Thank you, I found your article fascinating because my intuition in reading it suggested your authenticity, honesty, candor and discipline to curb hyperbole or dramatize. I have the sense your article was in the large part responsible reporting.

I don’t experience these types of “paranormal” events as part of my ordinary waking or sleeping consciousness including my recent adoption of meditation. Maybe I am repressed, in some way(s) infantile or maybe some other difference we don’t understand. Nevertheless, it is my conviction that regardless of the basis for your experience (metaphysical, Jungian unconscious apparition, both, something else) as someone who has devoted my life to science and engineering we are at a place of evolution where it is necessary to calmly include subjective data (both intellectually philosophical and experientially psychological) as part of the data gathering process. We are no longer limited in processing capability to quickly build models that include massive amounts of subjective data added to case data. Models are just attempts to reflect and then benchmark the predictive quality against actual reality. Why not include all data as experimental modeling? We are no longer limited to pen and paper. Thanks for sharing. There are lots of assumption questions in your reporting such as consciousness, free will, purpose and the nature of being. From a cold statistical standpoint it is likely we are in some kind of simulation with accordant “rules”, there is no reason your experience is not useful data. Being angry, “pissed”, is nearly always fear manifesting in a different form … statistically my hypothesis would be to move toward the object with curiosity (likely a better strategy than repression, avoidance, fleeing). But, I am not a psychologist.