Developing Telepathy

[jopoblo]

Nope, Ophiolite, you are quite right to get all defensive about this point. I was wrong to suggest or even imply that my comment was fact and not merely opinion.

In my opinion even Special Relativity theory is pseudo science if one believes it to be valid with out conditions and qualifiers.
As yet there is no absolute proof that light even travels..... so an entire field of physics is built on an unproven notion.
So in my opinion it is mere pseudo science or hypothesis yet to be proven adequately. [ but of course most will say that the nature of light has been proven - which of course creates the label of pseudo science]

Any way what I meant by my original comment was that any new branch of physics must go through the hypothesis stage and then on to the more concrete stages of research and experiment. So at some stage a theory whether it turns out to be successful or not must be held to be an abstract to begin with. Even AE must have had to get past the pseudo science complaint before having his work accepted by the mainstream.

So how is this any different to hypothesis about the physical or real nature of telepathy?

Just because something is damn difficult to predict doesn't invalidate it's reality. Shit humanity is damn hard to predict but does that lead to questions about it's reality or existence?

If predictability is essential to remove the pseudo label then that's the way it is, but let's not fool ourselves and say something doesn't exist just because we can't predict it.

Scientist observes blow-fly in flight.....can't predict it's movement....so it's movement doesn't exist....ha.

There is more than enough evidence to suggest that telepathy is a human pheno and also an animall pheno and that evidence suggests also that it is open to much speculation and imagination ...not to mention scams and fraud and there is also evidence to suggest that it is unpredictable to a major extent.

So we have evidence that it can not be predicted as much as we would like. Does this discount it's reality to a mere imagination? [ try telling that to a whole heap of people who have at some stage in their lives experienced telepathy. How many billion people do you think have had these types of experineces to some degree that are alive today . let's not forget all those who have lived yesterday and are going to live tomorrow]

I have suggested earlier a possible hypothesis of how telepathy can function physically, making analgies with particle entanglement. I see no reason to drop the hypothesis just because someone refuses to accept the evidence just because it can't be predicted upon.

So my meaning of the word pseudoscience is basically an unproven hypothesis held up as fact. I grant you that when someone holds up a hypothesis and claims it as "true" and fully proven when it hasn't been the label of pseudo science comes to the fore [such as SRT], and I have done no such thing, hence my comment directed at Skinwalker.

I look forward to your response as always

Quantum Quack(?): I agree with you, that there is no absolute proof that light travels, but there is no absolute proof of anything, and yet, we go on living and the world keeps turning (or does it?) It makes little sense to question the things we need to accept or take for granted to survive, such as the existence of air and gravity. And yet we cannot take for granted that what we experience--or the understanding of the world that we derive from our experience--will exactly match another's understanding of the world. Individuals' understanding of their experiences--even if the experiences are basically the same--do not agree. We need a common ground--a process of converting hypothesis either to theory or to junk--in which our important beliefs must repeatedly survive, if they are to be believed, to be accepted, by all of us. Especially if these beliefs are important--to us. Things that are necessary to survival can be taken for granted only if doing so allows us to survive. We don't have to know the chemical structure of water before we can drink it at a time when we are suffering from severe thirst. We might need to know when the world appears to be running out of resources of drinkable water, however. Even the idea of psi can become key to one's survival. If I pay attention to a feeling that I should avoid driving my car just now, then I might avoid a fatal accident that I would inevitably have if I chose to ignore that feeling and drive it anyway. And yet, many people (in modern American society, at least) are comfortable with their ability to survive and feel they will get along just fine without having to rely on their potential psychic ability. The belief, for them, is not important enough to consider. It is more likely that these people will strive to gather evidence to support their disbelief and ensure their continued comfort in their present perception of the world, while the other "half" will be more likely to gather evidence that will convince them that psi is real. Belief is not only a tool of understanding our inner and outer world, it is a tool of survival, and this aspect can make it unreliable as a tool for formulating a more accurate reality. Put another way, perhaps, emotions make good motivators, they provide for more creativity and energy, but cool reason provides for better accuracy and precision.

 

[duendy]

Hey jopoblo, and WELCOME...find your first two introductory posts really insight full and well rounded. love it where you sy we should listen to both 'sides'. yes. if we dont listen to the challenges we can go all new age gooey, and we dont want that. if we just listen to the skeptics we bceome rigid and ,,,,we dont want that

put rigid and goowey togther and what hae we got?....

we need to be on our toes. and flexible, and examine OUR shit too.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Just re-read my own post and I must admit I am not too happy with it. I see many problems with my own reasoning. Not so much my intent but in the what and how I expressed that intent. oh well........

 

[c7ityi_]

jopoblo, everything you say is a lie!

I don't know if you were responding to my statement, or all of the previous statements in general, but I stated that there is no scientific evidence of telepathy--which is true. There have been no experiments using the scientific method that have resulted in a consensus among scientists that the experiments were reproducible and did not contain fatal flaws, in procedure, data collection, or analysis of the final data.

Geller has submitted to tests in more than a dozen laboratories in Europe and the United States, and has never been caught cheating. Metallurgists have examined some of the bent or broken pieces of metal and in some cases are unable to explain the changes in the microscopic structure.

Not surprisingly Geller lost interest in formal tests when sceptics either ignored the results or offered increasingly implausible explanations as to how he might have tricked the investigators. For example, to explain Geller's skills at remote viewing, one article in a scientific journal alleged that he may have had a miniature radio implanted in a tooth through which a confederate could have given information. This charge was easily refuted some months later when Geller submitted to a dental examination which revealed no tooth radio and no signs that there had ever been one. An interesting side-effect of Geller's public performances has been the rise of 'Geller clones' who were able to repeat some of his feats; these were often children, who were not well educated enough to realize that what Geller appeared to be doing was forbidden by the laws of physics -- or, at least, the laws of certain narrow-minded physicists.

love it where you sy we should listen to both 'sides'.

You lie! I hate it.

 

[duendy]

Just re-read my own post and I must admit I am not too happy with it. I see many problems with my own reasoning. Not so much my intent but in the what and how I expressed that intent. oh well........

HI QQ, BRAVO for doing that. it takes guts to critique one's OWN offerings. it shows to me integtrity in learning/exploring when one can also critique one's own shit

now dont get me wrong. i am not agreeing with your view of what you critiqued. just that you did so....does that err make sense?

 

[Quantum Quack]

HI QQ, BRAVO for doing that. it takes guts to critique one's OWN offerings. it shows to me integtrity in learning/exploring when one can also critique one's own shit

now dont get me wrong. i am not agreeing with your view of what you critiqued. just that you did so....does that err make sense?

Thanks for your support Duendy.
My main complaint about my post was and is that it is not free of contradiction. The reason for all the posts prior was that I was attempting to defend my response to skinwalker that was ill considered in the first place....and I know from personal experience that if I need to defend a position there is something wrong with that position.....[ wrong to me....not interested so much in them]

I guess I just dislike getting into circular arguements that go no where.

The thing to remember is that posts on this forum aren't necessarilly considered in great detail or perfected before posting. Sometimes they can be very casual and not intended to be held up in a court of law...ha....
The legal term "without prejudice" comes to mind....

 

[heliocentric]

ddd

 

[heliocentric]

I dont see any real reason why telepathy shouldnt be physically possible, if light can read/detect information relating to it in an enclosed device (see The two-slit quantum eraser experiment - http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/) then i really see no reason why two organic brains shouldnt be able to read information from the other.
Alas i have no personal experience of telepathy so i cant definitely say whether it works, i do however have experience of the universal knowledge that seems to permeate everything around us; we are indeed immersed in information.
Prehaps this is what 'zero-point theory' relates to, i cant say i know *that* much about it. In any case it seems to be at least the begining of an atempt to challenge deeply embedded misconceptions of a non-holistic universe. And paving the way towards towards explaining those pesky 'mystical' experiences rather than explaining away. Although im sure there are huge holes in it all, i find it encouraging in the above respects.

 

[heliocentric]

Where it gets really spooky is that it is universally instantaneous and this is one of the reasons it is so hard to get predictability and usefulness from it....a virtually infinite amount of information is out there. [ mind blowing amount of information...]

Just noticed this comment. you couldnt be more right, becomming aware of that pure information is utterally bewildering sort of like being shown every page on the internet at once, your mind reals and finds it near impossible to pick anything out and instead tends to simply go into 'awe mode' of the amount of information and knowledge that is there.

 

[jopoblo]

Thanks for the welcome, duendy. And "Hello" to Q.Q., and to c7ityi, too.
I'd like to be honest. I have been a believer in much that is called "paranormal" most of my life. But I have also believed--and disbelieved--much about which I have not bothered to educate myself (for instance, Geller). I am basically taking a Philosophy class right now, which might just as easily be called "Skepticism 101". I signed up on this site in order to ask if anybody has had the experience of pulling into a driveway to allow the car behind you to pass (on a country road), only to watch the car pull in behind you, because you picked the driver's driveway to pull into! I have begun a paper for my class about the existence of ESP and psi phenomena, and I found no testimony anywhere about my personal "phenomena".
I am human, and therefore fallible. I hope I will always be willing to admit that. It's been pretty easy for me to do so far. I am encouraged that some of you are also willing to do the same, to admit that you might be wrong, or at least to examine your own beliefs, whether privately or publicly. (I imagine it gets harder the more your livelihood depends on showing that you are right.) Since I am, as I have admitted, poorly educated about the studies of Geller and his abilities, I will take some time in the future to find and read more, so that I am able to discuss his specific case on a stronger level in the future. As of now, my knowledge comes only from reading what material about Geller I have come across by chance, not from searching for information about him or his abilities, specifically. My time and internet access are limited, so please allow me some time to learn more. c7ityi, your accusation may be valid. I may find myself to be a liar. I am willing to accept that possibility, and I am also willing--in fact, eager--to learn more. I have found nothing so far to satisfy my desire to read just one study that is upheld by scientific review and critique that definitively shows psi to be a legitimate entity of reality. "Many voices" within my mind tell me it must be there; that is, I can think of many reasons why I wish to see a scientific study that proves ESP and psi to be real, but I haven't found such a study that falls under the criteria that my Philosophy teacher has laid out for his class (the principles of the scientific method, basically) and that has consistently stood up to the scrutiny of credible scientists.
Forgive me if I don't respond for a while, but I once learned that "respect" means to take a second look, and I am going to give your response, Geller, and the entire concept the overall attention that is equivalent to my respect for you, as a human (which, I can only assure you, is at least adequate, and, I'd like to think, even more than the average person would give a stranger (especially one who has called him a "liar")), and my curiosity of the subject, or subjects, of psi.

 

[jopoblo]

Thank you, heliocentric, for the website address. I'm looking forward to checking it out when I have time. If anybody has any more informative sites that they would like to share about psi, I, for one, would be extremely grateful to you for your insight.

 

[jopoblo]

OK, so the website from heliocentric is not about psi, per se, but about considering concepts in a new and strange way. Thank you, nevertheless. Anything that can be relevant is helpful in understanding something that is little understood (and I must admit that I did not understand--or carefully read--the detailed explanation of quantum erasure in its entirety; I just tried to get the gist of it).

 

[Ophiolite]

Geller has submitted to tests in more than a dozen laboratories in Europe and the United States, .

Detailed citations, or retract, please.

 

[Giambattista]

Off-topic post deleted by moderator. Please conduct private conversations by PM or email.

 

[shaman_]

An interesting side-effect of Geller's public performances has been the rise of 'Geller clones' who were able to repeat some of his feats; these were often children, who were not well educated enough to realize that what Geller appeared to be doing was forbidden by the laws of physics -- or, at least, the laws of certain narrow-minded physicists.

Any decent magician can also repeat these 'feats'.

Geller at his best.
http://homepage.mac.com/onegoodmove/movies/carsongeller.html

 

[duendy]

OK, so the website from heliocentric is not about psi, per se, but about considering concepts in a new and strange way. Thank you, nevertheless. Anything that can be relevant is helpful in understanding something that is little understood (and I must admit that I did not understand--or carefully read--the detailed explanation of quantum erasure in its entirety; I just tried to get the gist of it).

Have you heard of Charles Tart?
see what you think: www.paradigm-sys.com/display/ctt_articles1.cfm

and for an interview he gave whioch will allow you more a personal insight into where he comes from checkout www.dailygrail.com/node/6

alllso. i really recommend this book. as it seems to me your philosophy tutor is laying on some ....err shit on yu

i myself have only realy began reading this. i had wanted book for some time, anyway heres it:
Critique of Patriarchal Reason, by Arthur Evans, wit artwork by Frank Pietronigro
ISBN 0-9645384-1-5
" A philosopher and an artist join hands in tis book to reclaim philosophy as an art. Their collaboration, supported by a grant from te San Francisco Art Commission exposes the patriarchal mythology underlying modern "rationality".
There book shows how patriarchal biases haeinfected formal logic, higher mathematics, and the scientific method. It demonstrates the harmful impact of these biases on women, gay people, artists, indigenous societies, and the natura environement. In place of these biases, the book offers a new, librating view of the role of reason in human life.
Among the many thinkers discussed is Ludwig Wittgenstein. A surprising connection is uncovered between Wittgenstein's theories of logic and language on one hand ad his conflicted attitude toward his homosexuality on the other.
Critique of Patriarcal Reason opens the windows ofWestern philosophy. Read it, and you will discover a whole new way of looking at te world around you and your own life."
now, if you want a copy, i suggest you try here. i got a used copy. it is in great condision. and te book is really lofely,wit art work too.....and i got it for £11 after i was quoted from a rare book place in UK for £40 odd !

from here... www.alibris.com

 

[Ophiolite]

Off-topic post deleted by moderator. Please conduct private conversations by PM or email.

 

[Ophiolite]

. as it seems to me your philosophy tutor is laying on some ....err shit on yu

That is their job.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

I've dabbled in telepathy and yes its possible, its not easy though, what is easier is planting your thoughts and desires and will in someone elses mind, I've dabbled in that too (many moons ago) Not to be encouraged really. Worst form of manipulation...unless done as party trick, and participants know their minds may be being messed with. Myself, I got a few uncalled for work bonus's!

Anyway enjoy your chat, this isn't something I wish to elaborate on further. As I said, not to be enocuraged, thoughts are private and should remain so.

 

[James R]

c7ityi_:

jopoblo, everything you say is a lie!

This is ironic, given the rest of your post...

Geller has submitted to tests in more than a dozen laboratories in Europe and the United States, and has never been caught cheating.

I guess you've been listening to him and not to his testers. Geller is a great self-promoter. He seldom submits to any kind of rigorous testing these days, since he has been stung in the past. Contrary to your claim, he has been caught cheating many times, both in tests and in television footage and at other times by various people.

Metallurgists have examined some of the bent or broken pieces of metal and in some cases are unable to explain the changes in the microscopic structure.

It sounds like you've got this from Geller's web site. It's the kind of publicity he likes to put out for the gullible.

Not surprisingly Geller lost interest in formal tests when sceptics either ignored the results or offered increasingly implausible explanations as to how he might have tricked the investigators.

Or when he cheated and was caught out.

In fact, James Randi has made it somewhat of his life's mission to reproduce every Geller trick using only techniques used by stage magicians - and he has done all of the Geller favorites.

Hell, even I can do the spoon-bending thing as well as Geller, and I'm not a professional magician like he used to be before he started claiming his "powers" were real.

For example, to explain Geller's skills at remote viewing, one article in a scientific journal alleged that he may have had a miniature radio implanted in a tooth through which a confederate could have given information. This charge was easily refuted some months later when Geller submitted to a dental examination which revealed no tooth radio and no signs that there had ever been one. An interesting side-effect of Geller's public performances has been the rise of 'Geller clones' who were able to repeat some of his feats; these were often children, who were not well educated enough to realize that what Geller appeared to be doing was forbidden by the laws of physics -- or, at least, the laws of certain narrow-minded physicists.

Again, it sounds like this is straight off Geller's web site. Are you his publicist?