|
|
vampires! |
Woot! |
|
78% |
[ 36 ] |
:stare: |
|
21% |
[ 10 ] |
|
Total Votes : 46 |
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:35 pm
Vampires are real. I have proof. I have long long write outs on why they are and all the proof that you'll need. Pm me if you want me to explain all of it to you. But I know that they are real, and that they exist, and they're cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 7:37 pm
[~I~hopexyouxget~fat~] Vampires are real. I have proof. I have long long write outs on why they are and all the proof that you'll need. Pm me if you want me to explain all of it to you. But I know that they are real, and that they exist, and they're cool. Are you referring to the vampire (sub?)culture? smile The most I know about that is those who do actually drink the blood of their partners, and the ones who feed off of the auras of others - "energy vampires", I think they're called? sweatdrop I would like to be educated, though, if you could please PM me about your findings (even if you're instead referring to the creature vampires; in that case, sorry for being presumptuous sweatdrop )
|
|
|
|
|
-Resurrected Writer- Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:39 pm
Isobel Bellamy Amon the Halfbreed Well i like to leran more about them, I myself never had blood but would like to try it. One of my friends is a vampire, but he is a little on the crazy end. does any know how to weather he is or isnt( and no im not crazy) Read the first few pages in this thread, but really, it's virtually impossible to create a yes or no answer to anything supernatural, it's an untestable area. But, just imagine if there was something that could actually prove people's claims of being psychic, boy that would an an amusing day for scientists everywhere xd thankyah
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:31 pm
i have a thing for blood and biting so most my friends call me their own little vampire i dont mind it but lately im beggining to be more interested in vampires so could seoe enlighten me on vapire fact and fiction?
|
|
|
|
|
Aubrey of the sliver line
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:39 pm
i'll sort out, once again, some myths and the facts on them
1. vampires are immortal
FALSE. we are just as mortal as any other human being
2. Vampires are evil
Again, FALSE. we are no more inherently evil than the rest of humanity. the very concept of this is a demonization, likely of christian origin.
3. Vampires servive only on blood
FALSE. some of us do drink blood, some of us take in the verious energies in the world around us, some of us can do both, but those are more of a supplement, similar to taking vitamins. blood-drinking vamps typically do not need much blood at all, maybe a spoonful a day, and this is taken from willing donors who are educated on exactly what they're doing
4. vampires can 'turn', 'embrace', etc other humans and make them into vampires.
This is most likely FALSE, though it is debated in the community. the more accepted theory is that a feeding can awaken one's own Latent vampirism, or that one can develop what is known as 'sympathetic vampirism', which results from being fed on too often or too much at once, and typically results in temporary manifestation of vampiric abilities and thirst.
5. vampires are superhuman
again, FALSE. We do sometimes develop some odd abilities, but these are also within the range of normal humans. these include but are not limited to: Slightly overaverage strength, psychic ability, increased speed, and limited ability to influence the minds of others.
6. vampires burst into flame in the sunlight
FALSE. we won't burst into flame, but most of us are extemely photophobic or photosensitive. personally i wear sunglasses everywhere outside of the home, including at school, to the supermarket, and everywhere i go outside, and i usually wear a hooded sweatshirt when weather permits, though during the summer i wear a lightweight hooded shirt, which i intend to cut the arms off of and wear a mesh top underneath because it allows for more airflow while still protecting the skin fairly well. most of us sunburn rediculously fast, ranging from instantaneous to anywhere under a half hour(it typically takes me 15 to 25 minutes of direct exposure to sunlight and temperature over 10 degrees celsius to sunburn, unless theres a good breeze going to cool the skin)
7. Vampires sleep in coffins
Honestly, i have no idea how this started, but returning to the idea of photosensitivity, it could be that some early vampires DID sleep in crypts, seeing as they effectively cut off the light and allow therefore for better sleep.
8. vampires are strictly nocturnal
this is again false, and runs in with the idea of vampires bursting into flame in the sunlight(remember bram stoker's dracula? The count walked around in the daytime, he just wore a wide brimmed hat and sunglasses). some of us have been fortunate enough to live a fully nocturnal lifestyle, but most of us have not. we simply deal with having to walk around at the day and live in horribly lit environments. it's simply a part of life that we find inconvenient and occasionally painful.
9. vampires have made a deal with the devil
again, christian demonization, not to mention absolutely rediculous.
this is like the third time i've bothered to edumacate anyone on this stuff, so look around, i probably missed a point or two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:54 pm
*sigh* Back to the old vampirism topic. This is my response to the user "yabureta shinzo". I will say right now that I disagree with most everything that Dr490n (henceforth "Dragon", for ease of spelling) has said above. The vampire as described by Dragon is a relatively recent invention. Claiming any different is simply historically inaccurate. It's like claiming that Wicca is an ancient religion, and not a recent one. The fact is that modern Vapirism, like Wicca, does draw from historical references, but in and of itself is new. The actual facts of where vampirism comes from are abundant. Though the myth differs over various cultures, vampires have traditionally been dead. That is, vampires were people who died and, for whatever reason, refuses to stay that way. Generally the vampire in question would then seek the lifeblood of the living in order to substantiate itself. (Interestingly, the "energy-vampire" of modern vampirism seems closer to a succubus, historically, than a vampire.) This was pure folklore, there is no actual evidence in any form for vampires ever having had existed. The truth about vampirism is that there really is no such thing as a vampire. If the modern vampire were any different than a normal human being it would show up in genetic testing. The fact that no one has noticed anything substantially odd in any of the multitudes of genetic testing that has been done is proof enough that there is no such thing as a vampire. (Unless you're going to also claim that no vampire, not even one, has ever been genetically tested.) Even some of the things that Dragon talks about, such as sensitivity to light, are very recent additions to the vampire myth. Vampires being seneitive to light was added to the vampire myth in 1922 by the film Nosferatu. This is the first recorded instance of vampires having any aversion to natural light. Other mythological creatures before this had sun aversions, but not vampires. There's also one thing that Dragon has said that is not only mythically inaccurate, but scientifically as well. DR490N i'll sort out, once again, some myths and the facts on them 6. vampires burst into flame in the sunlight FALSE. we won't burst into flame, but most of us are extemely photophobic or photosensitive. personally i wear sunglasses everywhere outside of the home, including at school, to the supermarket, and everywhere i go outside, and i usually wear a hooded sweatshirt when weather permits, though during the summer i wear a lightweight hooded shirt, which i intend to cut the arms off of and wear a mesh top underneath because it allows for more airflow while still protecting the skin fairly well. most of us sunburn rediculously fast, ranging from instantaneous to anywhere under a half hour(it typically takes me 15 to 25 minutes of direct exposure to sunlight and temperature over 10 degrees celsius to sunburn, unless theres a good breeze going to cool the skin) The claim that someone can get sunburn instantly is ridiculous. Sunburn occurs from prolonged exposure to UV rays, generally from the sun. Like any form of radiation, exposure to sunlight takes time to start having a negative effect. Even the lightest-skinned person in the world (Albinos) standing on a mountaintop, during a period of extremely high UV radiation (UV index 11), wearing no clothes or sunscreen will take a number of minutes to burn. (About three, according to a sunburn calculator). Most light-skinned people don't take all that long to burn. The estimate of 15-25 minutes of direct exposure is well within normal for a Caucasian person. Heck, I just calculated my sunburn capacity. It's cloudy outside, so the UV index is as a measly 2, and It would still only take me little over 29 minutes to burn. Secondly, whether or not there's wind blowing has nothing to do with sunburn (unless that wind carries clouds). Like I said, sunburn is due to UV radiation, not heat radiation. The actual heat of the sun has nothing to do with burning, it's all in how much skin is exposed, and how much reflection of the UV rays is happening. Wind doesn't effect light waves in any signifigant sort of way, and as such, doesn't effect how much burn you'll get. (Though a cool breeze is always nice.) Thirdly, temperature also has little to do with sunburn. The UV index of the light getting through is all that matters. You can just as easily get sunburned in the winter as you can in mid-summer. (The fact that most people only get sunburn in the spring and summer can be attributed to the wearing of longer and heavier clothing in the winter, preventing sunburn.) These are the REAL facts about vampirism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 6:51 pm
again, you speak of what you do not know. the thing is, vampirism deals with metaphysics, not genetics. it is actually something very very old. the term 'vampirism' wasn't neccessarily applied to it until several hundred years back, and the community itself has only been willing ot reveal itself as of late, considering these days to be a more 'safe' time, though the satety of today's world, with it's wars and almost constant social upheaval is easily debateable. Like any myth, as i have indicated to anyone with the intelligence to read between the lines, the vampire myths, especially that of dracula, has a loose base in reality, with some extra crap tossed in based off of religious superstition and like i said, demonization. it's really as simple as that.
again, returning to the idea of vampirism being of a metaphysical origin, one must seek outside of the realms of science(bearing in mind that most of the scientific stuff about these days is more theory than fact...evolution, atomic theory, etc), and must therefore seek the realms of what would today be called mysticism and magick, but were once simply parts of life. the origins of true 'vampirism' have many possible traces in literature, from an ancient egyptian god to an extrabiblical text telling of a race called the nephilim to various otherworldly and extradimensional origins, most of which grow very confusing. the one thing that is consistant with any of us that have any real experience is that our subtle body(aka the soul) often has damage to it which is somehow irreparable(for example, i have a few chakra points that leak energy constantly). Again, for this to be considered at all valid one has to deal with the metaphysical world, and have at least a base understanding of it. i'm quite glad to go into details. Now, as for relating the energy vampire to a succubus, that wouldnt work. a succubus or incubus(succubus is female, incubus is male) is, by folklore, a creature who steals your soul by having sex with you. we neither steal souls or need to absorb energy through sexual relations, though the do prove to be the best way of gathering energy for some of us (typically termed 'sexual vampires', for obvious reasons). you addressed the statement that someone sunburning instantly is rediculous. this is incorrect. there are a few well known diseases that will cause someone to sunburn quite severely instantly. Personally, i doubt at first any claim that anyone makes that they sunburn immediately until i see it for myself or see any proof otherwise, but the amount who claim this(bear in mind they usually mean they get pinkish, not that they have third degree burns) makes it plausible, though still unlikely. as for my statement regarding the wind, it helps to keep the skin cool, if it's a nice cool wind, but it is no substitute for sunscreen, nor is it very effective at all. it just helps ease pain.
any questions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:08 pm
I don't believe in real vampires, but there are those who are vampiric in the ri lifestyle, be it through energy vampires or bloodsuckers. I agree with a theory that states that vampire myth is based off early diabetics. And this is a fact: to those of you human would-be vampires, drinking excess amounts of blood actually puts you at risk for diabetes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:14 pm
Muffyn themagikat im fascinated by the myths and personally think bram stoker is a genius, however i dont think i am one, whether it be true or not. that being said, the metallic taste of blood is good, lol I agree. I've always been fasintated by vampires. Anne Rice has really captured vampires in my opinion. I do believe there are real vampires out there. *Gets ready to be hit with things.* Yes the way she writes and describes about them really makes you wonder....^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 7:06 pm
DR490N again, you speak of what you do not know. the thing is, vampirism deals with metaphysics, not genetics. it is actually something very very old. the term 'vampirism' wasn't neccessarily applied to it until several hundred years back, and the community itself has only been willing ot reveal itself as of late, considering these days to be a more 'safe' time, though the satety of today's world, with it's wars and almost constant social upheaval is easily debateable. Like any myth, as i have indicated to anyone with the intelligence to read between the lines, the vampire myths, especially that of dracula, has a loose base in reality, with some extra crap tossed in based off of religious superstition and like i said, demonization. it's really as simple as that. You too speak of what you do not know, what you can not know. Suggesting that vampires were some conspitoral, hidden group that no one ever figured out existed for real poses many problems. One of them is that the modern day vampire (fictional or 'real') is almost completly unrelated to the traditional one. The second problem one faces is this; there was/is supposedly this relativly large population of people who have a shared secret, and yet none of them came out before recently? I find it just a tad bit hard to beleive that no books or stories of 'real' vampires existed until very recently (100 years, max). I mean, secrets about various and assundry things are leaked all the time. Heck, most people know about the existence of such things as the illuminati, the Skull and Bones, etc... And these are supposed to be high-level secrets. Yet I'm supposed to beleive that this secret has been kept since nearly the dawn of humanity (Or whenever you think vampires arose) in near-perfect silence by an infinte range of individuals? That's like seriously suggesting that god is really a Flying Spaghetii Monster. Quote: again, returning to the idea of vampirism being of a metaphysical origin, one must seek outside of the realms of science(bearing in mind that most of the scientific stuff about these days is more theory than fact...evolution, atomic theory, etc). But scientific theory isn't merely speculation. I can't simply say "Gravity is caused by everything rapidly expanding, causing anything not already touching the planet to 'grow' into it, making it seem like the object was pulled into the planet." That's not scientific theory, that's just conjecture. Scientific theories must be concurrent with previous scientific fact (Or have a really good reason for not being). They must be observable or otherways verifiable. For instance, the above statment wasn't scientific theory because if the planets were expanding, and not pulling upon the object, we would have long ago 'grown' into the sun, destroying the planet. Quote: and must therefore seek the realms of what would today be called mysticism and magick, but were once simply parts of life. the origins of true 'vampirism' have many possible traces in literature, from an ancient egyptian god to an extrabiblical text telling of a race called the nephilim to various otherworldly and extradimensional origins, most of which grow very confusing. the one thing that is consistant with any of us that have any real experience is that our subtle body(aka the soul) often has damage to it which is somehow irreparable(for example, i have a few chakra points that leak energy constantly). Again, for this to be considered at all valid one has to deal with the metaphysical world, and have at least a base understanding of it. i'm quite glad to go into details. Please do go into detail. The more exact the detail, the better. There are also many possible origins for humanity however many of them are debunkable (or at lest discretiable) by using simple logic in science. The history of humanity is everywhere; written into our computer databases, dictated to eachother over generations, and even etched into the very bedrock of the planet. The fact that any traces of 'real' vampirism only arise recently casts doubt upon your claims. I also doubt all claims involving the metephysical simply for the fact that there seem to be very few 'facts' about it. An infinte range of people say an even more infinte range of things about a world they've never seen, most of these claims disagreeing. And that's just in European countries. Add in all other mythologies and theologies and you have a jumbled mess with almost no consistancies. Quote: Now, as for relating the energy vampire to a succubus, that wouldnt work. a succubus or incubus(succubus is female, incubus is male) is, by folklore, a creature who steals your soul by having sex with you. we neither steal souls or need to absorb energy through sexual relations, though the do prove to be the best way of gathering energy for some of us (typically termed 'sexual vampires', for obvious reasons). I wasn't speaking of the method of harvesting, but more of the what. In legend, Succubus harves energy, or the soul. Vampires, on the other hand, harvested blood. Quote: you addressed the statement that someone sunburning instantly is rediculous. this is incorrect. there are a few well known diseases that will cause someone to sunburn quite severely instantly. Still not instantly, it takes time. Not only that, but your own words betray you. If the increased sunburn rate were increased due to something in the skin (wether it be a diease, or simply a different chemical makeup) it would be easily detectable via scientific means. Quote: as for my statement regarding the wind, it helps to keep the skin cool, if it's a nice cool wind, but it is no substitute for sunscreen, nor is it very effective at all. it just helps ease pain. The way you origionally said this :"(it typically takes me 15 to 25 minutes of direct exposure to sunlight and temperature over 10 degrees celsius to sunburn, unless theres a good breeze going to cool the skin): indicates that the wind has somethign to do with exposure time/sunburn rate. If that's not what you meant, then whatever. But the fact remains that damage by sunlight is a recent invetntion, first portrayed in the movie Nosferatu (some might argue that it appeared in Dracula, but he was not actually damaged by light, he simply couldn't use a number of his powers.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:29 pm
DieiNoctis You too speak of what you do not know, what you can not know. Suggesting that vampires were some conspitoral, hidden group that no one ever figured out existed for real poses many problems. One of them is that the modern day vampire (fictional or 'real') is almost completly unrelated to the traditional one. The second problem one faces is this; there was/is supposedly this relativly large population of people who have a shared secret, and yet none of them came out before recently? I find it just a tad bit hard to beleive that no books or stories of 'real' vampires existed until very recently (100 years, max). I mean, secrets about various and assundry things are leaked all the time. Heck, most people know about the existence of such things as the illuminati, the Skull and Bones, etc... And these are supposed to be high-level secrets. Yet I'm supposed to beleive that this secret has been kept since nearly the dawn of humanity (Or whenever you think vampires arose) in near-perfect silence by an infinte range of individuals? That's like seriously suggesting that god is really a Flying Spaghetii Monster. Of course some us 'came out of the coffin'. most would have either been laughed at or in some sense executed. there were a fair number of people executed from 1300 to 1700 for 'vampirism', though much of them i would imagine had no involvement. and yes, most of us would prefer to stay in hiding, for the simple reason of fear of persecution. bear in mind that when the world was taken over by Constantine and the roman catholics, a large amount of knowledge was lost and detroyed(THERE IS HISTORICAL PROOF OF THESE EVENTS). the existance of the illuminati has been known more because of the media than anything else, which should be obvious. there were rumors here and there, but nothing was confirmed until people decided to tell the media. information was alot more difficult to gain access to 100 years ago and even right up until just after the incorporation of television. did we arise in silence? ******** no. we just kept our asses hidden with the beginning of the rise of christianity so that ignorant people foolishly choosing to demonize everything their religion couldnt explain wouldn't kill us. Quote: But scientific theory isn't merely speculation. I can't simply say "Gravity is caused by everything rapidly expanding, causing anything not already touching the planet to 'grow' into it, making it seem like the object was pulled into the planet." That's not scientific theory, that's just conjecture. Scientific theories must be concurrent with previous scientific fact (Or have a really good reason for not being). They must be observable or otherways verifiable. For instance, the above statment wasn't scientific theory because if the planets were expanding, and not pulling upon the object, we would have long ago 'grown' into the sun, destroying the planet. Actually, yes. the statement would be theory. a theory is basically an estimated rule. who knows, what we percieve as 'gravity' could be something entirely different altogether. the rules in themselves can even be broken if you know what you're doing. Bear in mind that scientists once thought the earth was flat, and it was widely accepted as fact. Quote: Please do go into detail. The more exact the detail, the better. There are also many possible origins for humanity however many of them are debunkable (or at lest discretiable) by using simple logic in science. The history of humanity is everywhere; written into our computer databases, dictated to eachother over generations, and even etched into the very bedrock of the planet. The fact that any traces of 'real' vampirism only arise recently casts doubt upon your claims. I also doubt all claims involving the metephysical simply for the fact that there seem to be very few 'facts' about it. An infinte range of people say an even more infinte range of things about a world they've never seen, most of these claims disagreeing. And that's just in European countries. Add in all other mythologies and theologies and you have a jumbled mess with almost no consistancies. again, you seek what would be considered proof according to science. science does not, for the most part, recognize metaphysics. to see such proof requires that you be there. you can't really 'write a rule' or anything of the sort to explain what has been termed vampirism. you can't really understand what allows us to take energy from other beings and things, why some of us can manipulate people and things around us, just as science cannot explain telekinesis or extra sensory perception or spiritual activity, despite the fact that anyone can feel even a change in atmosphere or temperature when they walk into a place that is very actively haunted. Do some of these claims on the spiritual world contradict each other? yes, of course. not all of them are factual, and the perception of hte other side and otehr dimensions can vary from person to person anyways. often you can find psychics coming into a haunted place with no prior knowledge or very little, and stating historical things that are indeed later proven through research, however. not even science can deny that without slandering the person or simply calling them a liar. Quote: I wasn't speaking of the method of harvesting, but more of the what. In legend, Succubus harves energy, or the soul. Vampires, on the other hand, harvested blood. Not all vampires harvest blood. in fact there are often statements in myths and legends from a few cultures pertaining to what has been termed by the modern community 'psychic vampires', or those who harvest energy, like myself. most psy-vamps would consider themselves the purer form of vampires, though again, it's something debated within the community. besides, it's not like we just accept it. we question ourselves and others quite often, and prove ourselves to others. i've drained a person of energy before, though it was only partly intentional. Also, sanguine, or blood vampires, do not drain a body of blood. this was a fear tactic, likely made seem more real by the occasional murder/exsanguination. Quote: Still not instantly, it takes time. Not only that, but your own words betray you. If the increased sunburn rate were increased due to something in the skin (wether it be a diease, or simply a different chemical makeup) it would be easily detectable via scientific means. yes, IF it were part of the chemical makeup. in the case of vampirism it is not. it is part of the way that the soul allows the body to absorb energy. whether you realize it or not, the human body DOES absorb energy. During sex, EVERYONE, not just vampires, is exchanging energy, but again, this is part of understanding magic and metaphysics. If you are unprepared to suspend your disbelief there is no point in arguing with you, because there will not and likely never will be scientific proof for the existance of the metaphysical, because metaphysics deals with that you cannot see or properly scan. Quote: The way you origionally said this :"(it typically takes me 15 to 25 minutes of direct exposure to sunlight and temperature over 10 degrees celsius to sunburn, unless theres a good breeze going to cool the skin): indicates that the wind has somethign to do with exposure time/sunburn rate. If that's not what you meant, then whatever. But the fact remains that damage by sunlight is a recent invetntion, first portrayed in the movie Nosferatu (some might argue that it appeared in Dracula, but he was not actually damaged by light, he simply couldn't use a number of his powers.) correct. the whole sunlight thing was not seen in any media form until nosferatu(i own a copy of the film on DVD actually, though I'm not into the whole vampire film thing and never really was). However, that does not make it a recent invention, just a recent MEDIA invention. alot of us have actually debated the whole sun thing, and we don't often have that big a problem with it, though there is a problem. some of us simply find that it makes us uncomfortable, some of us get sunrashes(like me) with any exposure over a certain time(typically 10 minutes), and some of us claim to get some very bad sunburns. why this is I don't know, but it is unquestionably related to the vampiric condition. the only thing relating ot the sun that is almost completely universal within the community is that theres a problem with our eyes which no optometrist seems to be able to find. some of us worse than others. i have prescription lenses. the optometrist himself told me after 3 visits that there was most definitely a problem, he just couldnt figure out what it was(i have seen several specialists who agreed completely) oddly enough, the problem is only with ultraviolet light. Flourescenty lighting, halogen lighting, sunlight, etc. if i even wear so much as a tightly woven fishnet shirt i dont burn, but i still get some nasty sun rashes, and i need my sunglasses wherever i go(though rainy weather seems to be only ever so slightly hard on the eyes, probably because of cloud cover or something of the sort). Some of us have even brought up the possibiliy of eye related problems being Psychosematic(basically a mind over matter thing), which i think is quite likely a possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:05 pm
*actually applauds to the last 2 posts*
VERY interesting. I do enjoy a scientific study. As much as i'd love to provide proof, I have none. x.x;;;
My only wish, is to dream big, and to dream dark. Oh, how lovely it would be to TRULY become Nosferatu. smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 5:40 pm
if you had been reading at all you would realize that those of us who do claim to be vampiric do not believe in the traditional vampire, as in 'nosferatu', which is a german vampiric myth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:41 pm
So, basically, you have no proof, and no proof can be provided. You rely completely upon your own inferences of a condition that may be entirely of your own mind's creation. What I have against vampirism, otherkin, fae, dragons, and many other 'metaphysical' happenings is the same thing I have against religion. Religion takes basic observation (humanity exists), jumps to an unwarranted conclusion (God created humanity), then refuses to provide proof for this claim. (In religion's case, on the basis that god meant for people to have faith, not evidence.) In all reality, it's simply dodging the fact that there is no concrete proof, and it's all unsuported conjecture. This isn't to say that all "metaphysical" things are false. Quite a number of metaphysical occurrences have some interesting tests that warrant further study, at the very least. There is evidence to suggest the existence of telepathy, telekinesis, remote viewing, and OBE's. Again, it's not conclusive proof, yet there is at least evidence that points to the conclusion that they exist. This is in contrast with what I've seen with vampirism, where not only is there not any real evidence to support it, but the details of what vampirism is, and it's history, vary even among those who claim it. You did mention something about there being historical records of 'modern' vampirism that were largely destroyed by Constantine (The Great, I assume). If you could source these claims, as well as any other of your claims about the history of vampirism, it would lend credence to you case. DR490N Actually, yes. the statement would be theory. a theory is basically an estimated rule. who knows, what we percieve as 'gravity' could be something entirely different altogether. the rules in themselves can even be broken if you know what you're doing. Bear in mind that scientists once thought the earth was flat, and it was widely accepted as fact. No, my friend, this would be a hypothesis. Defined as "A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation." Like I said, pure conjecture that can be disproved upon further investigation. A theory, on the other hand, "is a mathematical description, a logical explanation, a verified hypothesis, or a proven model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation." Secondly, the belief in a flat Earth was almost fully abolished by the middle of the 1st century AD. It was abolished by scientists, and had largely been put in place by religion. Not only that, but religion and 'science' used to be inexorably intertwined in their workings. Everything withing science was regulated and filtered through religion, hardly making it science at all. Only more recently has science become a discipline independent of superstitions. Thirdly, the laws of nature can not be broken, be definition. The laws that we've observed to be true may be broken, but that merely shows that our observations were incorrect. The constants of the universe are just that, constant. Even the distortion of space/time by gravity is a natural part of the universe, governed by its laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:24 pm
you would claim that the vampiric condition is of my own mind's creation? I never wanted it in the first place, and now that i have it, i make the best of it. if it were of my own creation, i would not be able to use it to adversely effect others, as i have done on many occasions.
Nonetheless, your mind is already made up. there is no point in arguing with one so foolhardy as to close their mind because society says something is impossible. dwell in your ignorance, but we exist nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|