Consciousness; a radically new theory. Diaphonous? (Introduction)

by romansh , Tuesday, July 14, 2015, 14:56 (3419 days ago) @ David Turell


> My point is that, just as you state, we cannot detect the seams, so why make a point of it. Biologic machines must work through biochemical reactions which will result in micro-second delays. So what! If it comes across as seamless to us, that is an OK result. You are making unreasonable comparisons to precise non-biological processes. Of course there will be differences in function. 
> 
Our experience is simply wallpaper over the cracks.
 
> Illusion or whatever, you have given me a definition of energy, but sidestepped the question. Does consciousness contain energy, or as I view it thoughts are immaterial and have no energy?-For me "thought" is compatible with the brain actions ... so in this sense it contains energy. thought for me is not separate from reality. -
> Please explain. You seem to say that you cannot cause effects in the material world.-I did not say it cannot, I said it did not ... at least within my experience.
 
Here's another problem with NDEs ... 
If we experience consciousness after death and David has provided many anecdotal examples with his citations, then why don't we experience the supposed after death experiences whilst we are very much alive? it would seem from David's hypothesis our brains are not receivers of this consciousness, but actually dampeners that are preventing us from experiencing this universal consciousness.-Thought for me is awareness with a little forward and backward confabulation.