Tom campbell. You know him? You should. His work is free from

simulation of what?

From what I've seen I love Tom Campbell. Been meaning to buy his ToE for a while now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

>>18541974
Its free on google bookss

>>18541962
The universe my friend. check it out before you dismiss it

>>18541874
Last time I heard of him it was all about astral projection. Now he's into simulation theory? Meh.

I like Dean Radin better. Much more scientific and professional. Plus he's an actual engineer.

>>18542038
>>18541962

Basically good old pantheism adapted to the sensibilities of the West in the 21th century.

>>18542831
Would fit the flat earth. You know like old SNES 3d

>>18541874
Great. Just finished the trilogy. I took his advice and kept aspirin nearby. Need to go back and re-read a few parts.

>>18541874
You are a douche. I said in the last thread you made that I couldn't buy the law of attraction shit, which his entire premises is about and you responded saying something like "he doesn't follow that". So u took the time to listen to one of his lectures and that was the very first thing he mentions. Douche.

>>18543372
Your argument amounts to a pathetic ad-hominem on OP. You have obviously never read the works. Did you just wander over from Reddit. Serious. GTFO

>>18544352
No, me and OP had a conversation in his last thread in which I couldn't remember if Thomas Campbell had religious ideologies or if it was a Law of Attraction-esque ideology. Both of which OP claimed Thomas didn't. But the first minute of the lecture he was talking about Law of Attraction. Why would OP deny this, either he doesn't understand what he is reading, is ignorant to Thomas lectures or he is a douche.

I've listened to Thomas Campbell a few years ago several times on various radio programs, so I am a bit familiar with what he is about, I just couldn't remember the specifics, as I stated.

You can see that here if you even care. >>18520503

At any rate, this stuff is interesting and I believe there is something to it, but I much rather like what this guy >>18542773
said over Thomas Campbell.

>>18542034
always had a hard time reading ebooks. flicking through paper in bed is a lot easier for me and I'm more likely to get sucked in to what I'm reading rather than getting distracted and doing something else with my e device