Back in March, I posted about a preacher in Ohio claiming to be one of the end time prophets that the Book of Revelations talks about.

Well, our friendly prophet has informed us that a nuclear weapon will go off in the United States, some time between June 1st, and July 16th.

I guess my big question is: if a nuclear weapon actually does go off in the U.S., will you be convinced this guy is legit?

In his favor, he is giving a very specific time frame, and a very large event.

Against his favor, some of his past predictions haven’t come true exactly as he has stated (nor exactly as the Bible has stated).  But there is a little bit of wiggle room if he really wanted to make the case.

Either way… this prediction is pretty substantial.  And we don’t have to wait too long to see if it’s true or not!  Place your bets.

I have a secret to tell everyone about psionics… others have figured it out already, but it’s time I let everyone know officially…

All techniques are bullshit.

You don’t need articles, you don’t need guidance, you don’t need answers, and you don’t need belief systems.  The only thing you need to do is look inwardly.

Now maybe that sounds like I’m the one bullshitting at this point :-).  Maybe I am! ;-D

Emotion is the name of the game.  Emotion is the currency of will power.  The only door that needs to be opened is understanding what you feel and why.  And the only way to do that is to look inside yourself.

The only benefit I can provide to you is simply putting into words what you already instinctively feel.  And maybe (if I’m lucky) I can also give you clues as to why you feel the way you do.  But ultimately - you don’t need me to do so.  It’s all inside yourself right now, at this very moment.

If I had malicious intent, I could play your emotions, and convince you that you need me.  This is what the vast majority of society does.  We go around, deceiving others into thinking they need us, and allow ourselves to be deceived into thinking we need something external to ourselves.  But ultimately, that’s not true.  There is nothing external to ourselves that we need.

Now some nit-pickers might argue that we need food, or oxygen.  No, we don’t.  Our bodies need food and oxygen.   Or maybe you’ll argue that we need love and attention.  We certainly need love - but must we look externally for love?  And we certainly don’t need attention - that’s your ego talking.  Be careful with how you define those words too - they’re certainly vague enough to cause confusion :-P.

The reason that all psionic techniques are bullshit is because the only purpose the techniques serve is to manipulate your emotions, in order to generate will power.  The techniques are 100% dependent on how well they can stir up emotions in your current belief system.  Techniques don’t produce results.  Emotions do.

Therefore, to become good at psionics, you must understand both what you are feeling, and why.  The better you understand yourself, the better you can recruit your emotions to serve your goals.  The only way to accomplish this is to dig inwardly.

Somewhere, under the layers of self-delusion and confusion, there exists a God-like being.  Stop searching outside of yourself.  Stop feeding your ego.  Will you passionately dig for truth, or will you be yet another victim of mind?  This is the greatest secret of psionics.

Ernesto e-mailed me a question:

“As of now, I have just finished reading your incomplete sequel to your first E-Book. It left me feeling empty as your new website does not talk about all of the “Psi” phenomenon discussed in your first. I wish you could publish a blog in which you finish expressing the ideas of your sequel. Do you still practice Telekinesis and Psi Balls? Do you have any new ideas about how they function with this new broader outlook?”

One reason why I don’t talk about some of my current beliefs is because they sound insane :-P. Part of me would rather quietly hold on to my bizarre beliefs, and work on them in private, than to express them for everyone to read and criticize. Keep in mind that a lot of my friends in real life and co-workers read this blog, and my name is attached to every post, so I feel an increased burden to tone things down :-P.

Another reason I don’t talk about my current understanding is because it’s not clear. I don’t see it clearly in my mind, so I have a hard time explaining it. I’ll start to write a sentence, but it won’t feel correct, so I’ll try again. And again. Ultimately, the problem is that I haven’t “figured it out” in my own head, so I won’t write about it.

But for this post - sure, I’ll give it a shot:

The biggest belief that I struggle with is that it is my understanding that reality is a dream of some sort. And I hate saying that because it’s very cliché, but I’ve yet to find any other explanation for what I’ve observed.

I’ve outlined this belief in past posts: Everything is Meaningful, and I am Probably Insane.

The basic idea is that the things we experience in reality have deeper meaning. Just like in dreams, where certain metaphors drive the experience, these same metaphors are also the driving forces for what we experience in reality.

The reason why I believe this is because I’ve been tracking it in my own life. I have these experiences which are too bizarre to be labeled “coincidence”. I see the metaphors, sometimes while the experience is happening, other times after the fact. I can predict what’s going to happen by looking at what the metaphor requires. A lot of the time I’m correct (though I will be honest, I am not 100% :-P).

Now of course, the same old arguments can be brought up, that I am biased because I’m looking for meaning, or that I’m a sucker, or whatever. Those arguments don’t really bother me, because I know I am very honest with myself, and that no one is more critical of my own thoughts than me. But, from an outsider’s perspective, they do seem like legitimate complaints. One reason I don’t like discussing my beliefs is because I’ll have to argue these worn out positions with people who don’t care as much as I do. I’ve put years of blood sweat and tears into my current beliefs, constantly challenging them from every perspective I can think of, testing reality, forcing myself to drop incorrect beliefs (at the expense of my ego and pride), etc. It’s very frustrating to argue with someone who is just trolling around because they have nothing better to do.

Now, the question that I’ve yet to answer, is how deep do these metaphors go? On the surface, it might seem like I’m just arguing in favor of basic psychology. I’ve observed these metaphors manifesting themselves in reality - not just in my own head - so at a minimum I’m talking about something more than psychology.

Right now I’m divided between three basic explanations:

#1. Reality itself is governed by these metaphors. Reality is a dream. Science is derived from this dream. Examples of this theory are cited in the above links: Everything is Meaningful, and I am Probably Insane.

#2. There is an underlying physical reality that is governed by science, but there is a mental reality governed by these metaphors that co-exists with this physical reality. This would mean that the metaphors are a result of the mind, but that we see manifestations of these metaphors in reality because of large scale unconscious telepathy. I talk about this idea here: Current Understanding of Intention Manifestation.

#3. Something I haven’t thought of.

If explanation #1 is correct, then reality is a free for all. There are no rules. Psionics, and all belief structures, are now easily explained. This sounds a little outlandish, so I tend to side with #2.

If explanation #2 is correct, then there is a very large question. How does this “mental reality” affect the physical reality? In this explanation, macro-psychokinesis is not explained.

Most likely, explanation #3 is correct. But since I’ve yet to think of it, I don’t know how it works :-).

Now, the next question might be: how can we determine which is correct? What would be a wonderful test that would clear a lot of this up?

Well, winning the lottery.

The lottery is void of mind. If this “mental reality” exists, then the lottery would not be a part of it. Therefore, intention manifestation wouldn’t work on the lottery (which is my experience). So, according to my experiences so far, #2 looks like it might be correct.

However, the problem with #2 is the question of macro-psychokinesis - i.e., how does the “mental reality” affect the physical reality? Is the physical reality deterministic? Where does free-will fit into this?

If #2 was completely correct, then you couldn’t use psychic abilities to win the lottery. Yet I have already succeeding in breaking the mathematical odds, and other psychics have won the lottery as well. See: Psychic Wins Lottery, I Won, I Won… Again.

So, #1 doesn’t feel correct, and my experiences back it up because I failed to win the lottery using intention manifestation.

But, #2 is also incorrect to some extent, because I have succeeded a little bit in winning the lottery, and others have done better than I have.

So, in conclusion…

In my last eBook, I talked about belief systems, and how we can succeed with psychic abilities using drastically different belief systems. The question that I had at the end of that eBook was basically: how can that be?

My answer to that question is that reality is some form of dream. I haven’t posted a lot on this subject because a lot of the revelations have been very personal as I inspect the metaphors driving my own life.

The next question is: to what extent do these metaphors affect reality? Either reality is a dream, and physical reality is derived from that dream (#1), OR there is a physical reality, and a mental reality, each governed by different rules (#2).

Judging from my experiences, and my intuition, I believe that #2 is probably more correct. However, then the question becomes: how is macro-psychokinesis possible? I.e., how does the mental reality affect the physical reality?

At that point, a good test is to attempt to win the lottery (something completely physical), using mental means (psychic abilities). This will get me lots of money, play into my own life metaphor, and help answer these glaring questions about how reality works.

Any questions?

Everyone knows I love a good story, and apocalypse is one of the best.

It seems a preacher is touring around, claiming he is one of the two prophets talked about in Book of Revelation.

For those that don’t know, the Book of Revelation is a Christian prophecy about how the world is going to end. It is extremely hard to read, because it’s very vague and riddled with metaphors. One thing the Book of Revelation does say is that there will be two prophets who do amazing things and spread the word about how awesome God is before Jesus comes back to Earth.

And apparently one of the prophets runs the website, http://the-end.com/.

If you enjoy religious prophecy talking about how awesome God is, and how much humans are going to get bitch-slapped by him, then check out the site.  And to tell you the truth, the author sounds like he actually knows what he’s talking about!

Recently I got into an argument about whether out of body experiences were real or not.  Whenever I get into such an argument, I always force myself to be as scientific and logical as possible.  This usually pisses skeptics off, because they are used to being the scientific guy, and the other person being the religious nut job.

I insisted that scientific evidence - if studied without bias - actually supports the theory that OBEs are real.  The skeptic was quick to jump on that claim.  He stated that OBEs (and their close cousin, near death experiences) were nothing more than a brain going crazy from the chemistry.  He presented me with recent scientific studies and articles as proof:

1. Scientists Induce OBEs in the Lab - A scientist used virtual reality goggles to trick the brain into thinking it was out of body.

2. Extreme Gravity Triggers OBEs/NDEs - A report stating that extreme G-Forces will induce an OBE because of the lack of blood flowing to the brain.

3. People have NDEs While Brain Dead

Seems a little daunting at first - I mean, how could I call myself a scientific guy, when there is scientific evidence that OBEs/NDEs aren’t real?

It turns out it was pretty easy:

1. Did the scientists really induce an OBE? No. The virtual reality goggles gave a creepy illusion of being out of body, but the OBE state of mind wasn’t actually induced. It’s an optical illusion. Just because you can fake it, doesn’t mean that the original isn’t real. I can create a fake video of me walking - that doesn’t mean I can’t walk.

2. All the report states is that lack of blood flowing to the brain can induce a near death experience. Well, that doesn’t really say either way whether the experience is real or not. It just says that when you do things that might kill you, you might have a near death experience. Which is actually pretty obvious :-P. I can induce a gun shot wound by shooting someone in the leg. Does that mean gun shot wounds aren’t real? Of course not.

3. The third piece of evidence was the best. How many of you read the page? Probably not that many. It turns out that article is in favor of NDEs being real. The person I was arguing against only read the title. I read the article.

I want to point out two things: 1. I am right about the evidence supporting OBEs being real.  I may make a separate post with a list of evidence in the future.  But more importantly, 2. skeptics are full of shit.

Skeptics hide behind citing work, and long articles, and scientific studies - but they can only get away with it because it’s very rare for them to actually be challenged.  It’s a game of intimidation - not one of pursuing truth.  The strategy is simple: argue the skeptical position, and when someone challenges you, just google the topic and paste a bunch of links to scientific documents.  No real effort required, and you look smart in the process, and feel good about bitch slapping some “moron”.

And for the most part, science has figured a lot of stuff out, so this strategy actually works really well.  For example, if you were to get in an argument about evolution vs. creationism, you could just google it, and find enough links on the internet that supports evolution, and throw them in the religious guys face.  You win.

But the reality of the situation is that science hasn’t figured everything out.  And when it comes to the subject of parapsychology, they are light years behind.

The down side to this is that you have to know your stuff if you want to challenge a skeptic.  The skeptic won’t put in the effort, so if you want to sound credible, you have to put in the effort for both of you.  It is an uphill battle, and I’ve yet to see a skeptic change their mind, but it’s an important battle because it teaches us that science is far from perfect, and suffers from the same fundamentalism as any other system of beliefs.

I was reading my past couple posts, and noticed that I’m ragging on intention manifestation quite a bit. I want to clarify exactly what I think intention manifestation is, and exactly what parts I take issue with.

First, for those that don’t know: the idea of intention manifestation is basically that if you think good thoughts, and follow your emotions, then you will attract good things. It became popular for a short time with the movie The Secret, especially once it got the Oprah bump. It’s a very empowering mindset, that states we attract whatever we think and feel about. If we think/feel bad things, then we attract bad things. If we think/feel good things - then we attract good things.

Using that, the next logical step is: whatever you want in your life, you can attract it, by thinking positive thoughts about it as though you have already attained it. Visualize. Feel. Get into it. And you’ll send out the attraction-vibes out to the universe, and then the universe will respond.

Ok.

Here is where I take issue: there is a distinct difference between attaining results, and explaining results. If you can attain something, that doesn’t necessarily mean you can explain how or why you were successful.

For example, I am really good at math. When I was in high school, I could learn math very easily, and I advanced quickly through the grades. Can I tell you WHY I’m good at math? I have some ideas - but really, I don’t know. I was born this way, I suppose. I really don’t know exactly why I’m good at math.

What if I was convinced that I’m good at math because I eat a lot of chicken? People might ask me for help in math, and I would instruct them: eat chicken! That’s what I do, and look at how good I am! I might conclude that there is a chemical in chicken that helps stimulate the part of the brain responsible for logic and math.

Now the idea is silly - but the point is very valid. Just because I’m successful at something doesn’t mean I can give a reason WHY I’m successful. Back to intention manifestation…

I believe that a lot of smart people started to notice that weird things happen in reality. “Coincidence” simply couldn’t explain the weird events in their lives. So they invented an explanation: intention manifestation. It’s a wonderful theory that can explain weird events without relying on the idea of “coincidence”.

I believe the theory is incorrect. When I say that, I’m NOT saying that people don’t experience weird things. I don’t believe the theory of “coincidence” is correct either. I DO believe we can manipulate reality in some metaphysical way, to produce results. I’ve seen that with my own eyes. But there is a difference between attaining the results, and explaining the results. I have attained the same results others have - I simply don’t like the explanation of intention manifestation.

I am not skeptical of the results - I’m skeptical of the explanation. I’m not saying, “Prove to me that intention manifestation can produce results!” Not at all. What I am saying is: “Prove to me that intention manifestation is the correct explanation for these results.”

-

I offer an alternate theory for explaining the weird results we see using intention manifestation techniques. My theory is that intention manifestation techniques are actually sending out a telepathic broadcast, that others pick up on subconsciously. These telepathic transmissions influence our decision making process.

Now, if you’ve been paying attention, your response might be: “Prove to me that telepathy is the correct explanation for these weird results.” I can’t offer that much proof, except personal experience as evidence.

I have been successful with intention manifestation when using it on things that humans affect. For example, I have been successful using intention manifestation on attracting females, helping out friends and family members, getting more play time in soccer, meeting new people, etc. Each successful application of intention manifestation has had a human mind in the equation that could be influenced telepathically to help me achieve my goal.

I have had extremely limited success with intention manifestation when using it on things that humans have very little affect on. For example, I have been mostly unsuccessful using intention manifestation to make red lights turn green, win scratch off lottery tickets, and win drawing-based lotteries.

This leads me to conclude that the normal explanation for intention manifestation must be incorrect. If it was as simple as letting the universe fulfill my desires, then I should have had equal success across the board. Instead, the human-related attempts were overly successful, and the hard-reality-related attempts were mostly failures. This leads me to believe that a human being is important in the equation, and that telepathy of some sort could then be involved.

-

In conclusion, when I attack the idea of intention manifestation, please understand that I am attacking the theory. Not the results. I completely agree that weird things happen, and that doing intention manifestation techniques can produce results. What I am attacking is the reason WHY the techniques produce results. I do not believe the universe is listening to us, granting us our wishes based on what we think and feel. My results are not congruent with that theory. Instead, I believe a better explanation is some form of group telepathy, where one person’s strong desires can influence a group of people subconsciously.

I love using the term “dangerous thoughts”.  It encapsulates precisely what I feel the need to describe.  A dangerous thought is a destructive thought that is tempting, but ultimately not true.

For example, racism.  Imagine if you grow up, and know a lot of black criminals.  A dangerous thought would be to think that black people are criminals.  From your perspective, it seems true - your experience has led you to believe it.  In reality, the thought is very destructive, and is ultimately not true.  Crime doesn’t originate from skin color, it originates from social conditions (and some other things probably).

Racism is an easy example though.  There are much more clever dangerous thoughts though.

What about intention manifestation?  I believe that intention manifestation is a dangerous thought.  This is why:

Intention manifestation says that: “You get what you think about, in accordance to the law of attraction.  If you aren’t getting what you want, then you need to change your thoughts.  If you’ve changed your thoughts, and you STILL aren’t getting what you want, then really you haven’t changed your thoughts… you are canceling yourself out with other thoughts.”

Why is this dangerous?  Well, first - it’s tempting.  We would all love to think that we can wish and get whatever we want.  It’s a really nice idea!  I want a genie too!  All I have to do is think the right thoughts (and listen to my emotions), and I’ll get what I want!  Hurray!

But there’s a much larger reason for why this thought is dangerous.  Any failure is a failure of the believer - never a failure of the theory.  Now, forget that we’re talking about intention manifestation for a second.  Imagine we are talking about some random theory about reality.  And imagine that this random theory states at the end, “If you observe this theory to be untrue, then this theory states that it is a result of you not believing entirely in this theory.”

If the theory is, in reality, untrue - how could you prove it?  What if my theory was, “Trees have learned to speak English.  If you cannot hear a tree speak English, it’s because you don’t believe they can, and trees can also read minds and become offended by people like you, so they refuse to talk to you.”

Now, of course trees can not speak English, nor are they capable of such highly accurate telepathy :-P.  But how can you disprove such a theory?  Any attempt to disprove it will result in “well, of course you never hear the trees - they won’t allow disbelievers to hear them.  You just proved the theory is true!”

You can see how ridiculous this is.  And hopefully you can also see why I label this sort of thinking as “dangerous”.  You can easily get caught in a loop - forcing yourself to believe something in order to test the theory.

I propose a new thought-suggestion:

Thought Suggestion 132: I will not attempt to test theories that require belief in the theory in order to be tested.  It is the fault of the theory for not providing a way for healthy thinkers to verify the theory without mandating a belief system.

You’ll notice that a lot of religion gets cut deep with this suggestion as well.  “If you observe Christianity to be untrue, then really you’re just being fooled by the Devil, and you must believe even more in Christianity in order to overcome the Devil.”

Ouch :-P.

Science is great.  And I’m not just saying that.

I used to consider myself very scientific… but really I never understood why science was correct.  I just knew that it was suppose to be the best system of discovery, so I should trust it.  It came down to trust.

When I discovered that psychic abilities were actually real, I felt like my trust was betrayed.  I felt like science had led me down a faulty path, and that path had turned out to be incorrect.  Science had failed me.  My trust was broken.  So I started to look towards other things to trust in.

Nothing really grabbed my eye, though I did try a lot of belief structures over the years.  I would always end up rejecting it because it wasn’t scientific enough :-).  Eventually I did settle somewhat on the idea of personal development.  It was scientific to a point, but there was a lot of intuition and psychic ideas in it as well.  Sounds perfect :-).

But lately, I’ve come to discover that the personal development mentality is flawed as well.  The flaws are very clever and creative, and very hard to detect.  Ideas like meta-beliefs can really screw your mind over… Intention manifestation is a very clever idea as well.  Ultimately, I do not believe in intention manifestation, and the things that are incorrect with the intention manifestation model can be detected by being scientific.

Which is why I feel that science is the best method for discovery.  At this point, it doesn’t feel like before - I don’t feel like I “trust” science, instead I feel like I’ve derived the scientific method by trial and error.  Every other belief system I’ve tried out has failed because there are gaping holes that are easily prevented using logic, reason, experimentation, and evidence.

I can disprove intention manifestation pretty quickly.  Let’s make an experiment.  Intend to win the lottery for a month straight.  And if you win, then intention manifestation has some evidence to support it.  And if you fail, then intention manifestation has some evidence to disprove it.

It just so happens I did that exact experiment :-).  I believed 100%.  I visualized.  I intended.  I put my heart into it.  I got my emotions going.  I did this religiously for a month.  And I got zero results.

Now before everyone flips a lid, let me make something clear: there is evidence that the process of intention manifestation actually does affect reality.  I’ve seen it with my own eyes, with different intentions.  However!  It is NOT as simple as “placing your order” with the universe.  The universe is not a genie.  Or at least - that’s not what the evidence suggests.

In the future I may delve further into the raw evidence, and look for alternate explanations.  However, the point of this post is to express the simple point of view that: science produces the most accurate observations about reality.

Period.

The best way to learn about reality is to actually play around with reality and see what happens.  I know this seems obvious.  But that’s not what a lot of us do.  A lot of us form our opinion of how reality should function - and then we play around with reality until we notice the results that confirm our opinion.

Or we play around with reality until we form an opinion on something… then we only do things to confirm our premature assumptions.  There is actually an amazing idea in psychology that looks into this phenomenon - it’s called confirmation bias.  I recommend reading about the experiments they did to observe this phenomenon - it’s very interesting.

-

It’s hard for me to express why science is important while in the same breath say that psychic abilities and intention manifestation do produce results.  But here I am :-P.

I think it’s important to separate skepticism from science.  The scientific method says nothing about skepticism.  The scientific method can be executed by a computer program.  But in the real world, we are humans, with emotions and opinions - and it’s very very hard to remain objective and judge the outcome of something fairly.  Especially once we start investing a lot of emotional energy into one outcome or another.  The skeptical person usually displays a heavy emotional tendency towards evading admittance of ignorance, among other obsessions.  But hey - no ones perfect :-P.

The scientific method - the idea that we need to objectively play around with reality to understand reality - and that we need to constantly change and evolve our understanding fairly and without bias - is a beautiful goal.  It might be impossible to be 100% scientific, but putting our focus on evidence, experimentation, playfulness, and objectivity (even if objectivity is inherently impossible), is the most rewarding belief structure for learning about reality.

(Sorry for the small break - I might be moving apartments and we canceled our internet service and cable in response.  Now I’m on a new connection…)

I reject New Age.

There was a period where I thought to myself, “Well now, let’s give New Age a chance.  After all, they are basically the only group that really delves into psychic abilities.”

Well, I gave New Age a chance.  And New Age failed.

It’s such bullshit.  For every ounce of usable information, there are 300 pounds of backwards illogical bullshit.

I re-read some of my New Age books I have on my bookshelf.  All I did was change my perspective from, “Wow this is interesting” to “How do they know this?”  Holy crap what a difference.

Let me give a quote from one of the books on my shelf (random book, random page):

Generally speaking, you are here to expand your consciousness, to learn the ways of creativity as directed through conscious thought.  The aware mind can change its beliefs, and so to a large extent it can alter its bodily experience.

[another random quote…]

Man is so highly verbal that he finds it difficult to understand that other species work with idea-complexes of a different kind, in which of course thought as you consider it is not involved.  But an equivalent exists; using an analogy, it is as if ideas are built up not like “mental” patterns structured through touch and scent - in other words, thinking, but within a framework entirely different and alien to you.

If you read the quotes from a perspective of, “How interesting this is!”, then everything is jim dandy.  But if you slightly change the perspective to, “How do we know this is true?”, then everything falls apart.  These quotes were taken from “The Nature of Personal Reality”, by Jane Roberts - usually considered somewhat of a classic in New Age culture.

After picking up these books after years, I almost feel offended reading them again.  Who the hell are you to tell me why I’m here?  Maybe I came here to shrink my consciousness, and destroy creativity?  I don’t believe that to be true, but you have no authority to tell me otherwise.

What does “expand your consciousness” even mean?!  Honestly.  “Learn the ways of creativity”?  Says who?  Heh.

And how the hell do you know how a cat thinks?  What makes you qualified to write about how other species think?  Have you DONE anything?  Other than sitting in a chair and spout out nonsense as it floats around in your mind…

I am now very cynical towards New Age (if you couldn’t tell :-P).  I went along for a ride, assuming it would eventually lead somewhere… but it doesn’t.  It’s a circle.  Just like any other belief structure.  Where is the real growth?  Where is the self-destruction?

It’s funny… if you have one requirement for a belief - that there needs to be evidence to support it - then 95% of the belief structures on Earth fail.  Even science and atheism fail quite a bit.

New Age is just another example of how creative human beings can fail at understanding the world around them.  Another one for the recycle bin…

“Mind is not Buddha. Learning is not the path.” -Nansen

So last Friday was a big day in my lottery world.  The drawing meant a lot for two main reasons: 1. I had been meditating on schedule for 3 weeks, putting a total of 4 hours and 13 minutes towards intending on winning.  2.  I was at $0 profit, so if I didn’t win anything, then I would officially be going into lottery-debt.

The results were: ZERO NUMBERS CORRECT.  Oi!

So that pissed me off :-).

I was bummed out all of Friday, and I was thinking to myself how crazy I was for trying to win the lottery, and how silly the whole goal is in general.  When I went to sleep on Friday, I was debating whether to keep the project going or not.

Saturday night I came to one important realization though.  The project isn’t silly :-).  I have won the lottery in the past, and my logic up until this point has been very strong.  I have evidence to support my beliefs - I’m not just plucking things out of the air.  I’ve beaten the odds.  I’ve proven modern statistics wrong already.  I accomplished 1 in 43,000 in the first 5 drawings.  So I still have another 42,947 losses before the statistics balance out.  Until that point arrives - I am beating the mathematical odds.

Sunday night I came to an even better realization.  I realize that I’ve been taking this project too seriously.  It used to be fun.  I used to be excited to just play and see the results.  But now when I check my numbers, I just prepare myself to be frustrated and pissed off.  So I want to take the next two weeks as a break (while waiting for the jackpot to reach $45mil), and just try to relax and not be so serious.

Also, I think that intention manifestation - as presented by popular sources - is bullshit.  I don’t think that those who teach the popular view of intention manifestation are purposely misleading people.  I think that we saw some strange shit, and we were too quick to try and explain it.  We wanted to show everyone the weird things we experienced, and when everyone else demanded an explanation, we felt obligated to give one.  I now believe the correct response should have been: “I don’t know how it works, but it’s pretty weird, huh?” :-).

We always have to be careful with our minds.  When we want to believe something we are in a very dangerous position of altering our perception in order to see what we want to see.  The second we let our guard down is the second a false belief sneaks in under the guise of truth.  Everything must be questioned.  The jeweler doesn’t appraise rocks in bulk… each one is put under the magnifying glass, and judged individually.  I feel as though intention manifestation is a box of rocks.  It’s time to pull out every idea - one by one - and figure out exactly where the gemstones are hiding.  And have fun in the process :-).