I am an "indigo child" (Try and prove me wrong!)

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.metagifted.org

I can't prove my hypothesis in the sense that we can't prove the Theory of Evolution.

But, for the keen of eye, the clues are too strong not to believe in evolution.

Humans evolve and I'm one of the latest in evolution.

Whatever makes ya feel better.

As I said, believe whatever whacked out beliefs you want to believe but don't try to drag science down with you.

BTW, how is your communion with your alien overlord/forebear going?

If that works for you, by all means. However, you've provided nothing akin to the sort of observable data and information that is used to create the basis for the theory of evolution. Beyond the conjuncture and abstraction is hope, and that's not a bad thing... just disagree with you about it being evolution. We're all different from one another, whether on the spectrum or off, wise or blissfully ignorant, young and old. These variations fulfills roles and provide evolutionary opportunities should the event and possibility present itself but the direction taken will depend on the challenges faced, not any specific traits that is the secret key to supremacy.


M.

When I was first tested 28 years ago, it took a hospital admission, an IV line, and a blood-draw every 5 minutes for a period of 24 hours, with the results being sent off to a specialized lab.. A year ago, the same test took one small blood draw at my GPs office, and was processed in his office's lab.

I have got an extra chromosome, but I'm more partial to purple.

This somehow seems false. Someone just instigating and perhaps perceives aspies as arrogant so is using an exaggeration to mirror what they see in aspies but declaring themself as "indigo" to prove some point.

I'm not really buying it. If someone with aspergers pissed you off, fine go take it up with that person. No need to take it out on everyone here.

kittenmeow - I have a rare "mild variety" of symptoms correlated with AS. There is great synergy in the science of autism and much is too be learned from "indigos" that will benefit diagnosis accuracy and treatment options to other areas of the spectrum. Lots of people think of the spectrum as a linear line and I disagree. Linearly it implies that one side is more "functioning" than the others. I view the spectrum as a sphere because evolution is like a tree and lots of plants have the sphere shape like so many other beautiful things in nature/science/truth.

Initially I never would have thought aspie's would be so hypocritical of someone else on the spectrum. You just can't fathom that my mental age with respect to a development above self-actualization is higher than yours. I have theory of mind and I because I have completed self-actualization I am able to analyze your current phase better than even you yourself on occasion. This is because your emotions trigger defense mechanisms and your subconscious mind filters out information to your ego (what you perceive as real.)

Could you explain what hypocrisy you see? I'm confused, as while there are many critical comments, I do not understand the nature of that statement... You've claimed theory of mind, you've claimed to be self-actualized beyond the understanding of many here; I would ask for some sort of proof, something quantifiable that might be relevant to the conversation. A series of claims do little to substantiate what you describe as being anything other than your own experience, your own beliefs - which you are entitled to, but may want to consider that what is truth for you is not truth for others. That you seem to presume you know better than anyone else makes it a challenge to have a conversation of length as no matter the argument, your "knowledge" trumps any observable fact or personal experience.


M.

I do think there's something in this indigo and crystal stuff. I just haven't figured it out yet. I'm a third-generation agnostic and a gut-level atheist. I've never seen a ghost or anything remotely paranormal, and I see no evidence of deities. I haven't read up on the indigos much, and what I've seen includes a fair amount of wacky-ness. Still, I think there's something intuitive going on. Some emerging awareness that doesn't work in the common language or modern understanding, so a fairy tale emerges that fits the vibes, even if it doesn't make much sense. If I ever figure it out, I'll let you all know. Then again, if I ever figure it out, I probably won't be able to translate.

Anyway, I wouldn't discount it, just because it's fuzzy or unproven or incomplete. Just think of it as cosmic brainstorming. If we toss things around without condemnation or ridicule, maybe something useful will emerge.

And if they want to be pals, why not? It seems like a natural alliance. We need all the friends we can get. It's not like our status in the eyes of the mainstream will decrease because we associate with weirdos.

I'm open to possibility; when things are assured without substantiation is when I become leery and suspect. There is so much in this universe... there is more that we don't know we don't know than the sum of all our knowledge put together. When there are flat declarations of fact, then it invokes imagery of snake oil salesmen and patent medicine 'doctors' of the western US in the 19th century. Does that make sense, Tahitiii, at least from a personal angle?


M.

You fail. You have no idea what you are really talking about because you don't know me. You have no idea. Just because you are able to speak highly of yourself doesn't make it true. I don't care about your abundance in confidence and your self-actualization because you can babble all you want. If you can't provide anything relevant to back up your claims and instead boost yourself up while attempting to push others into some pre-fabricated mold your own ego is generating then perhaps you really aren't as much of an indigo as you think.

Also, if it is true, it would be more to do with the mind rather than physical traits, you and the blond hair and blue eyes. Sounds like someone filled your head up with lies. What would you say if you met someone who was black and had the theorized indigo traits? Would you say, "Oh yeah, well you don't have blonde hair and blue eyes!"

Give it up. You're full of it. Even if you don't think you are, you really are. There are way too many people who think because they have an over inflated ego and confidence that those two traits alone will also make up for the lack of honesty and backing up their words with actions.

I am aware of picking up on things that seem unusal to others. I am aware of picking up on devious mean people and it seems more so than others. As a result because of how annoying it can be when having to watch these scenerios unfold in front of my face while my BS meter is going off the charts, I either walk away or I let that person know that they are lying.

Usually because of how blunt and "socially incorrect" it is, the ones who surround such manipulators take the manipulators side and I'm told to go away.

Later it is proven, that person really was a devious liar. I don't get apologies but it's happen so many times that it's not a coincidence.

Does this make me special and unique? Not sure and if as a result I started to think it did and I turned out to be like you, I think I'd rather not think it's special or unique.

You do not tell me falsely of what I am or not. You have no idea if I lack theory of mind. You have no idea if somewhere in my life, I started learning. It can be learned. You have no idea if I have alot of empathy or just a little but I don't see alot of this "empathy" in so called normal people. Where is the empathy when those that have been rich all of their lives make fun of the homeless?

Where is the empathy shown for understanding not everyone loves bright lights and can handle some sounds and once it's revealed they just shrug and keep the lights bright and continue making the same sound that doesn't bother them but bothers you.

Where oh where can it be?

Now you stop kidding yourself.

Anyone want to explain the similarities between this:

1. They come into the world with a feeling of royalty (and often act like it).
2. They have a feeling of "deserving to be here," and are surprised when others don't share that.
3. Self-worth is not a big issue. They often tell the parents "who they are."
4. They have difficulty with absolute authority (authority without explanation or choice).
5. They simply will not do certain things; for example, waiting in line is difficult for them.
6. They get frustrated with systems that are ritual-oriented and don't require creative thought.
7. They often see better ways of doing things, both at home and in school, which makes them seem like "system busters" (nonconforming to any system).
8. They seem antisocial unless they are with their own kind. If there are no others of like consciousness around them, they often turn inward, feeling like no other human understands them. School is often extremely difficult for them socially.
9. They will not respond to "guilt" discipline ("Wait till your father gets home and finds out what you did").
10. They are not shy in letting you know what they need.

and this:

Characteristics of people with antisocial personality disorder may include:[citation needed]

* Persistent lying or stealing
* Superficial charm
* Apparent lack of remorse or empathy; inability to care about hurting others
* Inability to keep jobs or stay in school
* Impulsivity and/or recklessness[4][5]
* Lack of realistic, long-term goals -- an inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals
* Inability to make or keep friends, or maintain relationships such as marriage
* Poor behavioral controls -- expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper
* Narcissism, elevated self-appraisal or a sense of extreme entitlement
* A persistent agitated or depressed feeling (dysphoria)
* A history of childhood conduct disorders
* Recurring difficulties with the law
* Tendency to violate the boundaries and "rights" of others
* Substance abuse
* Aggressive, often violent behavior; prone to getting involved in fights
* Inability to tolerate boredom
* Disregard for the safety of self or others
* People with a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder often experience difficulties with authority figures.[6]

?

Just one more thought... no one is going to 'prove' that you're not an "indigo child" any more than you are going to prove another member isn't "Christian" or another deeply held belief. If that is your belief, then I do wish you the most success possible with it. To assume that others will inherently agree, however, may prove to be unreasonable.


M.

I can't recall you ever saying that everyone was equal. My comment was merely based on what I had already heard about "indigo children" either being evolutionarily advanced or of improved form than others and on your own insinuations. I apologise for my previous comment, I was just rather offended by your tone. However, I believe there is no excuse to suggest that my reading comprehension is in any way "low" when you hardly know me at all. I'll admit that I was perhaps a little prejudiced and didn't take my time to carefully analyse every word you wrote, but my reading comprehension and ability has always been above average. It's not the best idea to go around calling people dyslexic as an insult, especially as dyslexia has no correlation with intelligence at all.
Anyway, the initial point of my previous post was to point out my opinion that this theory cannot be classed as science yet and you have even backed this up yourself with the link to the Wikipedia page, which stated that: "There is no scientific support for these claims".
If you want any support on this topic, I suggest that you should stop calling us "uneducated" or "lazy", as generally insults won't make you any friends.

I bet you also can't recall where I said I was better than anyone else, but you just automatically assumed I would like all the un-self-actualized individuals here. Because they/you haven't met certain criteria in life to transcend into the next level you lack an ability to understand other peoples "theory of mind."

I've concluded form many observations that it is almost impossible to engage in rational and logical debate when emotions get in the way. The only loop hole around it is to be further up on Marlow's hierarchy of needs (where, I'm not sure yet.)

I often confuse many people by summing up "complex" conceptual information in simple words. The logic is infallible, but none the less most people fail to see the point.

Dsylexia does have correlation with (emotional) intelligence depending on how you measure what is intelligent and I think it would be absurd to assume that someone would be able to process proper emotinal response with an inability to comprehend what they are reading. The difference between Dyslexia and Hyperlexia is that Hyperlexics understand/comprehend what they read where as Dyslexic individuals do not. Oh the flip side, hyperlexics have more troubles learning words (unless learned auditorily), pronouncing words, verbosity, and other forms of verbal language.

You use the "you don't know me" defense mechanism, but you just can't seem to apply it to me, not true. Now that you have thought about it and it has been brought from your subconscious mind to your conscious mind you can relate our emotional responses. Because I'm more aware of mine I do not allow my emotions to cloud my logic. I'm more aware because my brain is wired differently and this has to do with synthesia (and example would be seeing numbers as colors.)

I posted articles with various authors claiming a link between ADD/ADHD and recently Asperger's Syndrome. Certainly you trust what the experts think as you limit your autonomy because of an ability to process large pieces of information over short periods of times. If you understood this was all genetic you would understand that I am not criticize you or myself for that matter. I'm only seeking to better understand so that the knowledge can be shared with others.

I have some more science links and I'll only address further individuals who portray they've watched the videos and/or have other relevant topics of interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl2LwnaUA-k

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... l=en&dur=3

I have this form of synesthesia. I can feel kinetic motion as pain, but who will believe me unless I can prove it with science. If I had the correct tools I would do the work myself, but alas I can not.

I think you just don't know how evolution works. There no "rule to develop higher". There is a rule of surviving to have offspring. Let explain this on an example:

Think about a virus deadly for humans as HIV and easily transmittable as the common cold (there is no reason why such a virus could not involve). The likely consequence for human evolution would be not a more clever kind of humans, but a human race of those which, by accident have a natural immunity against this virus (as today a minority of humans have a natural immunity against HIV). When we would stop today, to go the example HIV, all treatments and prevention regarding HIV/AIDS the likely outcome would be a human race with a high percentage of humans with a natural immunity. Not because they are more clever, but because they survive and have children, sharing their natural immunity.

There no reason to see why Autist or the supposedly "Indigo" shall have a better change of spreading their genome around.

---

Evolution is a very brutal game.

A bit ironic you accused me of misunderstanding of evolution.. I hope you feel the need to reverse that statement after consider this.

I visualize evolution as a tree of different outcomes. Some branches are longer than others and some may or may not be better suited to their environment.

A simple observation of how animals have evolved into different subspecies is a good analogy for me to explain your fallacy of logic.

Different species of birds that had developed from the same origin of species are not necessarily more or less valuable than each other in the sense that they are best suited for their environment. We still could understand which birds have the latest evolutionary traits could we not? And why would there traits be changing faster than any other traits? They would be evolving quicker if their environment was changing quicker through natural selection. Simply put, the slow evolving die. These newly evolved birds certainly can be said to be more evolved, but that does not mean that the other birds in different environments would be any more or less suited for their environment. They can peacefully coexist and can form synergy if they can work together. Nature does this naturally within species and a good example is the Worker Bee who evolved to create synergy despite not being able to survive on its own.

Now, if I can prove to the people with tin foil hats on that I am the latest in evolution through modern genetics than I can move into further detail.

If your convinced that I am the latest, but still think its blasphemy for me to proclaim I'm more evolved, you need to correct my story of the birds and the bees I just told. You will need to do this with a consistent logic where you conclude the bird with the faster changing environment who is evolving faster, is NOT more evolved. If this is not the cause than consider the following..

What are some of the traits associated with all "indigos?" The symptom would obviously be classified as insomnia.
-They simply can not fall into a 24 hour sleep schedule
--Research suggests that no one else really does either, but some are more adaptable to it.

Why would this have happened?
-Indoor lighting
--We've adapted for longer days because of indoor lighting.

I got some more traits as a result of evolution theories, but we'll take this slow.

The hypocrisy here manifests itself within the areas of self-actualization that have yet to be over come. People out lash and chose not to accept another because they are different, but at the same time wish others would accept them for being different.
I understand why someone would feel emotional over being called "less evolved", but on the same token, its hypocrisy for them to be prejudice against people who have been evolved quicker. If you understand the science you can conclude we where born with this conditions and what is the point of dwelling over something that can not be changed. This will give new hope to those who question whether or not they have a disorder because they are different.

Autism, Aspergerg's syndrome, "indigo children", or whatever you want to call it.. the spectrum gene pool is entering Western Society and I believe the scientific explanation of what happens with "self-idigoism" would be explained thanks to research in the autistic spectrum. After all, I've learned a wealth of information from nuerotypicals, it's about time they learned something from me/we.