Discussion Forum Discussion Forum

Science and Meditation

RE: Scientific proof for fairies

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 2:53 AM as a reply to Jeff Grove.
Hi, Jeff,

I apologize that my comment came off as glib. I was in a weirdly playful mood when I wrote that about the A&E channel. I mean no disrespect, and I appreciate your willingness to share your videos. Yes, I'm currently quite amazed over my first fruition and now my sudden access to the formless realm of Boundless Space. Just this is immediate experience of Magick as far as I'm concerned. So I'm not a skeptic. I'm an open-minded agnostic on the subject of extraordinary phenomena until I have some direct apprehension of the phenomena in question. 

Again, sorry if I came off as insensitive.

Jenny

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 3:05 AM as a reply to Tom Tom.
Tom:
Another question to consider: If re-birth is not true, why is enlightenment real?  Why do the stages occur as they do?  

Yeah. I think about this often too. Something, some kind of super subtle energetics must survive death(s) if what we are doing and experiencing as a result of so doing makes any sense at all. I think Thanissaro Bhikkhu has a free book on this topic, but I've not yet read it. I used to attend a Tibetan center where discussions on rebirth reached quite a profound level.

It seems a bit odd that the Tibetans go looking for and testing what seems like reincarnations rather than the more suble "rebirth."

Jenny

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 9:37 AM as a reply to _.
Jen Pearly:
Hi, Jeff,

I apologize that my comment came off as glib. I was in a weirdly playful mood when I wrote that about the A&E channel. I mean no disrespect, and I appreciate your willingness to share your videos. Yes, I'm currently quite amazed over my first fruition and now my sudden access to the formless realm of Boundless Space. Just this is immediate experience of Magick as far as I'm concerned. So I'm not a skeptic. I'm an open-minded agnostic on the subject of extraordinary phenomena until I have some direct apprehension of the phenomena in question. 

Again, sorry if I came off as insensitive.

Jenny
I am sorry to say I am going to have to ask for the hats back.

Lesson learned - whenever you want to troll a thread without appearing to, bring up reincarnation and watch the fun commence. C'mon guys, I have another thread for just that. This one is about fairies.

And so Jen, once you have that direct apprehension of extraordinary phenomena, then you know it is real, right? You are an open-minded agnostic, right? Anything is possible, right? I mean, TomTom can accept a small amount of telekenises and pyromancy, but shape shifters? People that turn into animals? Rainbow bodies? Reincarnation? And fairies....?????

Glad you like the thread though, and as a matter of fact, you were inspirational in its creation!

]http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/4805320
Jen Pearly:
:
This is not to say any particular phenomenon is "real" or "imaginary." It is to say, perhaps it is "safest" to remain open. Perhaps it is best, if coming from a scientific POV, to speak the truth: "We don't know."



sawfoot:

Jen, do you think fairies are "real"? There recently has been some new scientific proof which I have posted below.

http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/4835855


RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 10:39 AM as a reply to _.
Jen Pearly:
Tom:
Another question to consider: If re-birth is not true, why is enlightenment real?  Why do the stages occur as they do?  

Yeah. I think about this often too. Something, some kind of super subtle energetics must survive death(s) if what we are doing and experiencing as a result of so doing makes any sense at all. I think Thanissaro Bhikkhu has a free book on this topic, but I've not yet read it. I used to attend a Tibetan center where discussions on rebirth reached quite a profound level.

It seems a bit odd that the Tibetans go looking for and testing what seems like reincarnations rather than the more suble "rebirth."

Jenny

Yeah the Tibetans have some pretty far-out beliefs about this. The Tulkus are said to consciously take rebirth to benefit beings, but the criteria for being able to do that is supposed to be very high level realization (meaning, beyond seeing noself). So it's not simply reincarnation either. Rebirth means a continuity of mindstream that emerges in various bodies but that mindstream, like the bodies and everything else in Universe, is empty and impermanent. A tulku is said to have basically participated in the rebirth process consciously and intentionally to help beings (as opposed to us poor shmucks who are entirely driven by karmic winds in the in-between-state). ((Then again the Tibetans have lots of practices, like Phowa, for us which are supposed to help with that.)) Jeff probably knows a lot more about this topic than I do but basically a lot of Tibetan high level practices seem to have a lot to do with navigating that in-between-lives state or otherwise affecting that process.

This whole conversation (about afterlife etc.) is really interesting to me, on a socio-cultural level. I have no idea what if anything happens to my experiential continuum at death. But I find it so amusing that materialist types often point to folks who beleive in an afterlife of some kind and call them escapist. They say that 'believers' can't face the reality of death being a complete end of experiencing. But what's more comforting than a complete end of experiencing if you think about it? I mean, either way, thinking about death is sad because of the people you will leave behind or who will leave you behind right? Everyone who's being honest could probably fess up to a whole bunch of emotions about death-as-oblivion or any other kind of death; grief, resentment, regret, excitement at finding out. I mean that sucks. But fear? I'm certainly not afraid of oblivion and I don't see how anyone could be. Meanwhile, the traditions have these visions of afterlives that are often pretty high stakes. Terrifying really! A more clear case of projection would be hard to find than that of the materialist accusing the believer of being 'escapist' lol. That said, of course lots of folks use beliefs about afterlife stuff to not handle their grief around losing and leaving loved ones. Point is oblivion can play the same role. Just not knowing what the fuck death is all about is a pretty tough stance to maintain, on an emotional level, becuase the human mind *wants to know* (in general).

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 1:01 PM as a reply to . Jake ..
. Jake .:
J:
This whole conversation (about afterlife etc.) is really interesting to me, on a socio-cultural level. I have no idea what if anything happens to my experiential continuum at death. But I find it so amusing that materialist types often point to folks who beleive in an afterlife of some kind and call them escapist. They say that 'believers' can't face the reality of death being a complete end of experiencing. But what's more comforting than a complete end of experiencing if you think about it? I mean, either way, thinking about death is sad because of the people you will leave behind or who will leave you behind right? Everyone who's being honest could probably fess up to a whole bunch of emotions about death-as-oblivion or any other kind of death; grief, resentment, regret, excitement at finding out. I mean that sucks. But fear? I'm certainly not afraid of oblivion and I don't see how anyone could be. Meanwhile, the traditions have these visions of afterlives that are often pretty high stakes. Terrifying really! A more clear case of projection would be hard to find than that of the materialist accusing the believer of being 'escapist' lol. That said, of course lots of folks use beliefs about afterlife stuff to not handle their grief around losing and leaving loved ones. Point is oblivion can play the same role. Just not knowing what the fuck death is all about is a pretty tough stance to maintain, on an emotional level, becuase the human mind *wants to know* (in general).


Are you guys trying to wind me up deliberately? You know you were an inspiration for this thread too, Jake?

"I have no idea what if anything happens to my experiential continuum at death."

Absolutely no idea, right? Maybe you just fly off into fairy land?

sawfoot:

Jake:
:
. I just think it's funny how many secular moderns talk about various afterlife theories as escapist and rarely consider that oblivion at death-- the secular modern assumption-- can also be a defense mechanism (against the actual uncertainty of what if anything is experienced after death). So personally I'm agnostic although some experiences definitely point to the possibility of rebirth, which is rather troubling (and not at all comforting).

If you are agnostic about rebirth, are you also agnostic about the possibility of an afterlife with 72 virgins?

From <http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/4814759>

jake:

Sawfoot, I'm agnostic about what experientially happens-- if anything-- after my bodily death. I just don't know what if anything happens or doesn't happen. Neither do you. If it makes you happy and helps you deal with your admitted fear of death to pretend that you know, then more power to you. Have you ever considered that the fear of not knowing is more fundamental than the fear of death?
...
As for the 72 virgins, you seem to feel that is a very important point though I'm not sure why, but yeah I guess ultimately I'm agnostic about that possibility as well. However, like yourself, I do find certain possibilities more probably or plausible than others.


Believing that certain possibilities are more probable or plausible is exactly the point...You do have some idea. So you can say you have no idea, but it isn't treally true, is it?

I know you like this particular line of reasoning, but here is a data point for you. I am, honest to god, experientially speaking, literally and completely (truly and ultimately etc..) terrified of the thought of my own oblivion. Seriously. I am not making this up. And I believe (or, in other words, "pretend to know") that death is oblivion. And the thought still scares the shit out of me. So every time you remember this line of thought and those silly materialist types, and you start thinking " I don't see how anyone could be [afraid of oblivion]..." can you remember this conversation? Remember ole'  Saw?

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 2:10 PM as a reply to sawfoot _.
LOL LOL emoticon
Yes I was definitely trolling you with my last post Ol Saw. But one good turn deserves another don't you think?
It's true, I lean in a certain direction, sometimes! But I don't know. And I know that I don't know. That is pretty scary too dude! ;)

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 2:17 PM as a reply to . Jake ..
I like Heidegger's take on it: death is "the possibility of impossibility".

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 2:47 PM as a reply to . Jake ..
. Jake .:
LOL LOL emoticon
Yes I was definitely trolling you with my last post Ol Saw. But one good turn deserves another don't you think?
It's true, I lean in a certain direction, sometimes! But I don't know. And I know that I don't know. That is pretty scary too dude! ;)
Just when I though the whole world had gone mad...

Thanks Jake,  that is awesome, I needed a laugh. Triple LOL!

And I know that I know - and that's pretty f****n' scary too, dude!

Though perhaps we can discuss your dogmatic belief in your agnosticism in a new thread...emoticon

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/8/14 3:33 PM as a reply to sawfoot _.
It may be a dogmatic agnosticism about my dogmatism though! Yeah definitely a new thread lol

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/10/14 2:20 PM as a reply to sawfoot _.
Good morning DhO!!! (Robin Williams voice)
Long time listener first time caller
So as not to hijack the thread (did I get that right? I'm not very internetty) I would first like to say, of course fairies are real (duh) any critical thinking person knows that, and I hope that ends the speculation for good - jeezus H - it's not like they are sasquatches or something! (which any critical thinking person knows is a big load of hooey - maybe your next avatar should be your gf's selfie sawfoot_?!) Priceless
Anyhoo, my serious comment is that I think the subject of 'intellectual honesty' (as mr foot refers to it) is very necessary when performing the delicate task of unraveling your mind, body and emotions and exploding (or imploding, feel free to discuss on and on) your sense of Self out into the Great Beyond, and I am eternally grateful to all of you for existing here (or not ;)
For instance, I got into meditation practice after my first 10-day Goenka retreat almost eight years ago because I wasn't very contented in life (for no clear reason) and I just wanted to be happy, I needed something. I found Vipassana (capital V, which drove my friends apeshit) and it transformed me in so many ways, most of them good
As opposed to Not Tao, who I find also exhibits admirable quantities of this intellectual honesty that the fairy discussion was maybe a cover for (if we're being intellectually honest here ;), I am a pretty philosophical and spiritual dude, so I got 8 years of traction ruminating on the Three Cs and anatta and karma and yada yada... but, I got into meditation because I wasn't content, not because I really wanted to get to the bottom of my delusion and clinging to some mind-manufactured Self - I just wanted to be happy god-dammit! I thought that unravelling the sense of self would completely lead to that (and it does to a degree I guess but I can't tell if that's just the jhanas talking) so it does perplex me somewhat that stream enterers (much less arahats!) still get grumpy. What up with that?
I know, this needs to go on a new thread, I think I did hijack afterall (where is that damn backspace button?!)
Anyway thanks again guys (for reals, 'specially D Ingram and his hilarious nemesis sawfoot_) for the insights, the honesty (as you see it) and for the DhO - because of you I have now lost my religion completely (capital V) and I'm totally bewildered confused and broken. That's good right?
Daniel-san
ps I want a hat

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/10/14 1:56 PM as a reply to Daniel Leffler.
Daniel Leffler:
Good morning DhO!!! (Robin Williams voice)
Long time listener first time caller
So as not too hijack the thread (did I get that right? I'm not very internetty) I would first like to say, of course fairies are real (duh) any critical thinking person knows that, and I hope that ends the speculation for good - jeezus H - it's not like they are sasquatches or something! (which any critical thinking person knows is a big load of hooey - maybe your next avatar should be your gf's selfie sawfoot_?!) Priceless
Anyhoo, my serious comment is that I think the subject of 'intellectual honesty' (as mr foot refers to it) is very necessary when performing the delicate task of unraveling your mind, body and emotions and exploding (or imploding, feel free to discuss on and on) your sense of Self out into the Great Beyond, and I am eternally grateful to all of you for existing here (or not ;)
For instance, I got into meditation practice after my first 10-day Goenka retreat almost eight years ago because I wasn't very contented in life (for no clear reason) and I just wanted to be happy, I needed something. I found Vipassana (capital V, which drove my friends apeshit) and it transformed me in so many ways, most of them good
As opposed to Not Tao, who I find also exhibits admirable quantities of this intellectual honesty that the fairy discussion was maybe a cover for (if we're being intellectually honest here ;), I am a pretty philosophical and spiritual dude, so I got 8 years of traction ruminating on the Three Cs and anatta and karma and yada yada... but, I got into meditation because I wasn't content, not because I really wanted to get to the bottom of my delusion and clinging to some mind-manufactured Self - I just wanted to be happy god-dammit! I thought that unravelling the sense of self would completely lead to that (and it does to a degree I guess but I can't tell if that's just the jhanas talking) so it does perplex me somewhat that stream enterers (much less arahats!) still get grumpy. What up with that?
I know, this needs to go on a new thread, I think I did hijack afterall (where is that damn backspace button?!)
Anyway thanks again guys (for reals, 'specially D Ingram and his hilarious nemesis sawfoot_) for the insights, the honesty (as you see it) and for the DhO - because of you I have now lost my religion completely (capital V) and I'm totally bewildered confused and broken. That's good right?
Daniel-san
ps I want a hat
Hi Daniel. You are definitely hat-worthy. Just don't say you have no idea if anyone is hat-worthy or not. 

Fairies are real? Just like I said. You should submit your evidence to this peer reviewed scientific journal :http://www.journalofcryptozoology.com

Hmm, it is indeed weird that those enlightened people get so grumpy, isn't it? And some sometimes even can be mean. It's almost like those two behaviours might be correlated....Still, it is a nice name to call oneself. Forthwith, I am going to call myself amazinged. Level 3a amazinged. Because I am so amazing. And level 3a is the best kind of being amazinged.

"I'm totally bewildered confused and broken. That's good right?" That is a great place to be! A sure sign of progress....Just watch out for those who don't think they are confused.

Yours,

The Amazinged One, Sawfoot_@confused.com

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/10/14 3:35 PM as a reply to sawfoot _.
Hmm, it is indeed weird that those enlightened people get so grumpy, isn't it? And some sometimes even can be mean. It's almost like those two behaviours might be correlated....Still, it is a nice name to call oneself. 

An enlightened individual can be grumpy and still not suffer.

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/11/14 8:21 PM as a reply to Eric M W.
Eric M W:
Hmm, it is indeed weird that those enlightened people get so grumpy, isn't it? And some sometimes even can be mean. It's almost like those two behaviours might be correlated....Still, it is a nice name to call oneself. 

An enlightened individual can be grumpy and still not suffer.
Hi Eric,
I must say I'm utterly confused by this response (it's a theme recently nothing personal emoticon
Also I'm new here and I don't want to offend/hijack anyone, so for safety's sake I'll assert that fairies never get grumpy, I know this because whenever I've seen them they're super-chipper. Aghem, moving on...
My understanding of dukkha is mainly informed the Buddha's teachings of the two arrows. The first arrow is actual bare senate pain which can't be eliminated as long as we have human bodies (I think I'm borrowing from Pema Chodron here as well) and the second arrow is our reaction to that pain. In my mind grumpiness is a reaction, a second arrow, like depression. My viewpoints are also very colored by Goenka's presentation of the dharma and the role that sankharas play in negative emotional responses etc, so that may contribute to my confusion as well
If an Enlightened person can get grumpy (therefore making all of us unfortunately non-enlightened people grumpy by association, not very compassionate of them) can they also get depressed and angry and vengeful and what's the f-ing point then?!
Besides suffering, dukkha has been translated as 'stressful' among other terms like 'anxiety' (by heavy hitters like Thanassaro Bhikkhu). Isn't grumpiness stressful? Doesn't enlightenment eliminate things like stress and leave one experiencing the emptiness of the brahma viharas: love, compassion, joy and equanimity? I feel a little duped. Because I've had some deep post-meditative experiences abiding in fearlessness, compassion and joy for weeks on end (not grumpy at all back then), I'm ready to be corrected, but I thought the whole point was the eliminate suffering - the Buddha said he taught two things, suffering (stress, anxiety etc) and the elimination thereof. I thought that my temporary Buddha-like experiences (which were really sweet btw) would be made permanent by the attainment of arahatship (actually I was aiming for Stream Entry or Once Returner only but now I'm not so sure about any of it)
Please help me understand what I'm missing here!? Were my experiences purely jhanic and the result of meditating 10-plus hours per day (which is no way to live IMO moving forward), when will I go roller skating?!
I know I'm wildly veering off from the fairy business, but this is at least tangentally related to intellectual honesty (don't get me started on reincarnation) and plus, I really like this thread. I'm clinging to the fairies. Oh no - fairy sankharas!
Daniel

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/11/14 8:38 PM as a reply to Daniel Leffler.
As an aside: contratulations to Sawfoot for starting what is probably the one of the most-viewed if not the most-viewed thread in the history of the DhO. Regardless of any other considerations, abilities or understandings, you have a talent that newspapers such as The National Inquirer might pay big money for, just in case your current gig doesn't work out or you are looking to trade up.

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/12/14 6:54 PM as a reply to _.
Jen Pearly:
Hi, Jeff,

I apologize that my comment came off as glib. I was in a weirdly playful mood when I wrote that about the A&E channel. I mean no disrespect, and I appreciate your willingness to share your videos. Yes, I'm currently quite amazed over my first fruition and now my sudden access to the formless realm of Boundless Space. Just this is immediate experience of Magick as far as I'm concerned. So I'm not a skeptic. I'm an open-minded agnostic on the subject of extraordinary phenomena until I have some direct apprehension of the phenomena in question. 

Again, sorry if I came off as insensitive.

Jenny
Hi Jen,

thankyou for the reply, I knew what I was in for when I wrote what I wrote as I have heard all the explanations before but DhO is about sharing our experiences and if we were afraid of that DhO wouldn't exist. The sifu in china is a respected physician who runs a hospital and is also Deputy Director of the Classical Chinese Medicine Research Institute in China. Some of his patients include an ex president of indonseia and members of one of the royal faimilies (If I remeber it was Thai) so not bad for someone who supposedly pulls off cheap magic tricks for tourists as sawfoot deducted. The day of the cows cost me a taxi ride and I got a free meal thrown in.
One of the sifus helped me for seven years before he died and the only money I ever gave him was 200 in a card once so not something he would do for finacial gain. I payed to train with Zhao but he runs a school and clinic in Sydney and have payed for every buddhist retreat I have been on.
From one of my early experience I was healing an old buddhist nun from the chenrezig monastry and as I came in close proximity to her there was a tugging on my awareness like a rubber band as she sucked up my qi, I had a similar experince in one of my practices where I would use trees to balance and clean my qi cycling and exchanging with the tree. I selected a large old tree except this day the flow was one way as the tree sucked up my qi (ping heng gong). There is much to investigate beyond the normal accepted experiences.

Hi Erik and Tom Tom

As to the rebirth question. We know that rebirth is not the same as reincarnation. But lets look at our own experience.
Our lungs are 2-3 weeks old, taste buds are 10 days old, liver 5 months old, heart 20 years, skin 2 to 4 weeks, bones 10 years, intestines 2 to 3 days, hair 3 to 6 years, blood up to 4 months, nails 10 months, and the list goes on. No part of these are a permanent self.

 If for the past 20 years I digested a small ammount of mercury it would condition my present experinence, shape my personality and character which is not the same personality and charachter born 48 years ago. Death occurs at every moment and this moment is conditioned by what came before.

cheers
Jeff

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/13/14 12:28 AM as a reply to Jeff Grove.
This thread is too long to read all of it when I want so badly to say something that I Know.

There is rebirth, and there is reincarnation.  Reincarnation is a type of rebirth and it is a phenomenon that has quite a large amount of supporting evidence.  I know all about this process, but until others know for themselves, it is useless to speak what I know.

But fairies?  Aren't they the same as devas?   I did not believe or disbelieve in 'elemental spirits' until after my practice began to give me the ability to know minds.  Early this year, I was in the forest close to where we live by a wildlife refuge, and I 'saw' a mind, quite distinctly, beside a very peculiar tree.  I 'looked' at it in the same way I look at people and animals and saw that it was either unhuman or of an origin that it itself did not know.  I had a friend with me that day, a dear Taoist friend of mine that claims to be able to see spirits, so I called to him. When he reached the spot, without a word from me, he pointed to where the mind was and said, "what the fuck is that?"  I replied, "I don't know. I have never felt one before."  

That evening when I got home, I poured through the theravada and found several stories of Devas that live in certain trees.  I'd always assumed they were fables... but now I know they were Literal.

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/13/14 1:54 AM as a reply to Jeff Grove.
Jeff Grove:
Jen Pearly:
Hi, Jeff,

I apologize that my comment came off as glib. I was in a weirdly playful mood when I wrote that about the A&E channel. I mean no disrespect, and I appreciate your willingness to share your videos. Yes, I'm currently quite amazed over my first fruition and now my sudden access to the formless realm of Boundless Space. Just this is immediate experience of Magick as far as I'm concerned. So I'm not a skeptic. I'm an open-minded agnostic on the subject of extraordinary phenomena until I have some direct apprehension of the phenomena in question. 

Again, sorry if I came off as insensitive.

Jenny
Hi Jen,

thankyou for the reply, I knew what I was in for when I wrote what I wrote as I have heard all the explanations before but DhO is about sharing our experiences and if we were afraid of that DhO wouldn't exist. The sifu in china is a respected physician who runs a hospital and is also Deputy Director of the Classical Chinese Medicine Research Institute in China. Some of his patients include an ex president of indonseia and members of one of the royal faimilies (If I remeber it was Thai) so not bad for someone who supposedly pulls off cheap magic tricks for tourists as sawfoot deducted. The day of the cows cost me a taxi ride and I got a free meal thrown in.
One of the sifus helped me for seven years before he died and the only money I ever gave him was 200 in a card once so not something he would do for finacial gain. I payed to train with Zhao but he runs a school and clinic in Sydney and have payed for every buddhist retreat I have been on.

cheers
Jeff
Hi Jeff, sorry for being actually insenstive (not that this counts for much). One thing I was trying to figure out while watching those videos was to what extent the "Sifu" was aware of  what was going on. One possibility was that he wasn't - that he geniunely believes he has magic powers (and was a decent chap), and that the deception was happening with the infrastructure around him. That was partly why I showed the clips of the Chi master - clearly he really believed he had magic Chi powers, though in this case the illusion occurred due to his students unconsciously reinforcing that belief rather than any outright deception. 

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/13/14 4:13 PM as a reply to _.
As a long-time science editor, I took certain courses in detecting mathematical and other errors in epidemiological research. One of the teachers of one of these courses pointed to an estimate that 80% of peer-reviewed published medical literature is based on bad study design, statistically speaking, and that as consumers of this literature we ought to be extremely skeptical of all of it.

Here is an article explaining common sources of error and their prevalance.

RE: Scientific proof for fairies
Answer
9/13/14 8:45 PM as a reply to sawfoot _.
Something as foriegn as yin chi is labelled as magic yet if I were to speak of gravity it would be familiar and yet it is as equally unknown

Sawfoot I would be interested if you have expierienced any of the following

precognitive dreams
deja vu
Have you ever picked up the phone to call someone and found them on the other end
Been thinking of someone and found them at your front door or bumped into them in the street
conincidence
syncronicity

How about something as mundane as knowing a storm approaches half a day in advance. This is all about perceiving a subtle change in your enviroment. There are signs in the movement of birds on the horizon, the smell in the wind and the feeling in the air.  Our senses have been deadened by the years of television and the less reliant we are on them for our day to day life the less we notice about the world we live in.