Not me-full credit for that one goes to Peter Morris.
:rolleyes: YOU are the skeptic I was referring to; YOU should try to arrange a meeting with Christoper Warnock so he can refer you to the guys who practice Goetic Ceremonial Magic; and it is YOU who should be present during the ritual in order to witness it yourself.
Ok this is now my final post in this thread because the information you’re asking for is ESOTERIC. Thus, I feel no obligation to further discuss this matter nor get into a comprehensive discourse on Ceremonial Magic. If the source I’m about cite appears to have been “pretending to posses some magical powers or knowledge”, then that’s just fine by me; I understand. Adios
–The Tree of Life: A study in Magic, Israel Regardie
How interesting that you should quote Regardie!
He is a perfect example of the kind of “psychologizing” 20th century occultist I mentioned in an earlier post – the kind who happily dismisses all talk of “real” spirits, and argues instead for “psychological states,” as Crowley often did.
As Egil Asprem pointed out in Arguing with Angels, Regardie published only four of the five volumes used for magical work in the Golden Dawn. Some of it, including book “H”, he considered “typically mediaeval, and definitely unsound from a spiritual viewpoint.”
What’s more:
So what was Regardie’s problem? In How magic survived the disenchantment of the world, Wouter Hanegraaff quotes him as saying that
In Regardie’s view, ceremonial magic wasn’t about actually conjuring higher intelligences, but was rather, simply, a set of “technical methods” to reach the true goal, namely “exalting the individual consciousness.” In this regard, Regardie was a decidedly “modern” occultist.
You seem to belong to an earlier tradition. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)
I don’t have to do jack shit. It is your claim, thus it is your responsibility to provide your evidence…which is the real reason you are running away from this thread.
nm
I have read most of Sagan’s books and enjoyed them. In one of them I think “cosmic” was part of the title Sagan was talking about a reincarnation event that had been documented by several people who were eye-witnesses. Sagan had this to say about the evidence. “I can’t dispute the data, but I still don’t believe it.” After reading his remark I crossed him off my list of scientists. The world is full of “paranormal” events and when so-called scientists ignore them or worse relegate them to nonsense they lose their “scientist badge” in my opinion.
In case you were wondering, your list of scientist is not on my List of Lists of Scientists I Care About. I don’t know which case Sagan is talking about here, but I know what happens in these kinds of “cases:” they fall apart under actual scrutiny.
Could someone who has read that book please tell us what was actually in that passage?
I’ve not read the book, but I have encountered this case before in another debate. Sagan was referring to an account regarding a small child in India who (so it was claimed) had strikingly accurate and verified memories of a previous life.
Actually, I could just be remembering another time lekatt claimed the same thing. Out of curiosity, I googled some substrings of the quote - The only results Google returns for “I can’t dispute the data, but I still don’t believe it.” and substrings of that quote, turn out to have been claimed by lekatt.
Then I will skip simulposting the same results.
That fits the pattern! Sagan did say in The Demon Haunted World that reincarnation was worthy of more experimental study, but he said in no uncertain terms that he didn’t think it’s real.
I broadened my search a bit and found what appears to be a description of Sagan’s view in the Wikipedia article on reincarnation (subsection reincarnation research), which says:
However, I can’t find anything exactly like that in Sagan’s book. I have to question the veracity of the Wikipedia claim.
ETA: Just seen Marley’s post. Yeah - nothing at all like what lekatt claimed.
The op’s question (using bad English too by the way) was simply “Who ya gonna call”?
I know who knows, because I have already called them back in 1984, 29 years ago.
I witnessed a paranormal event (of which I will not go into detail in this thread about) and thought about it and thought about it and finally called the FBI.
The lady on the other side of the phone carefully listened to my report and then simply said, “I am sorry sir we no longer investigate paranormal events or happenings”
I seriously believe they get phone calls all he time and even more seriously believe that they have investigated super natural/paranormal events and that they have more answer’s and more information on the subject than we do.
Surely someone on SD or at SD knows someone in the FBI that could weigh in with the proof that ghost, demons and evil spirits do exist and have been the center of many criminal investigations for many numbers of years?
What were their findings?
Perhaps the national debt could be easier to bare if the truth were told and the book royalties and film rights went to the Treasury Department … 
This case has been around for many years and has not fell apart yet.
It was a reference to “Ghostbusters.”
Is this a joke? There’s no way the FBI is investigating phone calls by ghosts.
(bolding mine)Thank you ever so much for the uncalled for unsubstantiated anecdote-we never get enough of those when we ask for actual verifiable evidence. :rolleyes: Isn’t it interesting that that you can accuse governmental agencies of not providing all the facts when you yourself withhold them from us.
Whereas some people, present company included, say, “I can’t prove the claim, even though it doesn’t seem likely in any world we know about, but I will believe it anyway.”
I don’t know where your Sagan quote came from (provide a reference if you can), but you deliberately ignored 99.99% of the book.
Beliefnet-the online version of a psychic fair. Have y’all ever been to a psychic fair? It consists of tables and tents filled with fools and fakers telling you the most fantastic crap for a price, and where it gets weird is when these fly-by-night card and/or glass ball readers tell you entirely different things within each other’s hearing, yet will not directly confront each other over who is right. The unwritten rule of psychic fairs and psychic websites is the same: You support my bullshit, and I’ll support yours.
What makes you believe the FBI has this information?