DWQA Questions › Tag: deep subconscious channelingFilter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnansweredSort byViewsAnswersVotesOne reason that science appears to eschew hypnosis is because the phenomenon is not 100% reproducible on demand. There is no such thing as a hypnotic induction technique that will work with every subject, every time. Erickson found that even with well-experienced subjects, he would sometimes have to alter his induction approach because they had developed what he called a ‘mind-set’ or intimate awareness of it, such that it was no longer effective. This was especially a problem with highly intelligent subjects. Ordinary science appears to have no patience for any of this. It appears to be more “art” than “science.” What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind262 views0 answers0 votesErickson never believed that some people cannot be hypnotized, and spent his life attempting to prove that. One student, in particular, required over 300 one-hour working sessions before he could develop a somnambulistic trance. Once that was achieved, he turned out to be an outstanding subject. Erickson also noted that most engineers are difficult to hypnotize. Something peculiar about engineers seems to make them exceedingly impatient with anyone even attempting to hypnotize them. The result was that during many of his studies, it was always the engineers that would quit on him, often en masse. What can Creator tell us?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind317 views0 answers0 votesKarl began his healing career as a hypnotist. And it was certainly the mixed results he got with it that helped motivate him to explore subconscious healing beyond hypnosis—eventually resulting in the revelations of Empowered Prayer and The Lightworker Healing Protocol. Can Creator share with us the importance of that journey and its achievements?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind313 views0 answers0 votesIs the fact that human emotional problems like depression and anxiety can seemingly reside in one brain hemisphere, but not the other, an example of a corresponding compartmentalization of cellular memory that actually houses the underlying trauma memories and distorted beliefs they caused?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Karma227 views0 answers0 votesWhat is the origin of the leukemia in my client’s young son?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Karma229 views0 answers0 votesTo what extent do post-hypnotic suggestions get stored in cellular memory as opposed to short-term or long-term memory?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind273 views0 answers0 votesTo what extent are post-hypnotic suggestions embraced by the deep subconscious, to be acted on?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind268 views0 answers0 votesIs the relative weakness of post-hypnotic suggestions also due to the fact that they do not necessarily become beliefs, or actually conflict with previously held beliefs and get discarded?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Mind208 views0 answers0 votesA practitioner asks: “My wish is that, at some point, people will be able to do their own Deep Subconscious Channeling with Holographic Memory Resolution (DSC-HMR), with intent, while dreaming. We have seen that this is doable, right?” What can we tell her?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Channeling256 views0 answers0 votesWhat is the outlook for a possible resolution of his mental imbalance? Would he benefit from follow-up sessions of Deep Subconscious Channeling with Trauma Resolution?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Spirit Possession294 views0 answers0 votesA practitioner asks: “Why do I feel exactly the same after doing the LHP for almost 2 years myself, and after 20 DSC-TR sessions?”ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Healing412 views0 answers0 votesIs it possible to do healing work via subconscious channeling on Anunnaki, Reptilian, or Arcturian extraterrestrials without their conscious awareness, or is that capability unique for humans because of the deep subconscious disconnect imposed by Anunnaki tinkering with the human genome long ago?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Subconscious Channeling274 views0 answers0 votesWhen reading material written by skeptics denying the existence of an afterlife, spirits, etc., their biggest agenda seems to be, “Do whatever it takes to avoid having to settle on a paranormal explanation for ANYTHING.” Why do these people have such a deep-seated aversion to the very notion of the paranormal? It’s almost as if the paranormal traumatizes them. Is that a valid insight? Could these people actually benefit from Deep Subconscious Trauma Resolution?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Non-Local Consciousness298 views0 answers0 votesIncluded in a skeptical article in the collection, The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case against Life after Death, was this VERY interesting reference, “Another recent study compared Theravada Buddhist Monks with lay novices … The authors found far more (brain) activity in the practiced monks than the novices during meditation, noting that the monks were able to dramatically self-regulate the activity of their frontoparietal and left insular areas.” This one statement dramatically undercuts the assertion that the brain controls ALL mental activity and not the other way around. Yet, it was nonchalantly included in an article whose agenda was to (quote) “Argue that the mind is located in the brain in such a way that there is no mental life after brain death … Our conclusion is overwhelmingly supported by neuroscientific evidence.” Yet they inexplicably include a neuroscientific case study that dramatically undercuts that conclusion. What can Creator tell us?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Non-Local Consciousness333 views0 answers0 votesIn an earlier show, Creator agreed with the statement, “You will learn more about reality by studying the extraordinary, than the ordinary.” Yet the ordinary is the focus of the skeptics in their attempts to prove that the paranormal is make-believe. In fact, skeptics have elevated this proclivity to have the force of law. In the volume, The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case against Life after Death, behavioral geneticist Jene Mercer writes, “The law of parsimony, a guiding rule for scientists for hundreds of years, states that given two equally well-supported explanations for a phenomena, we are best advised to choose the simpler one rather than multiplying entities unnecessarily.” Skeptics routinely “choose the simpler” by ignoring and throwing out exceptions and outliers in their data, all the while congratulating themselves for being scientific. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Non-Local Consciousness262 views0 answers0 votes
Nicola