Karma reasons for concrete message



    Posts: 3563
  • Darwins +92/-2

I can appreciate or see (slightly) where my wife could have been affected by my chemistry ....
It's good that your mind is open to other explanations.  You've obviously experienced something very unusual and invested a lot of thought in researching the telepathy hypothesis - and you've also taken a bit of a risk in backing that explanation in front of a bunch of uber-skeptics here :laugh:  It takes a bit of courage to expose something like that, something that can attract ridicule. So I tend to believe you did indeed experience something profound that you couldn't explain any other way at the time.

.... but I also sensed her and that would mean that she too would have to have been sending.
It's also possible that it wasn't a two-way chemosignal communication - or not so at the start.  The strong emotional thoughts you were having about your wife might have originated entirely in your own brain - triggering the pheromone release which she then reacted to.

Something happen to both of you, closely linked in time, that made a huge impact. So it's perfectly understandable that you would attribute it to the only available explanation of telepathy - a concept that every kid has heard about (even though it has never been demonstrated as fact.)

It's also possible that your recollections of the incidents has become shaped by the explanation attributed to them - that kind of memory alteration has been scientifically demonstrated to be extremely common (almost inevitable) and there is no reason to think any of us as immune it.  It's not being delusional - just a brain mechanism whereby we overwrite the real original memory with a slightly modified memory based on new information and our own attempts to explain the memory.  We are completely unaware when this happens to us - so there is no dishonesty involved - only a natural fallibility we all have.  I saw a documentary recently where eyewitnesses to a crime change their recollections of crucial aspects of evidence after new ideas get deliberately 'planted' after the fact by the researchers.  I'll look that up but meanwhile, if you are interested, you can start with this:
However, the accuracy of eyewitness memories is sometimes questioned because there are many factors that can act during encoding and retrieval of the witnessed event which may adversely affect the creation and maintenance of the memory for the event. Experts have found evidence to suggest that eyewitness memory is volatile

I think that to be even further up the weird scale than my thinking it was telepathy.
Apply Occam's Razor ;) 

Chemosignals are a real phenomenon for which there is evidence - evidence that is easy to reproduce under controlled conditions. And the physiological mechanisms are known in many cases. 

Telepathy has no known physical mechanisms. It is widely claimed (including by many professional 'psychics'  &) ) but never unambiguously demonstrated, and never reproduced under controlled conditions.  And to accommodate the difficulty of demonstrating it, we need to invent a second complexity - an unproven seemingly magical shield.  So we have a mysterious function kept in check by a mysterious anti-function that sometimes fails :?     

Changed Change Reason Date