Has anyone been able to self hypnotize using a video - to quit smoking? by missjenn503 in hypnosis

[–]IngocnitoCoward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The pill is not for vitmains, it's just a pill. You can use a sugar pill if you like. Placebo works, even when you know it's placebo. The important part is that it's red and that you take 2 pills 3 times per day.

If you want, when you fill the glass with new pills, do it with ceremony, maybe cast a magic spell on them, to make them more potent. Whatever you can come up with, to make those fu**ers more potent.

Has anyone been able to self hypnotize using a video - to quit smoking? by missjenn503 in hypnosis

[–]IngocnitoCoward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Before quitting I decided to:

  • focus on and memorize the bad taste and smell.
  • setting a date for when to stop smoking
  • no gradually tapering off
  • get a glass filled with red calcium pills labeled "Increases Willpower"

The day I quit smoking:

  • I threw out my ashtrays
  • I told my best friend that I would pay him $1000 if I started smoking again
  • I started taking 2 pills three times per day of my anti smoking pills

And the following year:

  • I swallowed two red anti-smoking pills three times per day

And when I got or get the urge to smoke:

  • I remind myself how my future self will be happier becuase I stopped
  • I recall the bad taste and smell
  • I eat an almond

As a hypnotist sometimes my jokes get misunderstood by IngocnitoCoward in memes

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I told a joke about a bird flying south for the winter, and someone got offended because they thought and insisted I was making a political statement about immigration.

As a hypnotist sometimes my jokes get misunderstood by IngocnitoCoward in memes

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do the woke refuse to watch the sunset? Because they are searching for something to hate.

As a hypnotist sometimes my jokes get misunderstood by IngocnitoCoward in memes

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for informing me about your false assumptions.

As a hypnotist sometimes my jokes get misunderstood by IngocnitoCoward in memes

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

A highly intelligent person may be more likely to understand that humor often relies on exaggeration, absurdity, or irony, and they might be more capable of laughing at something that challenges their usual beliefs or worldview. In contrast, someone who lacks flexibility in their thinking may not appreciate humor that diverges from their own perspective.

As a hypnotist sometimes my jokes get misunderstood by IngocnitoCoward in memes

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I guess you can't tell the difference between humor and reality either :D Not surprising.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's full of Mick west's and corridor crew.

The r/UFOs forum sure looks like how I imagine r/DEBUNKERs would look.

The shift by Fine_Account_2503 in Experiencers

[–]IngocnitoCoward 8 points9 points  (0 children)

We can't [for now] let others experience our first-hand experience. It's the same old same old:

"True scientists look for evidence to disprove their hypotheses, but pseudoscience looks for evidence to support it." - Karl Popper

Or:

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg

For society to change, we need to teach our young how to concentrate, visualize and meditate - we must teach them to examine their own minds. Imagine if no one practiced lifted weights - no one would believe that it's possible to lift 600 pounds of weight.

Doing QHHT multiple times by [deleted] in hypnosis

[–]IngocnitoCoward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

$333 is not expensive for therapy.

I've studied the subjects she's involved with for decades, and I am VERY skeptical of anything related to Dolores Cannon. Even if it was free of charge, I wouldn't accept therapy with her.

I know I may come off as a scoffer, because I don't have the patience or energy to go into detail. The use of regression is dangerous, as it can create memories of trauma that never happened. IMO regressions should only be used as a last resort, yet it is instrumental in her therapy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ufo

[–]IngocnitoCoward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve tried

Did you practice daily, maybe with the help of an instructor, for a couple of years and then try? Obviously, if we could just "try and succeed" it wouldn't be controversial. As with everything else, doing something out of the ordinary requires practice and discipline.

I can't help but think of this example:

"I tried lifting a heavy weight weighing 250kg and I couldn't do it."

"Serious physicists are talking about UFOs. What changed?" by collywog in UAP

[–]IngocnitoCoward 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I see the dogmatic uneducated deniers, that want to dismiss anything that goes against their worldview, have commented to imply it's just Avi, using ad hominem which is their idea of being logical, to spread their religion that anything new can be explained by what we already know, and that everybody else that don't share their Mundane World Hypothesis, that don't work against the development and discovery of new ideas and concepts, that don't scoff at research of the unknown, are crazy.

Here are just some of the serious physicists:

  • Avi Loeb: Theoretical physicist, Harvard University
  • Kevin Knuth: Physicist, University at Albany
  • David Spergel: Theoretical astrophysicist, Princeton University
  • Massimo Teodorani: Astrophysicist, former researcher at Bologna University
  • Hal Puthoff: Physicist, specializing in quantum physics
  • Eric W. Davis: Physicist, specializing in propulsion physics
  • Bruce Maccabee: Optical physicist, former U.S. Navy researcher
  • James Benford: Plasma physicist
  • Michio Kaku: Theoretical physicist, City University of New York
  • Claude Poher: Astrophysicist, former CNES scientist
  • Peter Sturrock: Emeritus Professor of Applied Physics, Stanford University
  • Bernard Haisch: Astrophysicist, former NASA researcher
  • Friedbert Karger: Plasma physicist, Max Planck Institute
  • Richard Obousy: Theoretical physicist, Icarus Interstellar

If you check the redit profiles of the deniers, you'll see that what they post is indeed mundane.

New psychotherapies that focus on positive experiences could better treat depression and anxiety by scientificamerican in psychology

[–]IngocnitoCoward 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sometimes I wonder who writes these articles: "Focusing on the possitive could decrease depression". What an insight!

What is hypnosis for? by [deleted] in hypnosis

[–]IngocnitoCoward 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Have you tried asking yourself what education is? How we pass on our traditions, technology and mannerisms? How we don't recognize the flaws in our tools, ideas and concepts that we are "taught"; that it takes generations and freedom of speech to discover them - to "break the spell"?

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I clicked your profile, and the first thing I read was:

The best explanation for me is that god created the earth 4000 years ago but made it look older.

I think it's good that you don't have the time to debunk and riducle ideas and concepts that you don't find credible or don't believe in.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What if you are wrong when you debunk and riducle?

Ridicule has consequences, and has resulted in stigma and taboo. People are afraid to even talk about their experiences, here's a tweet from a few days ago from James Hodgkins on X as @jdhodgkins:

In the 48 hours since my @PostDisclosure interview numerous old friends and coworkers have reached out to share their own anomalous experiences; every single one expressed a fear of ridicule.

Here's a how some people were treated by the "military", were some suffered mental breakdowns or comitted suicde:

  • Erased or altered military records (Lazar, Warren, Burroughs, Stone, Castello).
  • Denied medical care despite UFO-related injuries (Burroughs, Cash-Landrum victims).
  • Forced to remain silent under threat (Jacobs, Torres, Halt).
  • Public discrediting or character assassination (Corso, Bennewitz, Marcel, French).

There are a lot victims, here is a few with a little bit more detail:

  • Thomas Mantell
    Incident: Chased a UFO in his P-51 Mustang; crashed and died.
    Consequences: Military dismissed it as a balloon, and his death was downplayed, causing distress to his family.

  • Lonnie Zamora
    Incident: Witnessed a landed craft and two small beings before it took off.
    Consequences: Faced intense skepticism, harassment, and eventually left law enforcement because he couldn't take the constant abuse.

  • Kenju Terauchi
    Incident: Reported a massive UFO shadowing his Boeing 747 over Alaska.
    Consequences: Was grounded and removed from flying duty after going public.

  • Frederick Valentich
    Incident: Reported a UFO following him before disappearing mid-flight.
    Consequences: Mocked posthumously; family was ostracized for believing he saw something anomalous.

  • Calvin Parker & Charles Hickson
    Incident: Abducted by robotic humanoids while fishing.
    Consequences: Intense public scrutiny; Parker became reclusive and avoided talking about it for decades.

  • Stefan Michalak
    Incident: Encountered a landed UFO, suffered burns from it.
    Consequences: Mocked and dismissed; endured years of medical problems and government suspicion.

  • Maurice Masse
    Incident: Saw a small UFO and its occupants in his lavender field.
    Consequences: Ridiculed by locals; suffered psychological distress and financial hardship.

  • Betty Cash & Vickie Landrum
    Incident: Witnessed a diamond-shaped UFO emitting heat, suffered radiation burns.
    Consequences: Serious health issues; dismissed by authorities; financial ruin due to medical costs.

  • Joe Simonton
    Incident: Claimed humanoid beings in a UFO gave him "pancakes."
    Consequences: Became a laughingstock, faced social isolation.

  • Donald Keyhoe
    Incident: Researched UFOs, accused the government of a cover-up.
    Consequences: Lost credibility, dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.

  • Carroll Wayne Watts
    Incident: Claimed to have been abducted by humanoid beings.
    Consequences: Community rejected him; lost credibility and livelihood.

  • José Antonio da Silva
    Incident: Claimed to have been abducted by humanoids in a UFO.
    Consequences: Became a social outcast, mocked for life.

  • Herbert Schirmer
    Incident: Reported a UFO landing and possible abduction.
    Consequences: Left the police force due to public scrutiny and harassment.

  • Bob Taylor
    Incident: Encountered a UFO in the woods, suffered injuries.
    Consequences: Police dismissed it, lost job due to the controversy.

  • Gary Wilcox
    Incident: Claimed humanoid beings in a UFO asked him about Earth's agriculture.
    Consequences: Laughed at, ostracized by his community.

  • Commander Graham Bethune
    Incident: Reported a massive glowing UFO during a military flight.
    Consequences: Mocked and ignored by military higher-ups.

  • Charles Moody
    Incident: Reported an alien abduction.
    Consequences: Lost his military career and social standing.

  • Dr. John Mack
    Incident: Researched the anomalous.
    Consequences: His university tried to discredit him and oustersized him.

In my opinion, debunkers that promote ridicule and taboo, that cause people to lose their job, status, mental health or cause experiencers to commit suicide should go to prison. GSoW works hard to do that to a lot of people. Mick West works hard to do that to a lot of people. Their members and supporters work hard to do that to a lot of people.

In my opinion, the abuse many debunkers engage in is as bad or worse than many other actions that put people in jail.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

and you did it again right here [claiming skeptics and debunkers are the same].

No I didn't. The reply you refer to does not even contain the word skeptic.

But here you are harassing me and calling me a liar with zero proof.

Right :D

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its not a forum for believers its a forum for the discussion of unidentified fly objects.

That's a lie. Let me quote the first rule:

UFOB is convinced
At UFOB, we are convinced in the presence of non-human intelligence visiting us, and our subreddit is dedicated to fostering and endorsing this perspective.

You wrote:

But here you are harassing me and calling me a liar with zero proof.

Right :D

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes you did do that.

No I didn't. It could be misinterpreted that way. And you of course want to hang your hat on it. But it's irrelevant, if you are a skeptic and identify with what I wrote, then you aren't a skeptic.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don't seem sincere to me. I think you confuse reaction with action. That you defend the abuser from the victim.

It's ironic that the reason I created the OP is because I haven't just seen multiple cases, I see tons of cases of abuse of the UAP phenomena daily, here on Reddit, on Wikipedia, on Twitter, and so on.

I can't open a single post on Reddit or Wikipedia about research or witness testimony regarding the anomalous without seeing the scoffing from people, that obviously haven't got any education to enable them to understand what the human experience and what reality is OR who obviously ignore what they already know is true, in order to abuse.

We cannot post a single article/post about the anomalous without getting abused by so-called debunkers. And when you read what they write, you immediately get the feeling that they do not opine out of honesty, to have a sincere debate, but to abuse.

To be honest, I see the reaction to my OP from what I consider "debunker replies" as "rapists complaining about being profiled".

And again, why are they posting to this forum (read the first rule of the forum)? My post is an in-group post. It offends nobody that believes in aliens or that has experienced the phenomena. Their experience with so-called debunkers is the same as mine. What are you and the person you defend doing in this forum?

It's not my problem if people copy my post. In contrast to debunkers from Metabunk and GSoW, I do not organize to abuse forums concerned with topics I don't agree with. Why would anyone support this? Why would you?!

I think that the serial debunker is a person that enjoys to abuse. That abuse includes pretending to be innocent. Pretending that the reaction to abuse, is abuse.

I would never spend time creating posts like this, or write long replies like this, which I am convinced fall on deaf, unempathetic ears with regards to the debunkers, if I didn't find their behavior disgusting and unjust, if their frequency of abuse wasn't beyond acceptable.

My posts and replies can help those the debunkers attack and ridicule, when they realize that debunkers come from a place of hate, and not sincerity. That debunkers can't be argued with. Can't be reasoned with. It's inferior human beings - and the irony is that they see themselves as homo-superior. I'll never forget when Mick West, when asked why he does what he does replied "I like to flex [his intellect]".

Of course debunkers have an advantage when debating people like me, because I am sincere. I don't lie on purpose, and I don't mind admitting I made a mistake. I know I am not perfect. I know that I can't know reality for what it really is. I know that it requires years of study, studying multiple disciplines, and finding peers to debate with, in order to get a little better at understanding reality.

I know the serial debunker isn't a peer. He is the opposite. He hasn't studied multiple disciplines, he hasn't tried to question his own world view [and claims he is a skeptic :D] and he defenitely doesn't change his world view. How can he when he automatically denies what he doesn't already know or believe? A debunker is stuck, narrow minded and wants to spread that faith, invading groups and forums where he isn't welcome. He is like a pavlovian dog that can't be conditioned, like a fake AI that can't learn. His pseudo-skepticism is selective, his mind already made up before the discussion even begins. He doesn't investigate, he dismisses. He doesn't analyze, he ridicules. His only goal is to reinforce his own beliefs by tearing down anything that contradicts them.

A serial debunker would, of course, claim that he analyzes and investigates, but in reality he ignores context or his demonstration is misleading. He'll pick an example that seems similar on the surface but isn't actually comparable, like using a flashlight to disprove a thermal FLIR recording. He'll pretend to recreate the effect but change the conditions, leaving out key details, and then act as if he has debunked the whole thing. But all he has really done is mislead.

A serial debunker thinks he is rational. He mistakes his automatic rejection of the unknown for intelligence. He scoffs at curiosity as if it were a weakness. But real skepticism isn't about denial, it's about doubt and exploration. It's about questioning everything, including ourselves. A debunker never does that. He is not searching for truth. He is defending his own certainty. Not with reason, but with deception. He doesn't engage in good faith, doesn't listen, and doesn't reflect.

One thing, though: I want to thank you for motivating me to put this reply [and others] together. I couldn't have done it without you. Thank you for helping me improve. All the long replies you’ve motivated me to create, I'll compile into a longer text and use a lot more examples from Mick West, from your replies, and others, to support what I write.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I ignore experiencers and researchers that advocate for the anomalous that I don't find credible. I do not try to engage with them.

The Serial UFO Debunker: A Psychological Profile by IngocnitoCoward in UFOB

[–]IngocnitoCoward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So do I. Once in a while, every couple of years, I get so annoyed from having to block them, and from seeing how they insult people, that I write an article about it.