|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 26, 2006 1:39:53 GMT -5
well... i've read into (perhaps too much) vampires recently and i wanted to know what everyone else knoe about them.
and dont give me the mumbo jumbo hollywood glorification crap of dracula being the father of all vampires and vampire bites instantly turn you into a vampire. im looking for anyone who can honnestly say they know anything about vampires from experiance so as to confirm anything i have possibly learned.
from my understanding, when i get goosebumps, it's real. i dont get goosebumps over fantasy crap; i never got goosebumps over vampires untill i read about caine and abel, untill i read about the masquerade.
|
|
|
Post by Wunderkind on Apr 26, 2006 14:50:19 GMT -5
Have you tried an actual vampire board? They are usually close to the otherkin boards.
I don't know too much about them, even though I've read a lot. I know there are blood drinkers and energy drinkers. I also know that some are barren, as in unable to reproduce. I've heard that there are actually some who are immortal, but I never really look into it, though it is interesting. Um... they usually have donors. ^^; I'm not feeling my best, so I hope that at least contributes something.
|
|
|
Post by Velen on Apr 26, 2006 19:05:03 GMT -5
Twilight, you may be a little off. They are not barren as far as I know them. Some even have kids. They aren't immortal, they aren't supermen, but there are two types. Psionic and sanguine vampires. Psy vampires, as I will refer to the former from here out, feed off of a person's energy and emotions, maybe several (people's). People may never know this is happening to them, but I've seen it happen. Truthfully, I was on the receiving end of said emotion, and at one point, it would be what I did to survive. I would voluntarily (not all psy vamps can do so voluntarily, or are even aware they do it at all) drain people of their joy for myself. Selfish, yes, I know. It can be done in mass amounts in a short amount of time for any reason, and I guess if you do, it could mean you are a psy vampire, but I do not refer to myself as one. Others do, however. >.>; There are several symptoms of a psy vampire "attack" including but not limited to:
A sudden and unexplained feeling like tiredness or being drained, hunger, sadness, at worst a slight headache even, which can come out of nowhere, or from physical contact with a psy vampire. Psy vampires do not HAVE to touch their "victims" to "attack" them. As far as I know, there is no permanent damage, and you cannot "become" a psy vampire, unless you consider becoming one using an empathic link or telepathic link to drain someone's energy for whatever reason.
Then, there are sanguine vampires. Many people speculate they only have a blood fetish, others may have the physical need for some nutrients that their body does not produce, that are most easily found in blood. Or maybe they do live off it, I don't know. I enjoy the taste of blood, but I don't need it, or take it from others. Some do have donors, but they don't drink much. Maybe a half cup a week, at most, from what I've been told. Not much more to say about it. Many people who claim to be vampires openly are only seeking attention or roleplaying. They don't have altered fangs, turn into bats, or burn in the sun. There is a physical condition for sensitivity to sunlight, but it will not kill anyone. Skin cancer would be the indirect way the sun can kill someone, however, but that's easily prevented, and takes a while to get. Hope that clears it up.
|
|
|
Post by Wunderkind on Apr 26, 2006 19:54:59 GMT -5
The barren and the immortal parts are refering to what I've read from otherkin.com (forum). The immortal part came from some who claims to be one, and is actually quite respected in the community. The barren part came from a lot who are, I'm not saying all are. I'm saying it seems fairly common.
I didn't know about the symptons... A method I heard for shielding one's self is picturing said person, or even just the feeling you get from them in a doorway and then shutting the door on them. It is actually quite effective.
|
|
|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 26, 2006 22:15:40 GMT -5
far as i know, only the truly immortal ones are barren, but not nessacarily are all baren people immortal, so it's debatable.
and Sanguine vampires, i thought, were the chi vampires, the ones who drained energy without having to make contact.
anyone read Vampire: the Masquerade?
yes, it is marketed as a paper RPG, but i feel merit is hidden in it, and got goosebumps when i read about caine.
and furthermore, the games, Redemption and bloodlines make strong goosebumps rise whenever they come up to caine being the first vampire...
i dont get goosebumps over nothing... but perhaps i have? i dont know.
it seems very plausable that god cursed caine with vampirism...
|
|
|
Post by Velen on Apr 27, 2006 11:26:53 GMT -5
The barren and the immortal parts are refering to what I've read from otherkin.com (forum). The immortal part came from some who claims to be one, and is actually quite respected in the community. The barren part came from a lot who are, I'm not saying all are. I'm saying it seems fairly common. Maybe they are barren, but it could also be by choice or by parents. Stoner: Sanquine means blood. >.> Back to Twilight: No one is immortal. I don't care who you are, what you are, or where you (they) came from. They are not immortal. otherkin.com is not the expert on all things otherkin, but neither am I. They can claim immortality all they want, but if I grab a 45 and shoot them in the face, they will die, just like everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 27, 2006 16:33:46 GMT -5
Velen, there are two types of immortality, the type where you can live forever unless killed, and the fantasy type where you live forever and take bullets and fatal wounds like nothing.
yes, they will likely die with a shot to the head, but otherwise, they do not contract fatal diseases unless forced, they do not die unless killed.
trees are that sort of immortal, they dont die unless their environment becomes inhospitable, or they are cut down, or blown down by the wind perhaps. the soil can become too soft and their roots could just come right out and kill the tree. but otherwise, they live forever unless killed.
humans are like this to an extent, but it requires a lot of work to keep your body in a proper state to continue to regenerate past age 30. around age 30, people start to deteriorate very slowly, but this CAN be reversed, however i am not certain how.
i believe it has something to do with being alligned with the earth's magnetic field, and a proper healthy diet, with occasional fasting.
|
|
|
Post by Shadow of Light on Apr 28, 2006 17:59:43 GMT -5
Velen:
Immortal would be like stoner said in a way at least, you still get sick and such but you don't age. A shot gun shell or any other normal moral wound or sickness is aas likely to kill you as the next person although because of your mindset you can become slightly more resistant to sicknes.
Invulnerable is where somebody can shoot you and you would laugh at them ebcause it wouldn't harm you. Imune to all harm but you still age.
invincibility is a combination of those two concepts.
Don't you just love how english plays with words. All sound similar yet have total different meanings, or maybe that's just to me, oh well...
well if you read teh emerald tablets of thoth I think it was and if you want to put any credit to them. A key lies in there. Whether fiction or not, thsoe tablets helped me to some realizations. You can find them at crystal links should you want to look...really your choice.
Shadow of Light
|
|
|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 29, 2006 0:07:26 GMT -5
yeah that's where i gleaned such insight, PLUS i've read similar things before about sleeping with your head pointed north will help your immune system or something like that.
i dont actualyl do like it said in the tablets though, im not very self, or otherwise, diciplined.
mostly by choice, but i also realzie how it can be potentially harmful to my health not to be, but then again, i really dont give a F**k lol.
|
|
|
Post by Velen on Apr 29, 2006 13:56:26 GMT -5
Nuh-uh. Trees do not live forever. Some trees live thousands of years, but it's in my bio textbook right here that everything dies eventually. I don't know who told you they're immortal, but they're totally BS-ing you. =\ There is, however, a way to live up to 3 times the normal age. There are "super flies" who have had their sexual organs removed until the equivalent of the human age of 60 years old. When replaced, they lived up to three times as long, and passed on the ability to live that long. That is the only way to live longer, but everything dies eventually. The heart is a living tissue, a muscle, and it cannot work the way it does forever. Physically impossible, as much as some people may wish it weren't.
|
|
|
Post by Shadow of Light on Apr 29, 2006 15:49:02 GMT -5
who would want a fly to live that long? that's just well sad. As for whether or not it's possible. Anybody who claims to be such, I'd say is lying although I do believe it's possible just highly unlikely. Then again that may just be my mindset.
|
|
|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 30, 2006 2:05:59 GMT -5
trees dont die untill conditions are set, all i understand is that untill the ground fails to produce the nutrients they need, or they overshadow themselves, or like i said before, mudslides and other natural disasters occour, they will continue to live and thrive.
and for crying out loud, who's lived 1000 years to document the life expectancy of a tree?
i am sure that the avarage life expectancy would be about 1000 years if they are given room to grow, at which point their roots deplete the ground, this, however, is only speculation, what does your holy text book tell you about trees?
|
|
|
Post by Velen on Apr 30, 2006 4:50:21 GMT -5
and for crying out loud, who's lived 1000 years to document the life expectancy of a tree? Actually, they cut out the insides of the biggest dead one known to man and counted the rings. x.x No tree in existence has had more rings in the trunk of the tree than said biggest dead tree, so therefore, they said "Hmm, I guess trees don't live longer than that!" They eventually did this for every kind of tree, and can now give a projected life expectancy for any species or even sub-species of tree in the world. Kind of like with flowers. Annuals and perennials and stuff like that. >.> I said the EXACT SAME THING. @_@
|
|
|
Post by stonerwolf on Apr 30, 2006 13:50:36 GMT -5
and for crying out loud, who's lived 1000 years to document the life expectancy of a tree? Actually, they cut out the insides of the biggest dead one known to man and counted the rings. x.x No tree in existence has had more rings in the trunk of the tree than said biggest dead tree, so therefore, they said "Hmm, I guess trees don't live longer than that!" They eventually did this for every kind of tree, and can now give a projected life expectancy for any species or even sub-species of tree in the world. Kind of like with flowers. Annuals and perennials and stuff like that. >.> i dunno, seems sketchy for me, i mean... what was the actual cause of death? the tree was too tall for it to adequately sustain itself? did the soil erode? was it CUT DOWN? i mean there's more to a tree than simply up and croaking and falling over.
|
|
|
Post by Velen on Apr 30, 2006 20:02:09 GMT -5
Well, think of it this way:
Gigantism. People who are born with the genetic trait that one day they will get really freaking tall. Problem is, the heart has to pump blood to every area in the body. The larger someone is, the harder that job becomes. People with gigantism have a shorter life expectancy, but that is irrelevant. Eventually, the carrier system in the plant, tree, in this case, was not sufficient to perform its function, and the tree died.
|
|