Trevor (Not Trevor) wrote:
>...
> >
> I can vouch fully for the 'reality' of lucid dreaming, and have no
> problem _whatsoever_ with the theory that it's behind most abduction
> cases, especially with the obvious pointers of 'being paralysed' and
> somehow waking up 'miraculously' back in bed.
> In article <3528F592.896 at micron.net>, m <mbackues at micron.net>
> artesticulated
> >chkcorea wrote:
> >>
> >> That sleep paralysis theory is crap, it doesn't hold water.
> >> There are people who are having totally conscious abductuctions.
> >
> >It appears to me that one reason for confusion with this, is that there
> >are multiple and related abduction phenomena, most of which take place
> >in dream states, and some which do not.
> >
> >In any case, scientific mumbo jumbo which has more to do with faith than
> >true science doesn't adequately explain the dream experiences and 'sleep
> >paralysis' either.
Everybody that I know of has lucid dreams once in while.
The whole point of being an intelligent dreamer is to
wake up and say, "that was a good dream"!!
There are several newsgroups who requested that the
"dreamers" do -not- post their "theories" to their
newsgroups. The only reason you are still allowed
in sci.physics is that it is good to know what
models of the universe do not model anything.
---
Jim
