Precognitive Dreams or Just Mere Coincidence?

Robittybob1 said:
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=30223&st=0&#entry498850
Posted on Physforums today:
"First we need the smallest object and multiple it by the atoms in the unviverse ....should be an easy problem just multiple how ever many there are by one :D....so negative is exactly equal to positive mass except we know it as negative just like a basic number....now we need all the matter in the universe to be sucked up with no light from anywhere (so we will look to black holes....there just happens to be a massive black hole at the center of our universe)
Getting closer!:)
Click to expand...

Huh? When you posted your dream I presumed you meant that science was "they".. not some guy on a site.
 
Pincho Paxton said:
Huh? When you posted your dream I presumed you meant that science was "they".. not some guy on a site.
Click to expand...
That is why I said "getting closer". I would have expected it to be a publication as well.
But if what he says is true, so where did he get this idea of these massive BHs in the centre of the Universe?:)
 
Robittybob1 said:
That is your opinion but i know differently, and have lived through hundreds of precognitive dreams.
This forum is the chance for us to explore whether this is real or not.
For in Early 2000 I went to the USA and dreamt GW Bush was going to win the Presidential election by just one vote, and not being from USA (but NZ) I thought how ridiculous for USA is a land of 300 million people how could he win by just 1 vote!
But he did in the end didn't he!:)
Click to expand...

I think you see meaning in that because you want to. I could convince myself of things like that in my life pretty often, but I have realized that making connections like that result from bias and wishful thinking.
 
elte said:
I think you see meaning in that because you want to. I could convince myself of things like that in my life pretty often, but I have realized that making connections like that result from bias and wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
All I can say is prove it to the forum then.:)
 
Proving something that is inherently subjective would be quite hard to do indeed. It works the same for your cases as mine.

I have learned to quit thinking about dreams. They use up a lot of the thought process, otherwise, when thinking about other things helps more in daily life.
 
elte said:
Proving something that is inherently subjective would be quite hard to do indeed. It works the same for your cases as mine.

I have learned to quit thinking about dreams. They use up a lot of the thought process, otherwise, when thinking about other things helps more in daily life.
Click to expand...
But I feel I can prove the oddity of the connection. One never knows if the uncertainty principle will interfere with it. Like when you try and measure something you won't be able to measure something else at the same time. But I have already written up an amazing dream sequence which has "helped to solve a murder case". The reason I put it in quotations is we may never know but you can follow what I did about it.
http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthr...ual-Guidance-assists-in-Scott-Watson-s-Pardon
:)
 
However, I can't think your thoughts the way you think them, so that prevents verifiability. That subjective process means even that account you give means much different things to you than me it would to me. Besides, I'm averse to the notion of reading 79 pages!
 
I'm glad I didn't because I prefer not to read long things if I don't have to.
 
elte said:
I'm glad I didn't because I prefer not to read long things if I don't have to.
Click to expand...
Well I shortened the NZ one right down to show the dreams and then how i went about finding the places I dreamt about and seeing if they were the places were the deaths had occurred.
Only 2 pages long.
It is coming up to 14 years since it happened and still not yet resolved. The man convicted is innocent but it is hard to overturn a jury verdict.:)
 
Robittybob1 said:
Well I shortened the NZ one right down to show the dreams and then how i went about finding the places I dreamt about and seeing if they were the places were the deaths had occurred.
Only 2 pages long.
It is coming up to 14 years since it happened and still not yet resolved. The man convicted is innocent but it is hard to overturn a jury verdict.:)
Click to expand...

It's interesting to me whenever I witness deceit like this. I wonder if they are from a small, very polite community in which their "fantasy" tales were tolerated because they've always been "a little slow". Later on, it's as if their "conviction" is proof of something we couldn't possibly conceive. It's fun at times, but it should be regulated at some point so, whackjobs like this can be swept aside for legitimate investigation.
 
Last edited:
Ellis said:
It's interesting to me whenever I witness deceit like this. I wonder if they are from a small, very polite community in which their "fantasy" tales were tolerated because they've always been "a little slow". Later on, it's as if their "conviction" is proof of something we couldn't possibly conceive. It's fun at times, but it should be regulated at some point so, whackjobs like this can be swept aside for legitimate investigation.
Click to expand...
Now I am very shocked to read the things you have said in your post. Firstly you called it deceit, and since your post quotes mine I assume you are talking as if I have set out to deceive.
Now I must inform the Forum that everything I have said in the linked thread on the Wooden Boats forum did happen with 100% certainty.
You have no right to call me a whackjob.:mad:
 
Robittybob1 said:
Now I am very shocked to read the things you have said in your post. Firstly you called it deceit, and since your post quotes mine I assume you are talking as if I have set out to deceive.
Now I must inform the Forum that everything I have said in the linked thread on the Wooden Boats forum did happen with 100% certainty.
You have no right to call me a whackjob.:mad:
Click to expand...

Fair enough... I actually should not be calling you a whackjob. I should ask you to provide legitimate documentation supporting your claims first. Then, when you are not able to provide any, I will commence with my "whackjob" accusations.
 
Last edited:
Ellis said:
Fair enough... I actually should not be calling you a whackjob. I should ask you to provide legitimate documentation supporting your claims first. Then, when you are not able to provide any, I will commence with my "whackjob" accusations.
Click to expand...
So what sort of documentation do you want?
As far as your partial apology goes it is not accepted for it so obvious to be made in jest and not sincerity. :mad:
 
Robittybob1 said:
So what sort of documentation do you want?
As far as your partial apology goes it is not accepted for it so obvious to be made in jest and not sincerity. :mad:
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know... let's start with your envolvement with helping to solve a murder case.... hell, how about any official document supporting a phychic's claims to having an involvement with a case. Let's start with their admission of evidence presentented to a jury. So, yes I suspend my "whackjob" analogy pending your submission of credible evidence. It's not in jest; I assure you if you are able to give us credible evidence, I would be incredibly grateful. However, I suspect this is not the case.
 
Ellis said:
Oh, I don't know... let's start with your envolvement with helping to solve a murder case.... hell, how about any official document supporting a phychic's claims to having an involvement with a case. Let's start with their admission of evidence presentented to a jury. So, yes I suspend my "whackjob" analogy pending your submission of credible evidence. It's not in jest; I assure you if you are able to give us credible evidence, I would be incredibly grateful. However, I suspect this is not the case.
Click to expand...
You sound like you have not bothered to read the linked thread, for you are asking for things that are not even suggested as ever happened. So you seem to be the one who is in error here, for you do not know the background or the type of claims that I made regarding the case.
:mad:
Good night!
 
Robittybob1 said:
You sound like you have not bothered to read the linked thread, for you are asking for things that are not even suggested as ever happened. So you seem to be the one who is in error here, for you do not know the background or the type of claims that I made regarding the case.
:mad:
Good night!
Click to expand...

oopsie!! you may have me here. I believe that I may in fact be guilty of not reading your posts or threads carefully enought for your liking. However, I would be more than interested in looking over ANY AND ALL legitimate information you may be holding on ANY case past, present or pending in which ANY phychic phenomenon is submissible in court. Please advise....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top