hey /x/, I am a skeptic, but I am bored. Post the most scientifically

>>17563981

Get all of Dean Radin's, Rupert Sheldrakes's, and David Wilcock's books and read them.

File: 1458769219160.webm (2MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 600x338px

No one is interested in trying to convince you of anything.

UFO casebooks has some good evidence and videos.
Shadow lands web site has the best ghost stories and pictures, etc.
/x/ has complete shit that will never amount to anything.

>>17563981
>I'm bored and want to be spoon-fed instead of finding some good threads to read

Fuck off

>>17563981
>Try to impress me
why?

>>17564001
>>17563999

So instead of having a good thread on /x/ for once ya gonna get buttmad.

Just go back to making shitty demon satan DMT hippie posts then instead of the cool spooky stuff like /x/ used to be. This board sux now.

>>17564017
>ya gonna get buttmad.
jej, i can see who is.
i just want to know why you want shinchan to impress you? are you a grill or something?

>>17564017
>there aren't multiple different types of threads
It's almost like you didn't lurk at all prior to making your thread.

>>17563981
This is one of the more compelling NDE cases I've seen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5APwnghwDg&nohtml5=False

>>17563981
The sightings are always easy to dismiss, even when they are genuine (except maybe the sightings confirmed by crowds and pilots/astronauts). There is a lot of much more spooky material (because it is not so easy to dismiss) in the study of close encounters, particularly the ones involving abductions and "missing time". Many of the cases that have been studied in a more serious way bear uncanny similarities that are difficult to explain. Several of the cases that were investigated through experimental hypnotic regression techniques, are truly chilling.