Just one more idea about the subconscious thing to the comment that made that: it's not that, nor fear, nor other emotion.
It's a distinct cognitive process, and impression. First I percieve the signal, it feels like an energetic pressure (to those who can sense the energy of other people... The energetic pressure sensation is like that but not exactly the same). Then I can look into it to resolve details, which involves interpretation.
I can also go looking for data in a given place or time, instead of just waiting to percieve a signal. While some of my previous reports on Twitter, including involving an Indonesian air crash, were made after actively looking for signals, most of my recent work on Twitter has been receptive to signals rather than looking for them.
This whole process (sensing a signal or looking for one, connecting to and looking into the data, interpreting the information, then recording what I see and so on) is completely distinct from any subconscious thing, or fear, except in the way I'll outline just now. Because at the same time when I'm looking into the data, I will percieve many things: including emotions, sounds, visuals, smells, sensations, ideas (and so on) and the interpretation of the signal and these data also depends in part on my subconscious, in terms of my wide accrued experience giving me a way to interpret a wide variety of things... So the subconscious is there, of course, just like in any other thing that people do, but the role it plays seems mostly interpretive, and the signal certainly doesn't arise in the subconscious at all. So that's to clarify some things, and I think these are very important misunderstandings and it's important to get it right.
Basically, yeah. I think it's pretty clear what I'm claiming. Just check out the Twitter, man. Hopefully you'll be more open minded than the rest of them. :)
How do you know I'm deluded though? You don't. But I know you're deluded because you are pretending that this reality doesn't exist.
You're saying because you, grkvlt, can't understand how it can be therefore it doesn't exist. That's the delusion. So you can't say I'm deluded because you're coming from a deluded point of view. I am not deluded. I look at the data and I go okay it works. you don't look at the data. or if you do you don't allow yourself to face that reality. Because you don't understand it or you're scared of it. So you pretend. That's the delusion.
And anyway who's more deluded and out of touch with reality: someone who can actually see the future and see what's coming up or someone who can't? the deluded one is you. You're clearly just scared and projecting here.
You're just jealous I can do this, and you can't. So... well thought points that address everything relevant, that's "schizo ramblings" to you? Then it's your mind that's the problem, not what I write. The visions you get just mean you're crazy, but mine are actually of the future. Drives you nuts, doesn't it?
So you're not going to be mean? How nice, should I be grateful to you, for your attempts at abuse then? is that how you'd like it? Is that what you need?
> Your posts sound like schizo ramblings so I'm not going to be mean in case you are actually disabled.
So "schizo ramblings" that's you not being mean, right? Well you must be projecting. Maybe get some help to deal with how disabled you are, before trying to pretend other people are schizophrenic like you, that's just your desperate attempt to make yourself feel your pathetic nothing of a life is not completely without power.
Oh, I should introspect because you're too narrow minded to think it's possible, so you got to pretend it's "wrong" and "deluded" but you're "correct" in seeing this thing that you have no knowledge of at all, but I deeply know my way around, and you're going to tell me how it is?
> also, in no way did i suggest you are a lesser or inferior person, you are just wrong....that you are not delusional... should maybe be the thing to introspect on...
But I'm not your lesser, and I'm not inferior to you, right, you just know so much more than me about my own thing? Oh, I see. I see, sure. Well you're the crazy one then, if you think you know so much about something you know nothing about, and you think you can talk down to someone about their thing, when you know nothing about it and you're just scared, you can't understand, and you hate not understanding stuff don't you. Because then everyone's gonna pretend you're little weak and crazy. Without your knowledge, you're nothing, right? So you just gotta keep study study study...but all that work--you're still so narrow-minded that you see something new and you just want to pretend you already know it's impossible.
Well I don't know how you're gonna get around that arrogance that's stopping you seeing the reality. I feel sorry for you, man. But when you pretend you're right and try to hurt people with that surety, it's going to come crashing back on you, like now.
Thanks for showing yourself so clearly. At least you don't hide behind anonymity like others who same the same. I got another prediction for you: in the future in a moment of rare introspection, you will deeply regret you made this comment, and feel shame for how it reflected upon you.
"Schizo ramblings", huh? well how do you explain how I can get results?
You're the only schizo... Splitting off your reality from what you're too afraid to face.
Disabled? I'm more like super abled. You're the only disabled.
Also, you must be commenting in response to my deleted sentence: 'downvotes are signals of quality?' Is that not not correct?
I get how that seemed condescending because it could come across as arrogant: as in, "I do not need to care what these downvotes mean."
Before you replied, I thought about that sentence some more and I thought, 'Actually, it is not so optimal to leave it there.' Then I deleted it. Methinks you must have replied just after that...
Even thus so, your comment was unwarrantedly and very rude, do you not think? Perchance you know not of the difficulty nor courage it took to post all these things publicly...
But underneath that for you... I detect you are trying to help me, although if you will permit me to offer my feedback and to hear it, I do possibly think your delivery could be better.
One reason I think you are trying to help me is because you are essentially saying, "Well, what do you expect, if you say it like that here?" So, I appreciate that empathy which prompted you to care enough to reply but, I just wonder, what more is going on for you than the disbelief? Why even try to be helpful and if you are going to be helpful, why deliver it in that way?
It is kind of weird, do you not think? Perchance you do not expect anyone will appreciate your assistance so you prefer to fall from the first floor than from the penthouse and aim low with a sort-of rude response, rather than something genuinely or generously helpful. I do not know. Am curious. Please tell me more about any of this if you want, thank you.
A reason I am generous here is because I can tell there is more going on for you than just disbelief and rudeness.
But is not the real condescending comment the one that is so unwarrantedly critical of mine, pays it no merit, and misrepresents it to pretend it is less than it is? It does seem grossly condescending and arrogant.
Thank you for the "amazing." But the rest of it: that is a misrepresentation. I am not saying You must Believe. I am saying some data is on Twitter and you can look at it. It seems some people do not do that. It seems some people cannot see past their confirmation bias.
I am saying remain open, remain curious, do not prosecute a confirmation bias, especially not on another, do not think that justifies you to be cruel to another. I posted my precognitive data on the Tonga event. There is nothing there that warrants cruelty. I am saying be kind tolerant and charitable in your responses. Do not assume the world must conform to your own understanding or belief of it.
There is much in the world which exists beyond your understanding. And that is okay. I do not understand how predata works. I do not understand any 'mechanism' for it. But I know how to do it. I am saying ignorance gives you no right to cruelty. Perchance it is that which helps people to so much fear and anger about this. There is a slice of the world which they know naught about, and within their existing beliefs they cannot conceive its existence, so they attack the idea and anyone suggesting it with all their cruelty. Perchance that explains but not excuses the cruelty: the wrath of the stubbornly ignorant?
That is an extremely rude misrepresentation and attempt to pretend I am less than I am.
That is an unkind, cruel way to react simply because you do not believe it is possible. Rather than maintaining curiosity and being open that there is something new you could learn in the data, you aggressively perpetrate a confirmation bias, and try to pretend someone is less than they are, and try to hurt them, and think it is okay to do that. It is very wrong.
The only delusion here is yours: that reality must conform to your current belief of it. And arrogant that nothing outside your necessarily limited understanding must exist. And wrong to perpetrate your own chosen closed-mindedness on others with cruelty.
I remain a little skeptical and in the past have considered that it is all a delusion. And if so, good, I would give it up. I am unattached. But the data convinces me otherwise. It is not a delusion. I am sure. I too have no explanation for how it is possible.
It is you who is deluded to be so arrogant and you who is the only one under a delusion, which includes your believing that the cruelty in your comment is either appropriate or warranted. Perhaps speak to a mental health professional rather than making these choices and posting on hn?
You may archive it in various ways. Followers may be a mixed blessing. Toxic hurtful people I would block to protect myself. It is a public archive for me. If people appreciate that, then that is great.
For many years I was reluctant to tell people about what I could do. The misrepresenting and cruelness hurts. And I did not feel strong enough before to share that. I was afraid that the mean words of another my damage my belief and my ability. Although I have been skeptical I know it is also necessary for me to believe. I wanted to regulate my emotions and thoughts about this ability as I went through the process of development. Prematurely sharing and exposing myself to the cruelty and misrepresentation of others, was something I was afraid would harmfully interfere with my ability to regulate, on my own terms, my emotions and thoughts about this, and I was scared it would also impact my development of my abilities.
So I carefully shared at each stage. Posting here today was another step for me. The significance of the Tonga event and the clarity of my predata on it is a milestone for me.
I knew something huge was coming but I did not anticipate the predata would be such a stunning hit.
Although, there are inaccuracies. I had the water and land mix, I had the undersea volcano and tsunami but I said North Pacific Ocean. When in fact Tonga is in the South Pacific ocean.
If you examine the history of my recorded predata and analysis and association with possible event hits you will see that these types of inaccuracies, either in time, geographic location or the event type are present.
Finally, in response to your earlier comment, I see it was perhaps a tactical error to respond to the misrepresentation of my work by adding additional examples to this thread. I anticipated that would expose me to further risks by little targeting more days then just the Tonga data. But for some reason I was careless and did it anyway. Perchance it is this: the pandemic data really stands out for me and holds its own.
Trying to misrepresent what I do as an easy scam is very rude and uncharitable.
Before deciding to begin posting recordings of data to Twitter I wanted to do something that was publicly verifiable. As that was my intention I chose Twitter and decided to never delete any predata.
The only tweets I have deleted are replies to Threadreaderapp and maybe some other random accounts where I would make a comment but then not want to associate it permanently with this precognitive Twitter so I would delete the comment. I never delete any predata. You may find some way to verify that with Twitter, anyone who works there with the right access, will know that what I say is true. I am sure someone can verify that should they choose. I am fully confident of that point.
If that is your method of trying to misrepresent what I have done then I accept the implied flattery that what is there is so incredible that it requires such a, however cruelly delivered, attempt at misrepresenting.
Although your TED talk idea is somewhat crazy-sounding to me. I do not think people are ready for that real acknowledgment of precognition. I hope that is wrong, however.
That's an unwarrantedly rude, don't you think? Are you able to back this up more?
The data is there. I cannot have forged it. It is extremely close to what happened. Please state what your actual criticism is of that.
Which part does not count, in your belief, precisely?
In addition, not solely Tonga. Were you to scroll up that same thread you would discover the pandemic, too, from 2018.
I think it is more like your disbelief, or whatever it is, fails to count either as an exceptional claim or as exceptional evidence, against what I have there posted and here linked.
I get to feeling you are trying to help but your delivery could be improved I believe.
It's a distinct cognitive process, and impression. First I percieve the signal, it feels like an energetic pressure (to those who can sense the energy of other people... The energetic pressure sensation is like that but not exactly the same). Then I can look into it to resolve details, which involves interpretation.
I can also go looking for data in a given place or time, instead of just waiting to percieve a signal. While some of my previous reports on Twitter, including involving an Indonesian air crash, were made after actively looking for signals, most of my recent work on Twitter has been receptive to signals rather than looking for them.
This whole process (sensing a signal or looking for one, connecting to and looking into the data, interpreting the information, then recording what I see and so on) is completely distinct from any subconscious thing, or fear, except in the way I'll outline just now. Because at the same time when I'm looking into the data, I will percieve many things: including emotions, sounds, visuals, smells, sensations, ideas (and so on) and the interpretation of the signal and these data also depends in part on my subconscious, in terms of my wide accrued experience giving me a way to interpret a wide variety of things... So the subconscious is there, of course, just like in any other thing that people do, but the role it plays seems mostly interpretive, and the signal certainly doesn't arise in the subconscious at all. So that's to clarify some things, and I think these are very important misunderstandings and it's important to get it right.