/sci/ - Science & Math

Normally you should get redirected to >>>/x/, but actually this would be wrong, because lucid dreams are not even paranormal. They are pure nonsense.

>>4891200
You're an idiot.

>>4891200
8/10

>>4891212
>has his irrational childish nonsense debunked
>can't be thankful for the correction
>resorts to expressing his butthurr through insults

>>4891214
Since I wasn't trolling, I geuss you meant to rate the informativeness of my poast. Well thanks for the 8 points.

>>4891220
>thinks simply saying something is nonsense is debunking it

>>4891228
No, that's not what I think. Are you interested in being told why it's nonsense or do you want to continue poasting inane greentexts? Feel free to ask.

>>4891220
If you weren't trolling then you're just stupid. OH NOES I CANT DO LUCID DREAMING SO ITS NOT POSSIBLE. We don't give a fuck about what you think, we aren't trying to indoctrinate you or anything if you don't want to try then you're free to not post. OH NOES I CANT SOLVE QUADRATIC EQUATIONS SO ITS NOT POSSIBLE ITS PURE NONSENSE

>>4891186
>Suck milions of dicks n 9fag

Jesus Christ, will you non-scientists fuck off already

>>4891235
Well that was never my kind of reasoning. You should learn some reading comprehension.

>>4891229
Another anon here. Put up or shut up. I've heard far too many reasonable reports of lucid dreaming, and it doesn't seem associated with any pseudoscience BS. It's nothing more or less than beware aware of dreaming while dreaming, and gaining some control over what happens.

I haven't tried really, but I've realized I was dreaming before. Haven't you?

>>4891241
> It's nothing more or less than beware aware of dreaming while dreaming

Indeed. And that's why it's bullshit. We don't need a name for what is supposed to be the default state. Every dream is lucid and making a distinction between lucid and non-lucid dreams is idiotic.

>>4891246
>We don't need a name for what is supposed to be the default state.
.... what? WHAT?

>. Every dream is lucid and making a distinction between lucid and non-lucid dreams is idiotic.
Not for me it's not! And not for the vast majority of people I've talked to! Holy shit, you have self-aware and controllable dreams *exclusively*?

>>4891249
I'd have to take some weird drugs in order to NOT be aware of dreaming while dreaming. There's nothing special to lucid dreams and the faggots mystifying them as an ability comparable to super powers are simply retarded.

>>4891229
You've said he's had it debunked. The only post in the thread was yours. So clearly you think you've debunked it with your post. All you've said in your post is that they're nonsense (that they're not paranormal is irrelevant). So clearly you think that when you've said it is nonsense you've debunked it.

But please, so the thread can advance, tell us why you think it is nonsense.

>>4891254
>I'd have to take some weird drugs in order to NOT be aware of dreaming while dreaming.
I don't think you fucking understand how rare your situation is. Your refusal to stop being a cock leads me to believe that you're not very good at checking your bullshit "everyone is like me" bias against reality.

What you're describing is *not the norm*. It's even right in the dialog of fucking Hollywood movies like Inception! That movie must have been fucking incomprehensible to you, because it repeatedly refers to how not being aware that you're dreaming is the default state for most people.

>>4891249
so we are basicly always "lucid" dreaming, only that we arent awared of it?

so the whole definition of lucid and normal dreaming is rubbish- its the same thing?

>>4891257
I thought it would be well known by common sense. Obviously there are uneducated poasters like you who need to get spoon fed. I explained it here >>4891246 and here >>4891254

>>4891261
But how can I be special? I'm not even extraordinarily intelligent. Btw I never watched inception.

>>4891262
That's what I was saying.

>>4891262
... the fuck? No, generally you aren't aware that you're dreaming. That's the difference between a normal dream and a lucid one. In a lucid dream you're realize you're dreaming.

>>4891264
>>4891267
OK, now you're either a moron or a troll. This has been explained in detail.

1. Most people are not aware that they are dreaming while they are dreaming.
2. Lucid dreaming refers to the far less common state of being aware you are dreaming. This can lead to having a degree of control over what is experienced in the dream.
3. You're a cockbag who either doesn't understand the difference between 1 and 2 or has only experienced 2 and is completely oblivious to the fact that it's rare.

>>4891268
He doesn't seem to understand the difference between dreaming then realizing once you have awoken that you were dreaming, and realizing you are dreaming while you are still dreaming.

>>4891254
tell me more!

why dont you want to ("lucid") dream?

Is there any evidence that lucid dreaming is an actual phenomenon?

>>4891273
I do know the difference and I'm telling you that every dream is lucid. At least for me this is the case. Of course I can't know how a retard dreams. Maybe for him it would be different.

>>4891270
I was not aware that it is rare and I'd like to see some convincing evidence for that claim.

>>4891275
>implying I don't want it
Lucid dreams happen. So what? Why should I give a fuck?

My most WTF moment while dreaming was when I became aware while I was dreaming, but I didn't know whether I was dreaming or not so I decided I would check. I looked all around my house, outside through every window and everything looked exactly like reality so I concluded I wasn't dreaming. And then some moments later I woke up...

>>4891276
http://dreaminglucid.com/articles/The%20Science%20of%20Lucid%20Dreaming%2052.pdf

>>4891276
I've been close myself without trying. Haven't really tried. I realized I was dreaming because I noticed inconsistencies. Then I promptly stopped thinking about it and went back to non-lucid dreaming.

If you're asking for fMRI studies of lucid dreaming, I'm not sure. But it doesn't seem pseudosciency to me.

>>4891277
>I was not aware that it is rare and I'd like to see some convincing evidence for that claim.
Talk to anyone. Ask them "have you ever been aware you were dreaming while you were dreaming? Like, you're dreaming, then you realize it's not real, and that you're asleep"?

No one else is going to to say "of course, that happens every goddamn time". They're either going to say "not really" or "there was this one time".

But hey, keep being a moronic cockbag. You're on a roll.

>>4891277
Lol you're literally the only one in this thread making the claim that all dreams are lucid and YOU'RE the one demanding evidence? You, sir, are a world-class troll.
9/10 only because I'm aware you're trolling, albeit quite effectively.

>>4891276
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=lucid%20dreaming

>>4891277
>Why should I give a fuck?

you tell me. im not the one taking pills not to dream

>Trying to control your dreams

Wait, can't everyone already do this? I mean I'm aware of when I'm dreaming and I can choose to wake up or alter the dream. No full control or anything but I can definitely go from random dream to a dream of my chosen theme.

>>4891279

Article seems...weak? Posits correlation between lucid dreaming an a specific frequency range of neural activity then says there's no MRI data to support it.

>>4891280

Seems it could go either way to me, but the burden of proof should lie on "this phenomenon exists" before any other concerns are addressed. Until then we only have self-reported anecdotes, and as the saying goes the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'evidence.'

>>4891285
>No one else is going to to say
>No one
You could of said "most of them" or "some of them", but "no one"? I'll have to ask you for a proof.

>>4891289
Apparently there is lots of evidence for lucid dreaming. Now where's the evidence for non-lucid dreaming?

>>4891288
I don't take any pills. It was hypothetical.

>>4891296
>Apparently there is lots of evidence for lucid dreaming. Now where's the evidence for non-lucid dreaming?

Oh god, 11/10

>>4891296
Lucid dreaming means you are aware that you are dreaming. Non-lucid dreaming means you are aware of what's going on in your dreams, but you are NOT aware that you are dreaming. If you do understand the difference, then you're an annoying troll.

>>4891301
I do understand the difference, but since awareness is a subjective quality and not objectivele measurable, anyone can make absurd claims about it. In order to do science, we need irrefutable evidence.

>>4891229
>>4891220

MISSPELL 'POSTING' ONE MORE TIME, CARL. QUIT FAGGING UP OUR BOARD.

>>4891305
le deal with it

>>4891305

ALSO, NO! URBAN DICTIONARY IS NOT A REAL, CORRECT OR WELCOME DICTIONARY ON A SCIENCE BOARD.

Though, 'ALL-CAPS POSTING' is. Deal with it, you fucking disappointment (yeah, and on the internet of all places. I hope you slit your femoral you closet homosexual).

>>4891303

Where are you going with this? Are you trying to parody people who want to be hip atheists but can't into science because they're still in high school?

>>4891294
>Seems it could go either way to me, but the burden of proof should lie on "this phenomenon exists" before any other concerns are addressed. Until then we only have self-reported anecdotes, and as the saying goes the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'evidence.'
You've learned the wrong lesson from that phrase. Disbelieving all claims of subjective experiences is not skepticism. We're not talking about ontological claims here.

We're talking about a subjective phenomenon, like floaters. Ever seen little wiggly lines blurring your vision when you look at a bright blue sky?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floater
We now have third-party physical verification of what's going on there, but that isn't needed before you stop telling people who say they see them "I don't believe you are really having that experience".

What would you say to a blind man who demands evidence that sight is a thing? And says "No, no anecdotes, they don't count."

Third-party verification requires dream monitoring. That's not quite possible yet.

>>4891294
It's not some outre mystical thing.
That's like saying "hunger" didn't have enough evidence hundreds of years ago and it was all anecdotal.

>>4891310
>closet homosexual
>implying closet

>>4891314
le pic related
<<<

>>4891236
>>4891317
>Uses 'le'

Srsly dude, take OP and fuck off back to 9fag; quit wasting everyone's time.

>>4891330

>>4891317

You should also be throwing around some terms that sound smart but you don't understand. I think it would class up your nonsense posts.

Dunning-Kruger, straw man, confirmation bias, ad hominem, begging the question, projecting, red herring, reductio ad absurdum, slippery slope, post hoc...

Also end all your posts with "QED".

>>4891335

I never read about lucid dreaming but I know when I am dreaming. However when I try to do anything I end up just standing in a purgatory white room like on the Matrix no no sweet ass rows of gun appear or anything. After a while I get bored and decide to wake up.

Why is /sci/ always such faggots when it comes to hurr durr evidence anecdote burden of proof you prove it no you prove it?

>>4891349
Because this is a SCIENCE board. If you want pseudoscience, you can go to >>>/x/.

>>4891349
It's a combination of trolls and people who want to be good rationalists but are new to it and don't quite understand how and why it works.

>>4891351
Mostly trolls. We practically have our own class of troll: The "burden of proof" troll.

>>4891352

prove it

le epok thrad op

>>4891361
dohoho!

OP here

does anyone else have good experiences with lucid dreaming?

Enjoy you're ban. :333333

>>4891375
I've had lucid dreaming experiences before. But I can't believe I had them because I'm waiting for irrefutable proof from the scientific community.
There's no fooling this hardened cynic.

>>4891350

Disregard that, I suck cocks

In my previous poasts I didn't realize there is a difference from beig in control of my actions in a dream and being in control of the dream.

Carl: Everyone lucid dreams, they're just not aware of it.
The rest of the world: That very awareness is what defines a dream as lucid.

>>4891382
>Everyone experiences God, they're just not aware of it.

>>4891382
>no reading comprehension

>>4891386
Good impersonation. I'm proud of you.

>>4891382
>no reading comprehension

>>4891386
Good impersonation. I'm proud of you.

You really are easy to troll, /sci/.
Even after this post, i will continue, and you will continue to feed me.
Such morons.

>>4891399
>no reading comprehension

You replied to:
>so we are basicly always "lucid" dreaming, only that we arent awared of it?
...with...
>that's what i was saying

Lucid dreams are as real as awareness itself. Something much reported but unverifiable.

>>4891407
arguing a position, with someone who pretends to hold an opposite position, is not moronic. it's a long time philosophical pastime.

>>4891416
>philosophy
>not moronic

>>4891408
My poast was referring only to the second statement.

>>4891414
So you think we are always aware that we are lucid dreaming?

>>4891417
>i'm 15 years old

>>4891419
I am aware of my dreams. You can continue calling it "lucid". It doesn't add any new information.

>>4891421
You're not supposed to be on le 4chan. Enjoy you are ban.

>>4891423
Do you believe that everyone is always aware that they are dreaming at the time their dreams are occurring?

Or that no one is?

Or that both are possible?

>>4891423
>i don't understand green text

>>4891428
>believe

This is a SCIENCE board. Take your religion and your straw men somewhere else.

>>4891429
Then don't use it, if you don't understand it.

>>4891431
So why are you making other claims about dreams?

Instead of saying these issues are simply unverifiable and unscientific?

>>4891431
it's not a straw man if you are being asked to choose from all available possibilities.

>>4891442
>doesn't know what a straw man is

>>4891436
Aren't you faggot permab&?

>>4891423
Either you're naturally a lucid dreamer or you're not seeing the distinction of what lucid dreaming is. Either is possible.

I've had only a few lucid dreams during shallow sleeping, suffering insomnia at the time. It seemed like I was awake, staring up at the sky. The stars were clearer and crisper than I had ever known. I knew this to be impossible because above me there would be a ceiling and I wasn't sleeping on my back in the first place. For a while I considered how it was that I could picture the sky so clearly since imagining so detailed an image is all but impossible.
Attempting to do anything broke the illusion and I woke up.

Normally when dreaming I don't know that I'm dreaming (and this is normal to most people Carl), flying or whatever crazy shit happens during a dream you don't really question it. It seems natural, perhaps akin to deja vu experiences where you get a sense of false familiarity with something that you've never experienced before.

Normally you don't know that you're dreaming. Sometimes you don't remember what you were dreaming, or forget very quickly. Some will reject the notion that they dream at all, though it seems to be a case of them not having any recollection of their dreams since sleep studies show that they do go through the motions.

>>4891452
Alright, thnx for sharing you're view.

Everybody in this thread is poasting garbage.

I'm out.

>>4891498
>king of /sci/
>not blackman
Fuck off, prick.

>>4891505
>blackman
>a king

lol no

>>4891407
>You really are easy to troll, /sci/.

Pretends to be a troll after being ridiculed, nice try but you're still dumb.

>>4891510
More of king than you could ever be, tryhard.

>>4891512
Do I hear some rustling?

>>4891436
>>4891447
Are you really going to talk to yourself?

Are you that pathetic?

had the FUCKING BEST lucid dream last night

>go to china on the monorail from Arkam city
>flirt with an asian bitch
>do drugs with her and go to a deadmau5 concert
>fuck her

Protip: it is easier for me to lucid dream when i wake up and then force myself to go right back to sleep.