexual content.

Septim had a dream involving various images and themes, including some sexual content.

 

If you dismiss mine as simple fantasy, then you have to do the same to Septim's.

Septim had a dream about misery and fun, with a huge variety of environements. First a dark side, then a light one. And as he said: He saw the girl for the first time.

 

You had a dream about you being in a book and having fun with your girlfriend. I don't see why dismissing your dream states the same as dismissing Septim's. As I said: They are completely different.

 

 

For the rest, please see my next post. I quoted a bit to much :D

[FritzDerochebrune]

Are you illiterate or something? I made it perfectly clear that while the selection of images for dreams is random, what images are available to be selected depends greatly on your conscious life. If you think a lot about someone/something while awake, it may or may not appear in your dreams, but it will do so essentially at random.

You said dreams are random. This means the entire dream is random. Not just that bit and that bit. And it has been proven several years ago: you dream about things you don't think about. Mostly things you have back in you mind and probably don't even know about anymore.

 

Are you honestly this emotionally damaged? ONE CONVERSATION with my grandparents would have priceless value. If you say otherwise about someone you claim to love, you don't love them.

We, anyone who has faith, can talk to his or her grandparents or other desceased. You only fail to get that, like you fail to get the point of religion.

And thank you for helping my argument even more. The fact that I don't believe in a heaven to see them again should make it more important for them to come see me. While you "know" that you will be able to resolve any lingering issues in heaven, I don't have that "knowledge". So we have two options:

No they shouldn't. If someone is a lost sheep, the Shepard calls for it. If it doesn't respond, it is left for the wolves.

1) My grandparents don't care about me enough to come back for a bit. I find this highly unlikely, and kind of insulting.

The only thing insulting are your answers. At several occasions you use my answers for your goal, just because you are unwillingly to get the point. I would understand why your grandparents wouldnt come.

2) My grandparents are unable to come back, because the dead just stay dead. Since the dead returning is impossible, you didn't actually see your grandfather.

My explenation at your first point is more plauslible.

I don't know how we would experience it. But I do know that no matter how much time you spend hanging around the real world, you miss nothing in heaven. You just don't understand the concept of INFINITY. To put this in mortal terms, imagine blinking an extra time before leaving to go do something you enjoy. To a person in heaven, spending an entire human lifetime on earth would be infinitely shorter.

Well, I'm going to expereince it. You won't. You can't say how it is in Heaven, since you don't believe in it. If you really think so about religion, there are three options for you (based upon beliefs of different religions)

 

1 U die and go to hell

2 U die and vanish as if you never where, because you didn't have the faith to go to Heaven.

3 U die and will be reincarnated as a lesser animal

 

Still not done? :glare: one more post, I'm sorry everybody, but I can't reply otherwise

[FritzDerochebrune]

And here's part 3 of me reply :blush:

 

Proven? You have got to be kidding. Please post links to credible scientific studies "proving" that ghosts even exist, never mind proving some difference between demonic ghosts and normal ghosts.

Not the smartest at home are you? I've stated: There is no evidence of hauntings being real or not real.

Of course you won't, because there isn't even the slightest bit of reliable empirical evidence for ghosts. When priests do an exorcism, the only thing at risk of getting stronger is the priest's bank account.

They don't get anything for an exorscism, or you should consult someone who act like he is a priest. Then you can buy yourself of.

 

Where are you getting this "rule" from? What is a "faith-value" and why does it produce a force on a spirit (and where is your proof that either even exists?)?

Every person has a negative or positive value. Although you can't mesure it, I tried to explain easier for u, since u allways read half of me post and try to use it in ur defence, wich is, in any case, as loos as the wireless-controller of the PS3. Positive values often get more paranormal effects. Negative ones, like you, will not.

You know, I can invent nice-sounding stories too: the reason it wasn't really your grandfather is because the Dream Eater consumes all spirits that attempt to enter a living human's dream. Only the strongest atheist can disbelieve the Dream Eater hard enough to allow spirits into his dreams. Since you admit that you are not a devout atheist, your grandfather could enter your dream. Therefore your dream was nothing more than your imagination and wishful thinking.

I've lost the last bit of respect (wich wasn't very big anyway.) Have you ever particepated in a real debate? If you did, you would know you would have lost at the beginning. Changing your story from sexual to non-sexual to half-sexual isn't a strong point in your defence. I can go on and on, for example ur childish behavior (ur story above is an example)

Do you see how stupid this is? Deal with facts and reality, not pure speculation and wishful thinking. And stop presenting your wishful thinking as if it was solid fact.

My statements do rely on facts and reality. Only not your reality. My reality, and that of my fellow believers, states you go to Heaven if your a good person.

Science has not proved there is no such thing as a ghost. It has only failed completely to find even the slightest bit of evidence for them. Basic rules of rational thinking take care of the rest, if there isn't even the slightest hint of proof that something exists, belief in it is irrational.

 

By your rules, science has also not proved there is no such thing as the Allmighty Hellbird. If you believe in ghosts simply because there is no counter-proof, you must also believe that I am god. And not just any god, but a very angry and sadistic god, who will eat your soul unless you give him all of your money. I eagerly await either the entire contents of your bank account, or your concession of defeat.

And three you go again. You never fail to break the simple, unwritten rulse of a debate do you? I stated science hasent proved there are such things as ghost, but also hasn't disproved them. And your story of your bird is quite threatening. GIVING YOU ALL MY MONEY OR ADMITTING DEFEAT? Another sign of weakness. Although I did not see it at first, Hoots_07 was right. As you saw your defence can't beat my defence, you just start joking with it.

 

Well, since you started, I'll add a nice story myself. Somehow the man who plays the leading part reminds me of you. It plays in Berlin, 1945. There, an old man under influence of drugs commanded armies that no longer existed. He would not give up a lost fight, and commited suicide rather then facing the victor.

 

No, the arguments agains them are made out of a complete lack of evidence. The idea that scientists hide the truth because they are too afraid of it is just stupid beyond belief. Not only am I not afraid of ghosts (why should I be?), but I would welcome proof of them for more practical reasons. If I somehow found proof of any supernatural entity, I would have fame and fortune beyond most people's dream.

Hundreds of scientist try to disprove the existence of ghost, but they can't. Why would they want to do that? Simple, so people don't lose faith in science. They are scared for that, since they get their paycheck from the governement. If people don't believe in science anymore, no more payday for them.

 

Unfortunately for my private island mansion, the proof just doesn't exist.

Try placing that in one of ur 3rd-person book dreams. It's as close as you'll ever get.

 

cya

 

Fritz

[Peregrine]

Read. Think. Just try to do that and probably you'll live to get old. Dream-selves are here in the real world. They look like us, act like us, and if powerfull, even smell like us. If you dream about your girlfriend and you where paranormal, there would be a chance she would be visited by an aperation of you in REAL-LIFE. Nobody knows how it exactly works, but I think it isn't real. For the last time: Dream-selves are not persons in your dream, if it is yourself or somebody else, it is no dream-selve.

 

Again you state your mythology as fact. Show me this proof of your mystical "dream-selves", or stop talking about it.

 

And once again: I did not use "dream-self" to refer to your bizarre paranormal apparitions or whatever. I used it for the simple purpose of making a clear difference between a real person and a character in a dream. A "dream-self" by that meaning is a dream character, whether of yourself or another person, that is "intended" to be a real person, but may or may not actually act/look/etc like them. For example, my dream-self that was an elite mercenary soldier in a recent dream, and did various un-Peregrine-like actions.

 

There is no supernatural meaning to the term. All it means is that when I say "Peregrine" or whatever, I am refering to "Peregrine, the character in my dream" and not "Peregrine, the conscious person typing this reply to you."

 

And how I know it happened is very clear, if you would bother reading my posts: I saw it explicitly stated on a page from a book: "and they had sex".

Nice story. But let me get this straight: it was a realistic dream, in book-form? How can you compare my dream, where I'm interaction in 1st person with others with your 3rd person 'realistic' book-dream? That's insulting.

 

Welcome to the world of dreams: they don't make sense. I stated very clearly that my perspective changed. For most of it, it was simple first-person and realistic, involving interaction with both the girl and other people. Then there was a perspective jump to reading something from a book, then more first-person stuff but in a different situation.

 

Septim had a dream about misery and fun, with a huge variety of environements. First a dark side, then a light one. And as he said: He saw the girl for the first time.

 

You had a dream about you being in a book and having fun with your girlfriend. I don't see why dismissing your dream states the same as dismissing Septim's. As I said: They are completely different.

 

1) She's not my girlfriend, only someone I wish was my girlfriend.

 

2) Mine included just as much non-sexual content as Septim's, as I have clearly stated.

 

3) You're dismissing mine just because the sexual element appears to be simple fantasy to you. Because the fantasy part was involved, the rest of the dream has no meaning. Well, the same applies to Septim's, if one element of a dream makes you discard the rest, his is meaningless.

[Peregrine]

Not the smartest at home are you? I've stated: There is no evidence of hauntings being real or not real.

 

Fine. THEN STOP TALKING ABOUT THEM AS IF THEY WERE PROVEN FACTS.

 

They don't get anything for an exorscism, or you should consult someone who act like he is a priest. Then you can buy yourself of.

 

Sure, nobody has ever used excorcisms or other supernatural stories as a method of collecting money from the stupid...

Every person has a negative or positive value. Although you can't mesure it, I tried to explain easier for u, since u allways read half of me post and try to use it in ur defence, wich is, in any case, as loos as the wireless-controller of the PS3. Positive values often get more paranormal effects. Negative ones, like you, will not.

 

Facts. Evidence. Post them.

 

But I know you can't. You're just making this stuff up, or quoting someone else who did. Forget positive and negative values, there isn't even the slightest bit of evidence for the paranormal effects.

 

I've lost the last bit of respect (wich wasn't very big anyway.) Have you ever particepated in a real debate? If you did, you would know you would have lost at the beginning. Changing your story from sexual to non-sexual to half-sexual isn't a strong point in your defence. I can go on and on, for example ur childish behavior (ur story above is an example)

 

I didn't change the ****ING STORY. You just nitpick at a word change and convince yourself that I'm changing it.

 

And of course I just made up the story above. That's the whole point. But it's just as plausible as your explanations. If you can state made-up (and completely lacking in factual evidence) supernatural explanations as fact, so can I.

 

My statements do rely on facts and reality. Only not your reality. My reality, and that of my fellow believers, states you go to Heaven if your a good person.

 

You have a strange definition of "fact". There is no empirical evidence for the existence of a heaven.

 

And three you go again. You never fail to break the simple, unwritten rulse of a debate do you? I stated science hasent proved there are such things as ghost, but also hasn't disproved them. And your story of your bird is quite threatening. GIVING YOU ALL MY MONEY OR ADMITTING DEFEAT? Another sign of weakness. Although I did not see it at first, Hoots_07 was right. As you saw your defence can't beat my defence, you just start joking with it.

 

Again you miss the point completely. Both your ghosts and my Hellbird story are complete fiction. Both lack even the slightest supporting evidence, but both are stated as un-arguable fact.

 

Your entire justification for belief in ghosts is that there is no counter-proof. If you have any evidence for that belief, you have refused to post it, instead just saying that I can't prove you wrong. If that is a good enough reason to believe in something, well, nobody has proven my Hellbird story wrong. If you refuse to believe it (and therefore send me all your money), you are admitting that your beliefs are arbitrary and not logically consistent.

Hundreds of scientist try to disprove the existence of ghost, but they can't. Why would they want to do that? Simple, so people don't lose faith in science. They are scared for that, since they get their paycheck from the governement. If people don't believe in science anymore, no more payday for them.

 

Again with the complete ignorance of science. Proving a negative is impossible by definition. No legitimate scientist would even try, since it's a basic concept that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

However, what science has done is demonstrate that there is no proof for ghosts. With a complete absence of proof for something, it is irrational to believe in it. If you can't tell the difference between active disbelief and lack of belief, that's your problem, not mine.