Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Wolfchild nathan.olsen@*******.msus.edu
Subject: [OT] Magic and RL (was Re: On Cybereyes)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 18:43:48 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, abortion_engine wrote:

> > All basic aura reading is (as far as I can tell) is adapting your eyes to
> > see the interfeerence of the body's EM field or something along those
> > lines. It occasionally shows up with cameras, particularly GOOD quality
> > video taken in reduced light conditions without lights or starlight
> filters
> > or with LOW speed still footage.
> >
> All aura reading is rediculous, superstitious, self-delusion or intentional
> mis-representation.
>
> Hey, folks, magic isn't real! Press pause on the fantasy deck before you
> stop roleplaying!

Actually, aura reading isn't magic. As the original person said, it is
simply a faint visual representation of a person's EM field. I can do it
and it only took about 30 minutes of practice to learn how. As for whether
or not magick is real, I can't say for sure. I am extremely skeptical and
scientificly-minded, but ever since I first met my wife (who practices
Wicca), I've seen some things where there is no apparent rational
explanation for what happened, but I am NOT the type that easily accepts
anything that doesn't fit in my scientific world-view.

What it comes down to is that I've seen some things that I can't easily
explain away, but unless I see her shoot lightning bolts out of her
fingers and blow up a parked car, I will remain forever unconvinced.

Oh, and a word of advice about this subject, people on both sides of this
debate tend to be firmly rooted in their opinions and will not change
their minds. It's kinda like the "which is better, SR2 or SR3" arguement
that's been going on for a while on this list. KnowhatImean? (Which makes
me wonder just why I wrote this response in the first place. Oh well,
since I spent the time writing it, I might as well hit 'Send' and see
what happens.)



Wolfchild - "Life ain't easy for a troll named Sue."
--
"Quin tu istanc orationem hinc veterem atque|"Let us spend one day as
antiquam amoves?" -Plautus, Miles Gloriosus|deliberately as Nature. . .
--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--|and not be thrown off the
"There are nights when the wolves are silent|track by every nutshell and
and only the moon howls." -George Carlin |mosquito's wing that falls on
Wolfchild <nathan.olsen@*******.msus.edu> |the rails." -H.D.Thoreau
Message no. 2
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: [OT] Magic and RL (was Re: On Cybereyes)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 20:19:44 -0400
> > > All basic aura reading is (as far as I can tell) is adapting your eyes
to
> > > see the interfeerence of the body's EM field or something along those
> > > lines. It occasionally shows up with cameras, particularly GOOD
quality
> > > video taken in reduced light conditions without lights or starlight
> > filters
> > > or with LOW speed still footage.
> > >
> > All aura reading is rediculous, superstitious, self-delusion or
intentional
> > mis-representation.
> >
> > Hey, folks, magic isn't real! Press pause on the fantasy deck before you
> > stop roleplaying!
>
> What it comes down to is that I've seen some things that I can't easily
> explain away, but unless I see her shoot lightning bolts out of her
> fingers and blow up a parked car, I will remain forever unconvinced.

You know, I've said almost that exact same thing.

> Oh, and a word of advice about this subject, people on both sides of this
> debate tend to be firmly rooted in their opinions and will not change
> their minds. It's kinda like the "which is better, SR2 or SR3" arguement
> that's been going on for a while on this list. KnowhatImean? (Which makes
> me wonder just why I wrote this response in the first place. Oh well,
> since I spent the time writing it, I might as well hit 'Send' and see
> what happens.)
>
Yes, which is why I think I'll hit "Send," and probably shut up about this.
[Or, perhaps, not.]
Message no. 3
From: Wolfchild nathan.olsen@*******.msus.edu
Subject: [OT] Magic and RL (was Re: On Cybereyes)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 19:52:09 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, abortion_engine wrote:

> > What it comes down to is that I've seen some things that I can't easily
> > explain away, but unless I see her shoot lightning bolts out of her
> > fingers and blow up a parked car, I will remain forever unconvinced.
>
> You know, I've said almost that exact same thing.

Except that I, even though an uberskeptic, refuse to ignore the
possibility of its reality.

Besides, even if it is all just a big load of drek and my wife is a fool
for embracing spirituality and magick so completely, I really can't
complain about the ritual sex. ;)



Wolfchild - "Life ain't easy for a troll named Sue."
--
"Quin tu istanc orationem hinc veterem atque|"Let us spend one day as
antiquam amoves?" -Plautus, Miles Gloriosus|deliberately as Nature. . .
--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--|and not be thrown off the
"There are nights when the wolves are silent|track by every nutshell and
and only the moon howls." -George Carlin |mosquito's wing that falls on
Wolfchild <nathan.olsen@*******.msus.edu> |the rails." -H.D.Thoreau

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] Magic and RL (was Re: On Cybereyes), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.