Anthony Peake, Ferryman? |565|

Seeing Anthony's latest praise of Keith Augustine and "Myth of an Afterlife" I really wish Alex would have pushed back a little harder. Maybe next time.
 
Seeing Anthony's latest praise of Keith Augustine and "Myth of an Afterlife" I really wish Alex would have pushed back a little harder. Maybe next time.

I'm trying not to be overly harsh about Peake, but he spouts a lot of garbage. E.g. "if you think you understand quantum physics you don't understand quantum physics ", "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"... except when it comes to his own claims, then it's "based on absolute research and science"
The guy lacks credibility
 
See the 1:45 timestamp: "my philosophy has always been [...] extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

So unscientific...

 
Please invite him on my behalf... but in the process let him know that it might be a rough ride... a fair one... just a little rough.
He's already said you are unfair to Sam Harris and Keith Augustine. So he would want some ground rules. I think he is afraid of actual push back. Skeptics like their snark one way. No pushing back.
 
I'm assuming the article Randall linked to is quoting Peake correctly. Here is a quote by Peake:

'The truth of the matter is (for the moment you are going to find this very hard to accept), the quantum physics and neurology that explain these events are your quantum physics as this book is your book. You are its author, not me, because I do not exist in this particular universe. This is because you, and you alone, are the only conscious being in this universe'

http://afterlifetopics.com/debunking-anthony-peake-part-1-prologue-and-chapter-1/

An interesting thought experiment, but the tone is so overbearing, presumptuous and arrogant
I’ve had interesting experiences with this line of thinking. Reality is mostly objective IMO, but I’ve found you can “bend things around you” to create a somewhat more favourable local universe.


It seems to depend on your ability to understand reality as best as can be, but also grasp with the other hand a sense that we all just create it at will as we go along. To lean against the chaotic elements and allow these energies into your life occasionally if needed.

If needed though. Starting to believe that you are the only one in the universe leads to insanity as I don’t think whatever constitutes the universe allows you to have too much fun
 
Also Peake demands the mechanism e.g. of reincarnation to be known before accepting the data on it... That's absurd.

Agreed... absurd... contrary to science. I was surprised he hasn't noticed this blind spot before. then again, that's the advantage of doing these interviews this way... they get too stuff you can't get to in an echo chamber.

So credit Tony for being willing to engage.
 
He's already said you are unfair to Sam Harris and Keith Augustine. So he would want some ground rules. I think he is afraid of actual push back. Skeptics like their snark one way. No pushing back.

ok. i will agree to almost any ground rules... because as you pointed out it's really just a Smokescreen
 
Generally speaking, Scientists approach the observation of our existence with a lens that sees the greater as having-qualities-of the lesser, as opposed to the lesser having-qualities-of the greater. So we say “reality runs kinda like a computer” instead of “computers run kinda like reality”.
Because our experience with computers is only 100 years old, it’s anthropomorphism for us to view those similarities through the lens of the lesser being primary.
Because of this there will be no told-ya-so moment for Sim theorists. For instance - If Tomorrow somehow Science confirmed simulation theory and discovered it’s run on Crystals and Etheric Energy (no hard drives), many would still say “well technically it’s not a computer so…..”


Well, if we go one step further than communication, we’d be talking teleportation. And How could you argue one possible and not the other? (I’m not saying you would, just that’s how I extrapolate.)
I suspect that’s what’s going on with Remote Viewers, Telekenetics(Cherylee Black), and also Observer Effect.
And to anyone who would disagree I’d ask them to also confirm they’ve never physically felt the anger of another person while in separate rooms or location…. I personally extrapolate that connection to the extent of the entire universe, because : how could you argue that one of those situations involves physical connection and not the other situation?.
Thought, Upon awakening from a nap:

Re: Bernardo Kastrups ‘Smallest possible unit of existence which may not be further reduced’.

(Notion possibly hereby destroyed.. I think.. sorry BK)

Whether we exist within an infinitude or a simulation,
The smallest unit is only the smallest CURRENT unit.
A base unit which has never been further reduced May just be on the “Yet” list ad infinitum.

And for both the Simulation and/or the Infinitum, the appearance/intuitive-notion-of an ‘irreducible base unit’ would only serve Consciousness as a tool of conservation of energy.
 
Last edited:
Apologies if it was covered but I didn't see it so far (and I got sucked into the SHarris debacle a bit, damn it), I just wanted to chime in to about the mostly missing aspect of time in the discussion, you mentioned it right at the end but there was no elaboration sadly, which I think would also cut into APeake's positions on reincarnation/transmigration of souls etc.


If the 'non physical' realm is not beholden to time in the way we mostly experience it here in the physical (linear past>future), which seems to be the case from many sources (and fits nicely with modern physics understanding of the nature of time, in that scientists don't see a reason it should go in one direction and not the other), then of course most recounts of past lives are going to focus on the most memorable or impacting experiences.
If one had 'infinite' time to experience different lives and eras, we've probably all been to ancient egypt and other eras, so of course we're going to focus on the past lives where we "upgraded to a higher cast from a lower one" over the reverse experience.
The experience in the 'non-physical' is that it's all happening at once, which doesnt really translate to the physical (our) day to day experience because we naturally try to impose a linear chronology that makes sense to us, but simply doesnt fit.
So all that, 'different lives across different 'persons' in addition to his 'past lives are memories of one person' seems possible to me...

Same point for why we have contact with the human dead: they are both 'currently' reincarnated and also going existing in the 'non physical' as "ghosts" or whatever, it's all happening 'at once' (to our linear time model understanding).


More personal speculation from here, but I think they are reasonable mentions as to 'what is happening' towards Peake's dismissals:

> We aren't covered in scars because the impact of that traumatic death is very 'memorable', so has the most 'significance' in this incarnation.
In the non physical, this - and all other impacts are 'happening' at 'all times' but when we're embodied this time, it translates to a recent impact - and other ones that were processed (in linear time) are now not showing. Damn hard to explain.

I guess I'm trying to say that: non-physical/all time has all impacts at all times. But, incarnation #1 happens, you get an 'impactful event'. Go back to the non-physical and the impact is/was always there. Incarnation #2 happens you have a chance to 'process' that and work it out so when you return to non-physical, it's not there - and never was... 'all time' is confusing! Why not? Fits into both sides' model.
(...Also not accepting that scars can't transfer to another 'random body' because it's different DNA, lolol pretty well established that biology is affected by consciousness, not even worth elaborating on.)


> The disparate groups have different templates of what reincarnation involves, because the non-physical, and physical is mailable and responds to our consciousness. So all conscious input is effecting - therefore determining - what is 'real'. The more input (attention, focus, emotion etc) the more 'persistent' that aspect of the universe is , the more 'real' - maybe even takes on a life of its own (egregors etc).
So generally there's plenty of space for Peake's versions, and others to be 'real', but I thought it was a particularly weak detraction point to bring up because of the lack of a 'standard' global reincarnation template of what is happening in the 'non-physical'.


> The "vast majority" of people dont remember past lives because, well, most people have shit memory. Or maybe they do remember, but don't realize it's a past life because of our western education. Or we're just too focused on this life etc. Why not? Fits into both sides' model (actually I thought undercut his model a bit)


> The "vast majority" of past life accounts from hypnosis are people trying to please the hypnotist, or are just suggestable? Sure, they probably get a snipit of a past life, maybe something mundane of which there is no verifiable 'proof' for, and then spice it up with something that they added to it themselves. Why not? Fits into both sides' model.
Again, super weak detraction point (and with 'all-time' + mailable universe, maybe they are 'creating' a future past-life when they do that)...

> Maybe it's all coming from an "uber-deamon", or it's collective memory etc - sure, why not. Maybe that is the mechanism he's looking for that 'manages' past lives, both the video game, groundhog-like experience and other 'personas' past lives, all at once/across time. Why not?


Overall, so weird that APeake is weakly dismissing all these things as 'wrong', in an armature fashion (as many here have pointed out) esp when I dont see any of it being mutually exclusive, nor any of his rationales proving one over the other... Ultimately imho we can only discuss experiences in this phyiscal realm and inspire ourselves, dangerous game he's playing deciding on what is 'true', especially when trying to determine it on these topics via the toolset of modern science (hammer v screwdriver).
Hopefully that follow up episode with the panel happens so we can hear it hashed out in detail.

Anyway, I've only heard Peake on Podcasts so far, but I've bought the Ferryman book now and it's on my reading list.
Thanks for the great episode :)

PS coincidentally, I happened to next move on and listen to a pocast with a Mark Stavish interview, and he mentioned how everyone confuses transmigration for reincarnation. Hmm sounds like what happened in this episode lol
Don't know Stavish more than a couple of podcasts chats either, so maybe he's not a good source, but leaving it here for anyone interested: https://voxhermes.wordpress.com/


PSS since I spent a bunch of time on it, Sam Harris has proven himself to be a moron imho :'D
I used to be quite inspired by him, and glad he's at least pushing meditation into the mainstream athiest world, but damn... between this and his rational of Iraq and other excursions, and his 'explanation' of the Israel position etc.
Funny how he and Nelly Tyson and some others go on Joe Rogan, reach a new audience and eventually crumble and expose themselves to be actually quite... dumb, or more kindly have serious blind spots on some things despite being expertise in others (like we all do I guess, mirroring this APeake episode nicely).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top