edit

he means his co-worker said that, I guess, not martin ball

Ah my bad, I read it "I have to work with a guy like this" as in (s)he just HAS to meet this guy in real life.

I edited out the post as it seemed kind of embarrassing now lol

Yeah, I meant my co-worker. He really thinks he's the next Messiah or something. I don't think he does 5-meo-dmt but he does like mushrooms.

There must be something that is threatening about Martin to most of you.. This is the second thread in regards to Martin that has stirred up so much interest and controversy.. why not just disregard him if you don't believe him?.. Why does it matter so much to all of you to disprove him?.. and if you want to disprove him, why don't you take a look at his theories (outside of his perspective on Terrance) and start there.

His theories MAKE SENSE. He explains it very well in his book. It is a simple unified theory of reality.. to put it simply, his perspective is that We are God, We are Reality, Evolution is fractal, We are One, We can be our own shamans, there is no duality, there is no afterlife and there is no "spirit world" (this is the hardest one for egos to come to terms with). These aren't new concepts, but the way he explains it in his book makes perfect sense to me. A lot of religions already believe in some of these concepts, but they are ALL filled with fantasy and mythology, which is unnecessary.. and religions disregard scientific findings, which his book DOES take into account.

He isn't trying to be some cult leader.. He is trying to help people help themselves. In his book he gives instructions on how to work with the medicines ON YOUR OWN to align yourself with authenticity without a shaman.

I know my opinion won't change any of your perspectives, but all I ask if for you all to look deeper into it than you are. I personally am greatly thankful for his work. I know I am the only one backing him up, but I wouldn't do so if I didn't authentically feel that his work IS important.

Is it REALLY that far fetched for a person to understand reality? Why does it have to be complicated? There is no duality, Everything is ONE, We are ONE, We are God... that is it!

Yes, Cloud, something seems threatening about Dr. Martin Ball, Ph.D. to me.
It is that he claims that:
A) There is one objective reality which all human beings can potentially understand as such.
B) He understands it well enough to impart this understanding to other people, and he will do this for a lot of money by guiding them through a psychedelic experience.

This seems threatening to me because, foremost among many other reasons, I do not believe in certainty without proof, and constructing an internally consistant theory based on unprovable premises (so thats what he needed that doctorate for...) is no proof of anything except for deep-seated, delusional arrogance.

Believe me, I do not take umbrage at his experiencing the world in his own way, or at your faith in his theory. In fact, I believe that if it leads you to feel more at peace with the (imho) indifferent universe, then more power to you. That goes for any belief or any theory, regardless of how far it is from my own beliefs.
Regardless, I am deeply offended by both the nature of his assertion and the manner in which he presents it. (sells it, if you will) I think cellux drew a brilliant metaphor for his relative view of himself and other people. (post #87 I believe...excellent post all around)

The set of possibilities about human beings and their relation to the universe is infinite. The theory that Dr. Martin Ball, Ph.D. posits is certainly a possibility. From what I understand, however, there is not nearly enough factual evidence or even anecdotal evidence for him to be so certain about his weltanschauung. (sorry, i couldn't resist using that word...not intended to assert linguistic superiority :roll
The validity of a world-view, as far as I've experienced, has very little to do with how it makes a person feel. If you have time, I recommend reading "On Being Certain", by Robert A. Burton. He makes a very compelling case based on neuroscience, psychology, for the idea that the feeling of certitude has absolutely no correlation with a logical conclusion. Dr. Martin Ball, Ph.D. does not seem to grasp or believe this.

Also quite relevant is Nietzsche's "The Gay Science," specifically The teachers of the purpose of existence. I believe Nietzsche is applying the intellectual scythe to people just like Dr. Martin Ball, Ph.D. (cutting "the teachers of the purpose of existence" down to size) Some nice food for thought in that whole work, and imho it was brilliantly written.

Also, just below me, endlessness makes an excellent point.

Did you read what I said, and as well as what others say, cloud? This isnt about us vs him or vs you. This is a thread about someone taking psychedelics and claiming to have found The Truth. We have pointed out several inconsistencies in his theory, you are being the mediator between us and him and his answers are flawed, so of course we are going to post in this thread in the dmt nexus when his poor answers are directed at us.

Also I think these kind of actions are worrying because it only serves to de-legitimize the sane and down-to-earth part of the psychedelic movement when an enlightened-guru-wannabe starts claiming to have The Truth and actually come off as a deluded person with an amazingly inflated ego, who doesnt give evidence to any of his beliefs and conveniently avoids the thoughtful criticism to his work. This ends up defeating the movement because in the eye of the establishment it goes to show that psychedelics can make people deluded.

But yes, as someone said, time will tell.. I have a clear conscience that we at the Nexus are humbly doing good work and I think the errors of Martin Ball's positions are pretty clear, but each one to his own, actions speak for themselves

Firstly why won't you consider the points endlessness has made?

And yes, I think he may be a problem. He is evidence that psychedelics cause delusions of grandeur.

The evidence for his truth is based on his own subjective fantasies. He takes science out of context and considers himself beyond error.

His "scientific" tool is the flawless precision of his own deluded mind.

If he is right, is he still delusional? Like I asked before, is it really that hard to understand reality?.. His theories are simple, straightforward, and actually make sense.

The biggest problem i see is that he is selling illegal psychedelic experiences for 200 dollars a pop. If he got caught, it would really be bringing the wrong type of attention to these plants and molecules we all love- and selling them in itself, whether or not he gets caught, already brings the wrong type of attention to them

Cloud, I feel like im repeating myself, either im very bad at communicating or you're not listening to what im (we're) saying... Did you read all we said about his incoherencies? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. He is the one making claims of finding The Truth and being against all other "lower" beliefs. Burden of evidence is on him. He is the one using words like "energy" unscientifically and making claims about levels of alignment that with his method one can get if you pay him enough and yet with no proof except fancy words and misleading arguments. Why should we believe him any more than any other person that claims they are jesus and makes evidence-less claims? There are many convincing pseudo prophets out there with self-consistent models...

Maybe his theories make sense to you, but to me as I've expressed over and over they seem flawed, inconsistent and making way too broad comments without any testable hypothesis and predictions to even be called theory.

Plus the flaws in character that seem to show up from his words are potentially harmful to our community and psychedelic movement.

To answer your first question, no, obviously if his theory is correct and he truly has become God and can show others how to (for only 200 american dollars) then by definition he is not delusional.
To attempt an answer at your second question, yes, I personally find it quite difficult to understand reality. I would also be extremely wary of anyone who claims to, and claims to be able to convey this understanding in exchange for a large sum of money.

But when you say "His theories are simple, straightforward, and actually make sense." (Over and over and over again) I begin to doubt your own right-mindedness. In all honesty, without the least trace of condescension, I am worried for your well-being. How can you correlate the simplistic straightforwardness and internal consistency of a theory with its validity?

But you're right, there is obviously the possibility that he (and you) are enlightened, have become one with the universe, and are now part of the universal God. It's not hard for me to accept the possibility of that, but as of yet it is nearly impossible for me to accept the truth of it.

Sorry, I may have missed something..

Which extraordinary claims are you referring to exactly? (outside of claiming to know the truth)

His explanation of energy makes sense to me.. his perspective is that we all come from the same source, which was an energy of some form. Everything is energy, and that energy is all connected.. therefore we are all connected to that same energy. There is no scientific evidence to back this up, but by logic it makes sense.

His theories DO NOT MAKE SENSE. How much more clearly can it be stated?

He claims that “god” is “a fractal energy being”. I’ve previously stated that 95% of the universe is composed of something that is neither energy nor matter. His theory cannot account for 95% of the observable universe. How does he explain that 95% of the universe?

Just because an idea resonates, sounds good, is easy to understand, and is psychologically satisfying doesn’t make it true!

It is not possible for living human beings to know the “ultimate” nature of reality. This isn’t a belief, it’s a fact: An observer in a closed system cannot know what lies outside of that system. Most of the universe (more than 99.9%) is too far away from Earth for us to observe – the light from these regions won’t reach the Earth for billions of years. We are effectively in a closed system. We cannot say what lies beyond the small portion of the universe that is observable. This isn’t philosophy or metaphysics, it is a physical, inescapable fact.

That is actually a very good point. I sent him a message a little while ago asking him about this.. hopefullly he responds.

i admire your loyalty cloud, but i think you are backing the wrong horse. in the most simple breakdown of this entire thread, i ask you this simple question:

if martin ball understands reality and THE TRUTH so completely, why does he come off as such a fop? there is nothing IN HIS BEHAVIOR OR LIFE that rings of an enlightened being.

he can pass judgement all day long and tell everyone with the patience to listen that he has the answer, but does he live like a person who has the answer.

no. he does not.

the proof is in the pudding, as the saying goes. martin ball's pudding sucks. straight up.

L&G

I'm not a FIRM believer in his concepts, but I do appreciate them.. I do agree with you guys that some of his concepts might be flawed.. And if there is a single flaw, he doesn't understand the true nature of reality.

I hope he gives me another follow up response to the questions I sent him.

I have no problem with Martin theorizing whatever he pleases, the issue I see is the negative attention he will draw to the community. It's been stated before but he's publicly doing some things many do not agree with, and it will put these substances at risk.

May we please add to the ledger of community consensus the following basic premise:

Total lifetime quantity of DMT smoked ≠ quantity & quality of personal wisdom.

I think discussions could be a lot more fruitful if everyone abandons the notion that the taking of psychedelics is a fucking race - an idea which has been forwarded by several parties engaged in this outright ridiculous trollfest.

Personally, I have no problem whatsoever with any of the man's theories. Lord knows there are enough such ideas floating around in here daily. He's certainly welcome to some of his own, and as theories go, they're not bad. We're all one energy, we're expressions of God, where we go is strictly subjective; all of these things make perfect sense and I really can't argue with any of them. The guy writes well, he's erudite and accustomed to metaphysical wankings. So... bully for him. He's clearly entranced by the sound of his own flapping gums, but if he's found something that makes him happy, who am I to object?

But this is the thing: because he chooses to put himself out there, he's become a de facto spokesperson - and in my ever so humble opinion, he ain't a very good one. He charges people for the experience (which to me is unforgivable), and his priority really seems to be that of achieving a cult of celebrity. He isn't even remotely interested in an open exchange of ideas. He presents his Unifying Theory of Everything (which really ain't all that new, unique, or complex to hear him explain it) as undeniable, unequivocal, take-it-or-leave-it fact.

Now I don't have a PHD in anything, alright? And I have no problem admitting that Dr. Ball is smarter than I am. But I've dived as deeply into the world of DMT as most, and the very first lesson I learned in there was that I DON'T KNOW A THING. It's given me a million questions and obliterated all my answers. It's humbled me to participate in something so vast and immeasurable, and I can safely say that I don't have the first fucking clue what it means. I'm open to a variety of ideas, but in the final analysis, who cares? It is what it is and that's all that it is. If you want to put a name to it, go ahead and take a shot - but tread lightly if you're doing it on some kind of a public stage. Because the world is looking for egomaniacal ponytailed weirdos doing make believe yoga to discredit "the movement" entirely - and the misguided efforts of megalomaniacs only serve to marginalize us further.

Mixing DMT with money is (in my opinion) wrong, as is using it as some kind of vehicle to achieve a measure of fame. This is my problem with Martin Ball - I just think he's a dangerous phoney, and for someone whose catchword is "authenticity", I don't find him authentic at all.