Diana W. Pasulka - aliens & religion & other dimensions (JRE podcast #2091)

[Scaramanga]

Why? Why would you want to do that?

Because it's fascinating. Also, because the experience is subjective, the only way to know what other people are talking about is to have the experience oneself. I mean, this is the very basis of scientific 'replication'.

 

[Scaramanga]

My minor contribution to this discussion would be that some migraine sufferers, like me, occasional see what's called a "migraine aura," which is generally experienced as a zig-zaggy visual distortion across the field of vision, sometimes static, sometimes migratory, which appears whether you have your eyes open or not.

Amazingly I had my very first experience of migraine aura just a few days ago. Possibly a result of new blood pressure meds. A few notes...

1) It started off ( like yours ) as a sort of small C shaped shimmery area in the left field of vision.
2) Surprisingly, though it was in the left vision, if I closed either eye I could still see it in the active field of vision ( which would indicate it was brain induced and not the eye itself )
3) The C shaped area gradually extended in length and size, and became full of zig-zaggy lines. Actually quite beautiful...but also gave a sort of 'What the **** is this ?' scariness as I'd never experienced it before.
4) The pattern moved outwards towards the edge of my field of vision....and was at its most amazing right at the edge, where it was lots of flickering blue and red light. Then it disappeared.

I experienced it again 2 days later. Doc has taken me off the new meds after I mentioned it. This video gives a quite close simulation of what it looked like, though it was not quite as bright and the zig-zaggy area was itself still transparent.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVFIcF9lyk8

 

[Area 51/50]

We are using the words of many, many researchers while you have thrown your hat into the ring with a single one. That imbalance in support is not our fault, nor is it rectified in any way by either your vehemence or your sarcasm. DMT is a hallucinogen. True, and thus there is nothing surprising about those who use it having hallucinations. That should be the end of the story, but furthermore it is illegal in most places, and I find something unseemly about your rabid enthusiasm for it, which approaches the charge of "pushing drugs".

First of all, there is no "we" involving you as you've contributed literally nothing to this discussion. Secondly, no, there aren't "many, many researchers" being referenced. Landru referenced a drug facts sheet and a poorly written SEO article from rehab center. Neither rebutted anything I said. You are speaking confidently about something you know 0 about.

Yes, I get it. You find nothing about this unique or interesting.

Clarify please. This is the way I read this:

Gallimore believes that the places and beings encountered during DMT adventures have an independent existence - as Africa and Africans exist, even though I've never been there. But he's an agnostic as to their nature. In other words he's not a member of the Jacques Vallée/Invisible Collège inter-dimensional beings UFO school of thought... but doesn't rule that out.

He is agnostic on whether the experience involves external entities or everything is coming from within your own brain. His credentials are relevant because he makes it clear that we can't explain everything DMT does with our current understanding of neuroscience. Well, that's according to him. Apparently he's been debunked by the MB minds.

It's not really debatable that people interface with seemingly hyperintelligent entities that can control your perception in the space. You can read a million reports describing these experiences. What's debated is whether you're connecting with something external or not.

i dont think people are saying its not different. Obviously lsd is a "different" trip than mushrooms or mesc.
obviously if you freebase cocaine (smoke it) vs snorting or eating, you get a different high and different intensity. (anecdoctal from friends)

They absolutely were arguing that it's no different lol

other than maybe marijuana, (or heroin which i have no experience with) i dont know any drug that hits you in 5 mins and only lasts for 20. does heroin last for 20? maybe it does. Of course i never tried smoking mushrooms. so dmt sounds "different" in that respect.

I've never smoked weed or done heroin so IDK. You can't smoke mushrooms, either. Yes, you can get the full effect with zero previous experience and on a single hit. It might be a bit harsh for someone who has never vaped or smoked before, but vaping batteries are extremely efficient these days. With a proper dose, which is only 20-30mg vaporized, you're gone. But DMT does not hit you in 5 minutes. It hits you in 5 seconds. As soon as you exhale, buckle up because you're out of here.

It also doesn't show any pharmacological tolerance observed in a lab setting. This is interesting because the entities will absolutely tell you when you've had enough and even after doing a breakthrough dose, they'll flick you back into this reality and you'll wake up sober in under a minute or so. It's interesting to say the least.

No click violations deleted.

 

[Area 51/50]

Davis et al., ibid.

This would be a startling find in the general population.
However, this wasn't an experimental trial but a survey. Davis et al. only recruited DMT users who (1) reported having had a "breakthrough" experience and (2) reported encountering beings who "seemed to act autonomously".

Yes, because that's what you'd want. Obviously if someone didn't breakthrough, they are not going to have that experience A "breakthrough" is just the term used for the fully immersive experience where you're in Hyperspace. It's a necessary component to the kind of experience they were trying to measure. If someone didn't meet entities, same deal. Otherwise it'd be like measuring how many people witnessed a home run at the basketball game. The fact the experience happens at all is intriguing and isn't less so because the odds aren't 100%. Just my opinion, of course.

I'm also not sure what difference everyone seems to think surveys vs. trials makes as you are relying on the exact same self-reporting. The Spirit Molecule details firsthand reports with Strassman if you'd like to read the person relaying them in real time vs. posting online. Timmerman, who you quoted earlier, is another current researcher worth following. He's putting on the DMTx trials, where they're using Dr. Gallimore's method of dosing patients with a consistently fed intravenous line of DMT. During the trials in The Spirit Molecule, the entities told one of the subjects that we need to figure out a way to stay longer. Once we do that, they can teach us more (or something to that extent).

Someone who doesn't know their brain is misfiring may interpret the experience as a supernatural event. The uniformity of a particular type of aura across experiencers may cause people to believe they're experience similiar non-neurological events. My assumption would be that many of the drugs discussed in this thread cause similar neurological stimulation that the brain, as a whole, tries to interpret as a coherent experience, much like we try to enforce narratives on dreams.

There is no such thing as a "non-neurological event" regarding your perception.

 

[Ann K]

He is agnostic on whether the experience involves external entities or everything is coming from within your own brain. His credentials are relevant because he makes it clear that we can't explain everything DMT does with our current understanding of neuroscience. Well, that's according to him. Apparently he's been debunked by the MB minds.

It's not really debatable that people interface with seemingly hyperintelligent entities that can control your perception in the space. You can read a million reports describing these experiences. What's debated is whether you're connecting with something external or not.

If you take a chemical substance that affects your brain, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption that your experiences after that are products of your brain. We know that happens. It's that simple.

What is really off-the-wall strange is the notion that a person under the influence is interacting with genuine external entities, who just happen to come along after his brain has been affected, and that those entities are unseen by those who are sober. THAT is the extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, and anecdotes, no matter how numerous, do not provide that. All your illustrations of similar shapes don't do it, as we already know that migraines have the same type of visual manifestation as each other. All those posts show us is "this is the kind of thing you see on a DMT trip".

 

[Area 51/50]

If you take a chemical substance that affects your brain, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption that your experiences after that are products of your brain. We know that happens. It's that simple.

Nobody said it wasn't a reasonable assumption, Ann. Every single experience you're having is the product of your brain. But no, it's not that simple, given that we can't understand consciousness. But that's a conversation for a different crowd.

As I said, DMT is produced endogenously in our bodies. There is massive overlap between DMT experiences and alleged abduction experiences. I said I think they could be connected. Neither of these experiences require the entities being externally real. You then went on to invent several claims I did not make, rudely demanding I provide proof for them.

What is really off-the-wall strange is the notion that a person under the influence is interacting with genuine external entities, who just happen to come along after his brain has been affected, and that those entities are unseen by those who are sober. THAT is the extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, and anecdotes, no matter how numerous, do not provide that. All your illustrations of similar shapes don't do it, as we already know that migraines have the same type of visual manifestation as each other.

For the 40th time, I have never said there is proof of any of this, much less that I have it. I never said these are genuine external entities. We don't know. I introduced these ideas specifically stating as much, only relaying what people experience in their trips. I didn't realize I was going to have to convince a bunch of [people] DMT is not like a migraine headache or form constants or something. No, they don't have remotely close to the same visual manifestation as migraines, ffs. You think neuroscientists are studying this because it produces the visual phenomena of a damn migraine?

"illustrations of similar shapes"

Illustrations? Lady, they are not "illustrations" or shapes you see in your visual field, ffs. YOU ARE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE ENTIRELY, EXPERIENCING IT WITH THE SAME QUALIA OF EVERYDAY LIFE. Do you remember the whole abduction similarity? Yes, like that.

"All those posts show us is "this is the kind of thing you see on a DMT trip"."

Gee, good job, Ann. You're finally starting to get it! These are indeed the things people experience on a DMT trip!

 

[Haliate2854]

For the 40th time, I have never said there is proof of any of this, much less that I have it. I also never said these are genuine external entities.

Fantastic! Lets move on then, so how is Diana doing everybody? Hows she going?
What crazy stuff is that dodgy rapscallion up to haha?

 

[Ann K]

Lady, they are not "illustrations" or shapes you see in your visual field, ffs. YOU ARE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE ENTIRELY, EXPERIENCING IT WITH THE SAME QUALIA OF EVERYDAY LIFE.

The pictures you provided are illustrations. In everyday life, people see things in their visual field. What on earth are you getting so worked up about?

I never said these are genuine external entities. We don't know.

I think we do know. A statement like that suggests you're willing to give credence to a fantastical concept, and that is the thing for which I am asking you to give support. All you do is throw in more innuendo, then back-pedal when called on it. You've been doing that since you first appeared here on this thread:

There are plenty of reports you can find online where people describe figures like Ganesha or Vishnu, Anubis, or Quetzalcoatl without realizing who they are. Hinduism and Buddhism are especially prevalent with various motifs throughout. People also commonly see biblically accurate angels, despite having no religious beliefs or knowledge of them.

"Plenty of reports you can find on line"? "No religious beliefs or knowledge of them"? C'mon now, those are sweeping statements, yet all you give us are anecdotes.

 

[Haliate2854]

In everyday life, people see things in their visual field. What on earth are you getting so worked up about?

One of the latest posts had a bunch of reddit pictures of angels. I have a theory that the reason he is getting so worked up is because he thinks he can draw them better but he doesn't have the courage to venture outside his comfort zone and try. He should just follow his dreams, I wish I could give him a big hug, and a big smooch, and say "its okay little guy, I am sure the angels are out there somewhere, and you can probably draw them just as well" then behind his back to other people I would shake my head like "nah he cant though but don't tell him that" because I don't actually have much faith in him and why should I? Im not his parent.
^ That is petulance @Area 51/50 and everybody else was being perfectly polite to you, been watching the whole conversation and don't try and say any differently, been here the whole time.

 

[Area 51/50]

The pictures you provided are illustrations. In everyday life, people see things in their visual field. What on earth are you getting so worked up about?

I think we do know. A statement like that suggests you're willing to give credence to a fantastical concept, and that is the thing for which I am asking you to give support. All you do is throw in more innuendo, then back-pedal when called on it. You've been doing that since you first appeared here on this thread:

"Plenty of reports you can find on line"? "No religious beliefs or knowledge of them"? C'mon now, those are sweeping statements, yet all you give us are anecdotes.

I'm not sure how much more clear I can make something that shouldn't be confusing in the first place: anecdotes are all there ever were! That has never changed. The disconnect is that you began arguing with ideas I'd never suggested or typed out myself. It's not backpedaling when the claims you think I'm supposed to defend are solely products of your imagination.

You insinuated I was trying to prove the external reality of these beings. That has never been the case. You've imagined it. It's one of the many "claims" you've wrongly accused me of making, then admonished me for not validating. It's insane. If anybody is backpedaling, it's you, now suggesting I need to "give support" to my agnostic stance on this? Get real.

"Plenty of reports you can find on line"? "No religious beliefs or knowledge of them"? C'mon now, those are sweeping statements, yet all you give us are anecdotes.

I'm getting "worked up" because you've been extremely annoying in every interaction here. Please tell me what else you think I could provide you with?! What is this "proof" that you think should exist for the following statement:

People also commonly see biblically accurate angels, despite having no religious beliefs or knowledge of them.

When I am quite literally referencing anecdotes from my initial post, why do you think it's anything other than bizarre that you demand I produce scientific studies that exclude the online user reports that I'm referencing?

Yes, people provided drawings of entities from their experience that turned out to be biblical angels... and they posted them without knowing what they were at the time... that's exactly the kind of online report I described initially! Do you think I am going to beam their subjective experience into your head? How is this confusing? A normal response to these post would be, "Ah, interesting."

 

[FatPhil]

I'm also not sure what difference everyone seems to think surveys vs. trials makes as you are relying on the exact same self-reporting.

Self-selecting sample with definitiional confirmation bias. There is literally no opportunity for someone to not report the effect being looked for in a set of reports of the effect being looked for. It's the weakest form of scientific investigation, one basically avoided unless there's no alternative.

Some people got high, and said that kind of shit people who get high say when they're high.

That's all we've got.

You've presented no scientific claims of evidence that can be "debunked". You're just slowly derailing the thread by your continual loops and denials.

 

[Area 51/50]

You've presented no scientific claims of evidence that can be "debunked".

Wow! Exactly! Great job, folks. 6 pages of extreme pedantry for no reason at all. And now we're finally back to square one where we started. I never presented ANY scientific claims! I mentioned anecdotes that I found interesting. That's it! It's there in plain English. Like I said, these alleged scientific claims were invented by you guys, which you rudely demanded I back up with non-existent scientific citations. Even after I repeatedly pointed out that there aren't studies that'd validate this beyond self-reports, y'all kept demanding them. Truly bizarre. I even asked for clarification on wth you think I could find and got crickets.

None of you are knowledgeable enough on this topic to debunk any of it anyway, which is why you're all flailing so hard in anger. "WHAT? THERE'S A DRUG? I DON'T BELIEVE IT. BRING ME CITATIONS! AH-HA, IT'S THE SAME AS MUSHROOMS. NOTHING TO SEE HERE!" while overruling the world's leading experts with a sentence from a rehab center blog post. Get it together, folks.

My "continual loops and denials" are me trying to corral you all back into reality. I'm denying that I made any of these scientific claims you insinuate because I haven't. I deny I've insisted these entities are externally real because I haven't. And now you're acting like it was me derailing the discussion?

You've spent 6 pages chasing your tails, misrepresenting everything I posted. A definite odd bunch, you are. Anyway, I'll be going now. To the jellyfish!

 

[Haliate2854]

Yes I am sure, you on the other hand have been snarky and rude.

You've presented no scientific claims of evidence that can be "debunked". You're just slowly derailing the thread by your continual loops and denials.

I enlisted the help of AI image generation to create a depiction of Mr FatPhil standing up for all of our sanity. I hope it is accurate enough, you can thank Bing for being such a good artist.

I mentioned anecdotes that I found interesting. That's it! It's there in plain English. Like I said, these alleged scientific claims were invented by you guys, which you rudely demanded I back up.

Hang on a second, I could have sworn I remember seeing something. Oh yes, right next to the Posting Guidelines, at the top of the forum. The best part is that no matter where you go on this forum, this banner below is there looking right at you.

Considering this banner that follows every user to every part of this forum I think everybody was more than polite to you. I know conversation and discussion often go off track, everybody is guilty of it. But I think we have all heard enough about DMT aliens.
Where does it end by the way? Can I discuss Heroin Hitchhikers? You've never heard of them but maybe they are a type of alien entity that I see when I take heroin which I just love to do I now guess I don't know when that happened but here we are? See the problem here, in a thread about Diana, aliens and interdimensional travel?
You keep trying to make hallucinations you see on DMT = aliens.

My "continual loops and denials" are me trying to corral you all back into reality.

I think you have lost all privileges of the phrase "back into reality" as I am not confident you have a firm grasp of it.

You've spent 6 pages chasing your tails, misrepresenting everything I posted. A definite odd bunch, you are.

You have spent 6 pages annoying everybody with things you cant prove and that cant be debunked. Arguing the merits of DMT aliens is the definition of "chasing your tail".

Anyway, I'll be going now. To the jellyfish!

"To the Jellyfish"? What is that, is that the name of your local mental ward? Good luck, space cadet.

 

[jarlrmai]

I think this a context issue, Metabunk outside of "chit chat" isn't for posting anecdotes you find interesting, it's sort of assumed and required based on the rules of the forum that a claim you make should be a claim you think is real and that you should provide evidence for, if you think these are interesting but not real/supportable claims then you should probably make a post in chitchat.

 

[Area 51/50]

Anecdotal evidence is evidence. I provided evidence for every single "claim" of mine, including multiple studies. They are absolutely supportable claims. The issue is the wack pack here is conflating my claim of these anecdotes with me claiming there's verifiable proof of something they've experienced.

Claim: There are many online reports where users describe biblical angels without knowing what they are.

That's verifiable and I provided links. You're telling me we can only discuss experiences like this if I have an angel I can put on display? Why do you have a thread on aliens without evidence of them? Why have there been discussions on abductions prior? Why are you discussing "other dimensions?" Why are NDE's being discussed? Why aren't Scaramanga's posts receiving any of the same criticism? He made many claims that I refuted regarding the reported DMT experiences.

People report common experiences with "abductions." These are insanely similar to DMT experiences. Pointing that out shouldn't be blasphemy.

You keep trying to make hallucinations you see on DMT = aliens.

I'm saying these "aliens" in "abductions" could more likely = hallucinations, Einstein.

Firstly, it's hilarious how completely oblivious all of you are to DMT. Like I 100% guarantee all of you would apologize after if you experienced it. Secondly, if you don't entertain the idea of "abductions" being something people actually experience, what are we even discussing here? I absolutely think an endogenous DMT dump is a decent explanation given the overlap between the reported experiences. I'm sorry that you don't know enough to realize that's not a far-fetched connection.

 

[Haliate2854]

Why do you have a thread on Aliens without evidence of them? Why are you discussing "other dimensions?"

Because Diana discusses them, and she discusses aliens. YOU are not Diana, you are- you- I don't even know what you are, but you are not Diana.
Edited to add: The difference being when Diana says "I think DMT aliens are real" we all here note that down in this thread, and say "Diana believes in DMT aliens". You on the other hand want to endlessly discuss DMT aliens.

Anecdotal evidence is evidence. I provided evidence for every single "claim" of mine, including multiple studies.

For the love of God I thought you were leaving.

 

[Haliate2854]

People report common experiences with "abductions." These are insanely similar to DMT experiences. Pointing that out shouldn't be blasphemy.

You edited to add that, so I will reply and say I think we all will benefit from your ceasing of DMT Alien'ing. There are entire forums dedicated to drug experiences as many users have already pointed out many times.

 

[deirdre]

You insinuated I was trying to prove the external reality of these beings. That has never been the case.

to be fair, the way you have chosen to write certain sentences does sound like you are testifying to the external reality of these beings.

The misunderstandings of wording happens even when we are in groups of like-minded people, but if you're amongst non-believers or not-open-minded people these misunderstanding will be exaggerated. It's very hard to discuss metaphysical concepts, as i've said previously, because we're talking about realms that are image and feeling based. "Words" are alien.

since i've never myself heard of an abductee that took a hit of DMT, i assume your premise is that "whatever neurological processes account for DMT trip experiences could be the same neurological processes that account for abduction beliefs"?

That IS an interesting theory. I think readers who can parse that have already done so, so there's really no reason to argue on with those who are missing the point.
And don't be mad at accusations you are derailing something (people accuse me of that all the time, yet they never accuse their like-minded peers when they do the same! ). It takes two to tango..they could stop responding as easily as you could.

It also doesn't show any pharmacological tolerance observed in a lab setting. This is interesting because the entities will absolutely tell you when you've had enough and even after doing a breakthrough dose, they'll flick you back into this reality and you'll wake up sober in under a minute or so. It's interesting to say the least.

Jiminy Cricket does look a bit like a mini alien

fyi i've had similar experiences too, but minus the visual entity part. It is cool.

 

[Ann K]

Firstly, it's hilarious how completely oblivious all of you are to DMT. Like I 100% guarantee all of you would apologize after if you experienced it.

Are you pushing drugs again? I think you've been warned about that.