Do any of you have psychic powers yet?

*laughs* Even I don't remember! I just came accross the link to this thread deep within my favorites list. I thought maybe we could all take a second, calm look at the subject and see where two years has taken our perspective.

How strange that there is a sense of security in seeing familiar names, despite our posting relationship in the past.
 
This is interesting. I found this site by googling the link http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/dbem/does_psi_exist.html to see whether anyone had denounced the article. The article itself is linked to from psipog.net - most people here seem to say everything on the site is BS; how they know this is beyond me but then I make no claim to wisdom.

The author of that site has written an article in scepticism which I'd recommend to everyone on this board, though - http://www.psipog.net/show.php?id=10143

Back to the point though - the googling led me to http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=22366&page=3&pp=20

And thence to this thread. Which probably doesn't answer your question, Halcyon, but it shows that this isn't the first of your posts which was never replied to :)
 
Good lord...I've long since lost my links to those sites and documents. How fortunate for me that you found them! On the subject of scepticism, there is a very well respected chapter on the subject in the book "The Conscious Universe," by Dean Radin, which I recommend to anyone who's taken a scientific interest in this subject. Often, that particular chapter has been reproduced on many websites, and can be found by googling "A field guide to scepticism."
 
Recently .. things have been happening that I can't fully understand or explain, and I would like to ask for some opinions on the matter. I have read all of the posts... Some of the arguements were pointless and unnecessary. I have noticed that the common arguement was, "Show me some proof!". I know of a few people who blindly and willingly follow a religion like Catholicism (or worse) but refuse to take into consideration, the possibility of the supernatural and telpathic. How is the idea of telepathy, ESP or anything related, any different from believing in god or a higher power? Our society is practically based on religion.. Even at school we are required to acknowledge or at least agree with the idea. The pledge... "One nation, under GOD..." Almost anywhere you go, you find people that will preach about their god and how wonderful their religion is. Millions, if not billions of people who are willing to accept a GOD or divine creator.. Yet, many of the same people don't want to believe in the idea that parapsychology is something to be taken seriously. Maybe telepathy and ESP and many things similar are the real deal.. maybe they aren't. I can't really have a biased opinion on the whole thing. But I can say that it might be possible. Nothing is impossible, only mathematically improbable. Aside from my rambling.... I would still appreciate some opinions from both sides, maybe someone can help me figure things out? :confused:
 
I have a lot of crazy theories on religion and telepathy. DeadEndSentience if you need help solving problems about these things contact me somehow. I think I may be able to help. Also for skeptics: around 70 years ago people didn't think black holes existed and called it impossible. Look how that turned out.
 
Niushirra said:
I think I may be able to help. Also for skeptics: around 70 years ago people didn't think black holes existed and called it impossible. Look how that turned out.
Click to expand...

yes, but there was an observable effect that those black holes were having on nearby space.

If some so-called psychics would come forward and let scientists observe, then you might get some of us "skeptics" to believe.
 
Skepticism isn't necessarily a bad thing. As for psychics coming forward? I'm sure plenty have. In this situation... It could be a long time if ever, before there is any hard evidence of the existence of psychics or psychic activity. For now, many people will just assume that it's all fake.
 
DeadEndSentience said:
Skepticism isn't necessarily a bad thing. As for psychics coming forward? I'm sure plenty have. In this situation... It could be a long time if ever, before there is any hard evidence of the existence of psychics or psychic activity. For now, many people will just assume that it's all fake.
Click to expand...


Yes but all these psychics fail when tested under observation. If they didn't, that would be some of the hard evidence that you speak of here.
 
The hard evidence I was speaking of is to prove the existence of psychic activity. As of yet, there is no proof. Tests have been formed, and have been failed. Maybe some are the real deal, and maybe some aren't. Personally, I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig in a test that isn't likely to be taken seriously, anyway. But maybe that's just me. Maybe some day it will be proven, and maybe it won't.
 
Actually government tests have been done with telepathy and empathy on military bases and in labs. It seems to have positive results and show it exists. I'll see if I can find and example. Also most psychics have to prove themselves with telekinises and that is extremely powerful. It dosen't do much either. My opinion is it should not be public knowledge that it exists. It's a long theory why not.

Edit:http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles/t/telepathy.html
That adress will give some proof.
 
Last edited:
Poppycock.

The goverment did, indeed, explore such things as "esp," "remote viewing, etc., but none had positive, conclusive results. In fact, the government promptly dropped all explorations of this type of research once it was apparent that it was poppycock.

Rather than simply regurgitate someone elses anecdotes about "the government testing," look for peer-reviewed journal articles that have "positive" and conclusive results. They don't exist.
 
I'm not saying it's conclusive there is still a possibilty though. I am not just one sided. I think everybody should just take a chance though and practice the first exercises of psi(found on psipog.com). Then make choose your side or stay inbetween like me.
 
SkinWalker said:
Which one of those papers were conclusive again?
Click to expand...


Did you even read my reply to your last post in there? How insulting! I'll cut and paste a piece:

"Milton and Wiseman were also culpable of being "biased and seriously flawed, both in the methods they had used, and in the way they had selected the data." They had "chosen to omit some recent and highly successful experiments." Milton later published a paper independant of Wiseman that included all the experiments conducted to date, and admitted that the results were actually statistically significant.

Should Ganzfeld Research Continue To Be Crucial In The Search For A Replicable Psi Effect? Part I. Discussion Paper And Introductionto An Electronic-Mail Discussion
Journal of Parapsychology, The, Dec, 1999 by Julie Milton"

Because you did not respond to it, I just figured that you were unable to provide a counter argument. I didn't think it was because you were blowing me off! :)
 
I didn't respond mainly because I realize that we can go back and forth like this probably to infinity. The bottom line is that there isn't anything conclusive one way or the other. There appears to be something worth looking at with regard to "psi/esp," but, as yet, no one has really determined what that "something" is.

It might be actual "psi/esp" or it might simply be human intuition and the innate ability for humans to recognize patterns on a level that even computers cannot achieve (which is why we don't have computers operating taxi cabs and city busses).

So, which part of Milton's paper was conclusive in the results to the point of being completely replicable? Perhaps you could quote it. :cool:
 
I am in no way religious. In fact I dispute religion to my core, but in some sense I believe in the pretanatural (neutral paranormal activity in both life and non-life). I also believe that everyone has extended abilities on an unrecorded level and that at some point in our life we can sometimes connect to that sense. Some of us more than others. The people who I disbelieve is most of the "psychics" on TV that make so much a deal about talking to the dead. Most of them use basic psychological mind tricks to take the information out of the person on hand and relay that information back to them but in different words. Another thing that looks stupid is the "Most Haunted" programme. It is obvious that they are using special effects (both computerised and physical) to create the effects needed.

I don't know if I can connect or am connected to my other senses or even if they exist. But what isn't needed is people going around dismissing everything because it sounds remotely strange. It is like the American Government; shoot everything that doesn't make sense, if it can't be shot, then shoot it.
 
SkinWalker said:
The bottom line is that there isn't anything conclusive one way or the other.
Click to expand...
That seems to me like a last resort pull out. When the evidence can no longer be successfully debated then we resort to appplying subjective personal standards to the situation and try to pass them off as empirical observations.

SkinWalker said:
There appears to be something worth looking at with regard to "psi/esp," but, as yet, no one has really determined what that "something" is.
Click to expand...
As many in the scientific community know, there are no lack of "observable effects," without explanations or hypothesis to explain them away, and there never really needs to be any. As long as they do exist, people will study them and gather up evidence for them. Psi is not a term I approve of, it's just one used to classify a set of these observable effects. The stigma associated with it and the "paranormal," or "supranormal," is bullshit. If there is something that has been documented and observed and tested, then it's obviously there.
SkinWalker said:
It might be actual "psi/esp" or it might simply be human intuition and the innate ability for humans to recognize patterns on a level that even computers cannot achieve (which is why we don't have computers operating taxi cabs and city busses).
Click to expand...
I agree with you in regards to innate human nature. I always have. How many people here know that there are biologically synthesized magnetite crystals in your sinusoidal bone? We have our own compasses, the innate ability to tell what direction we are facing. How many people here can actually do that? I know I can't, I have never been able to use that ability, but then again there are people I know that have an uncanny sense of direction. I only bring this up because I am certain that whatever it is about us that allow some of us to exhibit these effects(like my friends with the sense of direction) will turn out to be biological. Indeed, it would have to be.

SkinWalker said:
So, which part of Milton's paper was conclusive in the results to the point of being completely replicable? Perhaps you could quote it. :cool:
Click to expand...

You should re-read my post again regarding replicable standards. Partical physics could not even stand up to your standards for replication. You should use a more (scientific)industry applicable set of standards. Regardless:

"Updating our meta-analysis to include the studies (see Table Al) published to date (March 1999) since our meta-analysis was completed in February 1997 renders the overall cumulation statistically significant,"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top