Click on his screen name then move the mouse to the right and click "Add happeh to your Ignore List" and he'll go away. I did that with Gustav... it works quite well.
Developing Telepathy
- Thread starter Lomion
- Start date
leopold99 said:
No problems, Leo, I know that you didn't. He is reacting aggressively, calling names and using obscenities because he got caught in a lie is is trying to distract everyone.
He claimed to be a scientist and two of us here asked him for more details. Since he couldn't fake it any longer (not smart enough, I suppose), he reacted childishly and eve caught you up in it as well. He's just thrashing about madly and no telling who he'll slander next. (Though after having made this post, it might very well be me. But no matter, we all now know he's just a simpleton of a liar and has absolutely NO credibility left in these forums.)
mouse said:
And what if he is playing you for a fool?
Pay attention. You will see completely lucid sentences and printing occasionally. In my experience, a person who cannot speak, never can. A person who can speak, and is faking mental incompetence will trip and expose the intelligent person within.
Good act. He has most of you convinced.
Ophiolite said:
Oh Ya. I got that loud and clear.
Ophiolite said:
That is what I want to do. Except the world I want to shock you into is not painful. Everyone knows what everyone else is thinking. Everyone is nice and kind and considerate. People still blow up, that is the nature of the maturing process. But overall, it is like a paradise.
mouse said:
You are being funny. I am serious. Which means you cannot feel the energy of other people and you are unaware of your own energy.
That is a problem for some of the things you wish to learn. I went back and looked. You were talking about spirituality. I am not an expert on spirituality. It is probably defined many different ways.
I think most spirituality does involve an awareness of energy.
Light said:
What lie did I get caught in? Or is that next?
Light said:
Just like a psychologist. Poison. Making people sick with their knowledge. Yes I did say I was a scientist. I can say I am a singer. I can say I am a bricklayer. I can say I am a scuba diver.
(Oh Ya. Just to let you know what reality is like? I answered this post yesterday afternoon. I knew what you were going to say, and the answer was there in my head for me. Yesterday.
Now please proceed to tell me how you know what is in my head better than I do, and that the incident never occurred)
In the adult world, we do not need anyone to tell us what we are allowed to call ourselves. We are self described. In the slave world you live in, only what your god, authority, says is allowed, is what you think and believe.
I have more scientific ability than you ever dreamed of. I have so many theories that if I was a con man, I would become a millionaire like that Anthony Robbins I think his name was. The one got that got rich convincing people to walk on fire.
Light said:
As if credibility in these forums is an indication of the correctness or accuracy of anything. Nope. What you are saying is "This is OUR treehouse and we don't think he belongs". Nothing to do with science or truth.
Ophiolite said:
Charletan's put aside, there is something far more common. People will have really fantastic perceptual experiences and simply come to incorrect conclusions concerning what they are. Various forms of hallucination (anything from hypnogogic to shizophrenia) are the most common cases. Real mind-blowing, emotinally stirring, and attractive stuff... and utterly confined to an individual's brain. It's difficult for people (especially those whom use 'belief' as a means to understand reality) to understand the difference between internally generated perceptual content and externally stimulated percptual content.
Happeh said:
Sure, you can also say you are from the planet Mars - but it doesn't make it nor any of your other claims true. Would you also like to claim you're a medical doctor? Try going into business as one and see what happens, you fraud.
No doubt. You would have had to been extremely stupid not to see it coming.
Right, Just try calling yourself a medical doctor as I suggested above.
And even if you don't like it (as if that mattered) there are recognized processes to go through before you can claim to be any kind of professional. Like completing an education, for example. You can call yourself an astronaut for all I care. It doesn't make it so and neither would it impress me (in your case, that is) because you're just a fraud - plain and simple.Ha! Having theories proves nothing! Even a certain dumb member here from England has many theories - and every single one she proposes has more holes than swiss cheese.
Like it or not, dummy, credibility is probably THE most important quality of a human as viewed by another human. Without it, you become completely worthless and no one will pay attention to you. It has everything to do with truth.
And since you fail to recognize that, you're even worse off than I had expected. What a waste of human tissue!
Happeh said:
Mouse's definition seemed serious enough and correct. He can (as well as all humans) sense various forms of energy from other humans. If this answer doesn't 'count' for you then the wrong question was asked of Mouse.
Maybe you're talking about 'spiritual energy' and if so, you have to provide evidence that such a thing exists.
Happeh said:
The government had little say in the cold fusion nonsense. Several researchers actually obtained funding, part of it from government sources if memory serves correct, and were never able to produce any reproducible evidence. They lied about their claims. Indeed, they still lie about their claims. Corruption is a human condition, not one exclusive to the government. Governments, after all, are comprised of humans. Paranoia is another human condition...
Happeh said:
Please. Add me.
In a 1995 book saturated with piercing skepticism, the late Carl Sagan of Cornell University maintained his life-long mission of educating the public about science, in this case by debunking popular hysteria over alien abductions, channelers, faith-healers, the "face" on Mars, and practically everything else found in the New Age section of most bookstores. Then, in one paragraph amongst 450 pages, we find an astonishing admission:
At the time of writing there are three claims in the ESP field which, in my opinion, deserve serious study: (1) that by thought alone humans can (barely) affect random number generators in computers; (2) that people under mild sensory deprivation can receive thoughts or images "projected" at them; and (3) that young children sometimes report the details of a previous life, which upon checking turn out to be accurate and which they could not have known about in any other way than reincarnation.
Other signs of shifting opinions are cropping up with increasing frequency in the scientific literature. Starting in the 1980s, well-known scientific journals like Foundations of Physics, American Psychologist, and Statistical Science published articles favorably reviewing the scientific evidence for psychic phenomena. The Proceedings of the IEEE, the flagship journal of the Institute for Electronic and Electrical Engineers, has published major debates on psi research. Invited articles have appeared in the prestigious journal, Brain and Behavioral Sciences. A favorable article on telepathy research appeared in 1994 in Psychological Bulletin, one of the top-ranked journals in academic psychology. And an article presenting a theoretical model for precognition appeared in 1994 in Physical Review, a prominent physics journal.
In the 1990s alone, seminars on psi research were part of the regular programs at the annual conferences of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Psychological Association, and the American Statistical Association. Invited lectures on the status of psi research were presented for diplomats at the United Nations, for academics at Harvard University, and for scientists at Bell Laboratories.
NEW (not in the book): The first US patent for a psi effect was granted to Princeton University researchers on November 3, 1998. Patent "US 5830064" is entitled: Apparatus and method for distinguishing events which collectively exceed chance expectations and thereby controlling an output. This patent specifically covers distant mental control of electronic random number generator outputs.
The Pentagon has not overlooked these activities.
From 1981 to 1995, five different US government-sponsored scientific review committees were given the task of reviewing the evidence for psi effects. The reviews were prompted by concerns that if psi was genuine, it might be important for national security reasons. We would have to assume that foreign governments would exploit psi if they could.
Reports were prepared by the Congressional Research Service, the Army Research Institute, the National Research Council, the Office of Technology Assessment, and the American Institutes for Research (the latter commissioned by the Central Intelligence Agency). While disagreeing over fine points of interpretation, all five of the reviews concluded that the experimental evidence for certain forms of psychic phenomena merited serious scientific study.
For example, in 1981, the Congressional Research Service concluded that "Recent experiments in remote viewing and other studies in parapsychology suggest that there exists an "interconnectiveness" of the human mind with other minds and with matter. This interconnectiveness would appear to be functional in nature and amplified by intent and emotion." The report concluded with suggestions of possible applications for health care, investigative work, and "the ability of the human mind to obtain information as an important factor in successful decision making by executives."
In 1985, a report prepared for the Army Research Institute concluded that "The bottom line is that the data reviewed in [this] report constitute genuine scientific anomalies for which no one has an adequate explanation or set of explanations.... If they are what they appear to be, their theoretical (and, eventually, their practical) implications are enormous."
In 1987, the National Research Council reviewed parapsychology (the scientific discipline that studies of psi) at the request of the US Army. The committee recommended that the Army monitor parapsychological research being conducted in the former Soviet Union and in the United States, they recommended that the Army consider funding specific experiments, and most significantly, they admitted that they could not propose plausible alternatives to the "psi hypothesis" for some classes of psi experiments. Dr. Ray Hyman, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon and long-term skeptic of psi phenomena, was chairman of the National Research Council’s review committee on parapsychology. He stated in a 1988 interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education, that "Parapsychologists should be rejoicing. This was the first government committee that said their work should be taken seriously."
In early 1989, the Office of Technology Assessment issued a report of a workshop on the status of parapsychology. The end of the report stated that "It is clear that parapsychology continues to face strong resistance from the scientific establishment. The question is – how can the field improve its chances of obtaining a fair hearing across a broader spectrum of the scientific community, so that emotionality does not impede objective assessment of the experimental results? Whether the final result of such an assessment is positive, negative, or something in between, the field appears to merit such consideration."
In 1995, the American Institutes for Research reviewed formerly classified government-sponsored psi research for the CIA at the request of the U. S. Congress. Statistician Jessica Utts of the University of California, Davis, one of the two principal reviewers, concluded that "The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research … have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud…. It is recommended that future experiments focus on understanding how this phenomenon works, and on how to make it as useful as possible. There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer proof….."
Surprisingly, the other principal reviewer, skeptic Ray Hyman, agreed: "The statistical departures from chance appear to be too large and consistent to attribute to statistical flukes of any sort…. I tend to agree with Professor Utts that real effects are occurring in these experiments. Something other than chance departures from the null hypothesis has occurred in these experiments."
These opinions are even being reflected in the staid realm of college textbooks. One of the most popular books in the history of college publishing is Introduction to Psychology by Richard L. Atkinson and three co-authors. A portion of the preface in the 1990 edition of this textbook reads: "Readers should take note of a new section in Chapter 6 entitled ‘Psi Phenomena.’ We have discussed parapsychology in previous editions but have been very critical of the research and skeptical of the claims made in the field. And although we still have strong reservations about most of the research in parapsychology, we find the recent work on telepathy worthy of careful consideration."
The popular "serious" media haven’t overlooked this opinion shift. The May, 1993, issue of New Scientist, a popular British science magazine, carried a five-page cover story on telepathy research. It opened with the line, "Psychic research has long been written off as the stuff of cranks and frauds. But there’s now one telepathy experiment that leaves even the sceptics scratching their heads." And in the last few years, Newsweek, the New York Times Magazine, Psychology Today, ABC TV’s Nightline, national news programs, and television and print media around the world have begun to moderate previously held Stage 1 opinions. They’re now beginning to publish and broadcast Stage 2-type stories taking scientific psi research seriously.
If all this is true, then a thousand other questions immediately bubble up. Why hasn’t everyone heard about this on the nightly news? Why is this topic so controversial? Who has psi? How does it work? What are its implications and applications? These are all good questions, and this book will attempt to answer them through four general themes: Motivation, Evidence, Understanding and Implications.
Consciousness: The Conscious Universe, part II - Shifting opinions
By Dean Radin
At the time of writing there are three claims in the ESP field which, in my opinion, deserve serious study: (1) that by thought alone humans can (barely) affect random number generators in computers; (2) that people under mild sensory deprivation can receive thoughts or images "projected" at them; and (3) that young children sometimes report the details of a previous life, which upon checking turn out to be accurate and which they could not have known about in any other way than reincarnation.
Other signs of shifting opinions are cropping up with increasing frequency in the scientific literature. Starting in the 1980s, well-known scientific journals like Foundations of Physics, American Psychologist, and Statistical Science published articles favorably reviewing the scientific evidence for psychic phenomena. The Proceedings of the IEEE, the flagship journal of the Institute for Electronic and Electrical Engineers, has published major debates on psi research. Invited articles have appeared in the prestigious journal, Brain and Behavioral Sciences. A favorable article on telepathy research appeared in 1994 in Psychological Bulletin, one of the top-ranked journals in academic psychology. And an article presenting a theoretical model for precognition appeared in 1994 in Physical Review, a prominent physics journal.
In the 1990s alone, seminars on psi research were part of the regular programs at the annual conferences of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Psychological Association, and the American Statistical Association. Invited lectures on the status of psi research were presented for diplomats at the United Nations, for academics at Harvard University, and for scientists at Bell Laboratories.
NEW (not in the book): The first US patent for a psi effect was granted to Princeton University researchers on November 3, 1998. Patent "US 5830064" is entitled: Apparatus and method for distinguishing events which collectively exceed chance expectations and thereby controlling an output. This patent specifically covers distant mental control of electronic random number generator outputs.
The Pentagon has not overlooked these activities.
From 1981 to 1995, five different US government-sponsored scientific review committees were given the task of reviewing the evidence for psi effects. The reviews were prompted by concerns that if psi was genuine, it might be important for national security reasons. We would have to assume that foreign governments would exploit psi if they could.
Reports were prepared by the Congressional Research Service, the Army Research Institute, the National Research Council, the Office of Technology Assessment, and the American Institutes for Research (the latter commissioned by the Central Intelligence Agency). While disagreeing over fine points of interpretation, all five of the reviews concluded that the experimental evidence for certain forms of psychic phenomena merited serious scientific study.
For example, in 1981, the Congressional Research Service concluded that "Recent experiments in remote viewing and other studies in parapsychology suggest that there exists an "interconnectiveness" of the human mind with other minds and with matter. This interconnectiveness would appear to be functional in nature and amplified by intent and emotion." The report concluded with suggestions of possible applications for health care, investigative work, and "the ability of the human mind to obtain information as an important factor in successful decision making by executives."
In 1985, a report prepared for the Army Research Institute concluded that "The bottom line is that the data reviewed in [this] report constitute genuine scientific anomalies for which no one has an adequate explanation or set of explanations.... If they are what they appear to be, their theoretical (and, eventually, their practical) implications are enormous."
In 1987, the National Research Council reviewed parapsychology (the scientific discipline that studies of psi) at the request of the US Army. The committee recommended that the Army monitor parapsychological research being conducted in the former Soviet Union and in the United States, they recommended that the Army consider funding specific experiments, and most significantly, they admitted that they could not propose plausible alternatives to the "psi hypothesis" for some classes of psi experiments. Dr. Ray Hyman, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon and long-term skeptic of psi phenomena, was chairman of the National Research Council’s review committee on parapsychology. He stated in a 1988 interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education, that "Parapsychologists should be rejoicing. This was the first government committee that said their work should be taken seriously."
In early 1989, the Office of Technology Assessment issued a report of a workshop on the status of parapsychology. The end of the report stated that "It is clear that parapsychology continues to face strong resistance from the scientific establishment. The question is – how can the field improve its chances of obtaining a fair hearing across a broader spectrum of the scientific community, so that emotionality does not impede objective assessment of the experimental results? Whether the final result of such an assessment is positive, negative, or something in between, the field appears to merit such consideration."
In 1995, the American Institutes for Research reviewed formerly classified government-sponsored psi research for the CIA at the request of the U. S. Congress. Statistician Jessica Utts of the University of California, Davis, one of the two principal reviewers, concluded that "The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research … have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud…. It is recommended that future experiments focus on understanding how this phenomenon works, and on how to make it as useful as possible. There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer proof….."
Surprisingly, the other principal reviewer, skeptic Ray Hyman, agreed: "The statistical departures from chance appear to be too large and consistent to attribute to statistical flukes of any sort…. I tend to agree with Professor Utts that real effects are occurring in these experiments. Something other than chance departures from the null hypothesis has occurred in these experiments."
These opinions are even being reflected in the staid realm of college textbooks. One of the most popular books in the history of college publishing is Introduction to Psychology by Richard L. Atkinson and three co-authors. A portion of the preface in the 1990 edition of this textbook reads: "Readers should take note of a new section in Chapter 6 entitled ‘Psi Phenomena.’ We have discussed parapsychology in previous editions but have been very critical of the research and skeptical of the claims made in the field. And although we still have strong reservations about most of the research in parapsychology, we find the recent work on telepathy worthy of careful consideration."
The popular "serious" media haven’t overlooked this opinion shift. The May, 1993, issue of New Scientist, a popular British science magazine, carried a five-page cover story on telepathy research. It opened with the line, "Psychic research has long been written off as the stuff of cranks and frauds. But there’s now one telepathy experiment that leaves even the sceptics scratching their heads." And in the last few years, Newsweek, the New York Times Magazine, Psychology Today, ABC TV’s Nightline, national news programs, and television and print media around the world have begun to moderate previously held Stage 1 opinions. They’re now beginning to publish and broadcast Stage 2-type stories taking scientific psi research seriously.
If all this is true, then a thousand other questions immediately bubble up. Why hasn’t everyone heard about this on the nightly news? Why is this topic so controversial? Who has psi? How does it work? What are its implications and applications? These are all good questions, and this book will attempt to answer them through four general themes: Motivation, Evidence, Understanding and Implications.
Consciousness: The Conscious Universe, part II - Shifting opinions
By Dean Radin
Light said:
Yes it would be fraud if someone who did not have a medical degree set up a medical practice and charged money to patients. I agree.
Light said:
To a point. I find it is more that lemmings view credibility as more important. That is why politicians and con men can do what they do. Simple people like yourself accept their lies. They bamboozle you with their authority and credibility. Doesn't matter they are liars, they convince you that they are credible.
That kind of attitude leads to cults. The people who worshipped Jim Jones thought he was a credible leader. If they were independent, like me, they would have checked up on the details of Jim Jones instead of accepting his lies and ability to fool people into thinking he was credible.
Light said:
There is a difference between being credible in the eyes of others, and being credible in the.....laws of the universe or the truth of reality. I don't care about popularity contests. Never did. I only care about the truth.
Light said:
Nope. If you listened to me, your life would improve. I cannot predict how, but your life will change. I can say that from my experience you should become more open minded and your views should begin to reflect reality more. I cannot guarantee it though.
Crunchy Cat said:
I understood mouse's reply. I felt he understood my question and purposefully dodged it.
Crunchy Cat said:
Why do I have to prove it? You have your own body right there. You can prove it to yourself if you would take 5 minutes.
The next time you go talk to someone. Stand there and talk to them for 5 minutes. At the end of the 5 minutes, slowly begin to inch towards them. Don't be obvious. Do it slowly. At some point they will begin to move back. You have penetrated their energy field. They are not comfortable with that so they move back.
I think I have heard psychologists call this effect "entering someone's personal space". I don't know about you, but personal space is not a scientific term I ever heard. That is like describing some compound as purple instead of giving the chemical formula.
What is personal space? Personal space is a phrase people who refuse to use the word energy invented, so they could talk about energy and it's effects without admitting it is energy.
You are just fooling yourself with this junk about personal space. Human beings have an energy field surrounding them just like the Star Trek Enterprise has an energy field surrounding it.