06-01-2019, 04:15 PM
So my dad and I were arguing about the effectiveness of subliminals today because I told him I was going to buy E3, even though there was no apparent change brought about by E2.
Later on in the day, my dad brought up this article and the truth is, I didn't really have a response to it:
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/14/scien...ter=google
I still bought E3, but I was wondering what you all think about the article. Does it have any validity? Or is there something fundamentally wrong with it?
I still trust that these subs aren't snake oil, but I have to admit, I don't notice any changes after 2 months of using E2 (3 different times, no less) and I don't have a retort to this article. Also, there seems to be some contention about whether or not the SM, WM and DMSI subs work, from what I can tell.
So a piece of me is wondering if maybe I'm just a sucker for buying this stuff. Another piece of me is still confident these subs work, despite all that stuff I said above.
I'm curious what people on the forum have to say about it, so I decided to post it here and ask y'all's opinions.
Later on in the day, my dad brought up this article and the truth is, I didn't really have a response to it:
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/14/scien...ter=google
I still bought E3, but I was wondering what you all think about the article. Does it have any validity? Or is there something fundamentally wrong with it?
I still trust that these subs aren't snake oil, but I have to admit, I don't notice any changes after 2 months of using E2 (3 different times, no less) and I don't have a retort to this article. Also, there seems to be some contention about whether or not the SM, WM and DMSI subs work, from what I can tell.
So a piece of me is wondering if maybe I'm just a sucker for buying this stuff. Another piece of me is still confident these subs work, despite all that stuff I said above.
I'm curious what people on the forum have to say about it, so I decided to post it here and ask y'all's opinions.