PSI Effect domonstrated, recorded.

L

Lucianarchy

Registered Member
PSI Effect demonstrated, recorded.

I'm an open minded sceptic. But I sometimes experience precognition/remote viewing of events, mainly applicable to my own life. I can't provide a mundane explanation yet so I sometimes participate on the JREF skeptic forum. One of the skeptics started a thread about my rv abilities and in my opening response I provided an example by predicting the location of a terrorist attack which, sadly, actualy occured later that day. You'll see my opening post, which predicts the name of the location, is second post in the following thread.

1st example: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=23702&highlight=ladybrook


The second another time stamped example which coincided with the attack at Falluja.

: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=31468

Fortean Times MBRV experiment
Session 1: "rooftops, chimneys, outline of buildings against night time background-" OK, it was 'overcast' not night, but the rest was there.

Session 2: "(sun)flower, dark center, round, radiant, intricate" It was a rose flower. The rest was there.

http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=13297

and again, here: 2nd post.
http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=14194
 
Last edited:
"The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook"

That is not a prediction. You slipped a word into your post then linked it with an event later on.
 
... and you weren't even correct with your second vague prediction.

You predicted an attack on a western target with over a hundred deaths. This did not happen.
 
Yeah, but Falluja is West of somewhere, right, so maybe that's what he meant. It's Western to say, people from Baghdad, .... ;-) !
 
Ignore the misses, celebrate the hits, make tenuous links where you can...

Sorry Lucianarchy but I am not convinced.
 
Last edited:
shaman_ said:
"The psi effect works only through co-operation, that is why Randi has the "Out" in his challenge, a challenge is not co-operation. ladybrook"

That is not a prediction. You slipped a word into your post then linked it with an event later on.
Click to expand...


Look at the thread title that quote is on and where it is. The Ladybrook terrorist attack happened within a few hours, not "later on". 'Ladybrook' has hardly ever made the news, either before or after the attack.
 
shaman_ said:
Ignore the misses, celebrate the hits, make tenuous links where you can...

Sorry Lucianarchy but I am not convinced.
Click to expand...

You will find in terms of RV that the 'hits' vastly outweigh any misses and is certainly beyond chance. People are trying to replicate the effect by using 'cold viewers' or 'guessers', the fact is, they can't. I am a sceptic myself, I just want to understand more about the effect, because even the scientific literature suggests that the effect exists. These experiments only go to reinfrorce the existing evidence. I'm not trying to convince anyone!
 
Lucianarchy , just listen to your soul and try to let others know what you see.
even if they ridicule you, your message has still been sent, and that's all that really matters, right ?

and if your prediction becomes un-true (not false) then thats great! better safe than sorry, right ??

besides, a cautious word from a enlightened mind could actually prevent the event from happening ! thus causing it to become un-true, yet still fullfilling the intentions of the visionary and the vision itself.

take care all
 
Lucianarchy said:
Look at the thread title that quote is on and where it is. The Ladybrook terrorist attack happened within a few hours, not "later on". 'Ladybrook' has hardly ever made the news, either before or after the attack.
[/I]!
Click to expand...
Yes the thread title was 'Lucianarchy and remote viewing'. Whats your point?
Actually if you read through those jref posts you will see that Ladybrooke(correct spelling) has been in the news several times before and after that 'event'. The attack was foiled by the way. Did the bomb even get to Ladybrooke? Or was that another weak link?
Once again you did not make a prediction. Is every word a potential prediction? (after the event)

Lucianarchy said:
You will find in terms of RV that the 'hits' vastly outweigh any misses and is certainly beyond chance. People are trying to replicate the effect by using 'cold viewers' or 'guessers', the fact is, they can't. I am a sceptic myself, I just want to understand more about the effect, because even the scientific literature suggests that the effect exists.
Click to expand...
That is rubbish and you know it even though you don't want to accept it. lol scientific literature.
And please stop calling yourself a skeptic.
 
Last edited:
Lucianarchy said:
I'm an open minded sceptic. But I sometimes experience precognition/remote viewing of events, mainly applicable to my own life. I can't provide a mundane explanation yet so I sometimes participate on the JREF skeptic forum. One of the skeptics started a thread about my rv abilities and in my opening response I provided an example by predicting the location of a terrorist attack which, sadly, actualy occured later that day. You'll see my opening post, which predicts the name of the location, is second post in the following thread.

1st example: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=23702&highlight=ladybrook


The second another time stamped example which coincided with the attack at Falluja.

: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=31468

Fortean Times MBRV experiment
Session 1: "rooftops, chimneys, outline of buildings against night time background-" OK, it was 'overcast' not night, but the rest was there.

Session 2: "(sun)flower, dark center, round, radiant, intricate" It was a rose flower. The rest was there.

http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=13297

and again, here: 2nd post.
http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=14194
Click to expand...


Try reading Holographic Universe, by Michael Talbot.
It is a scientific understanding of ESP and it also mirrors much of the work I have done for the past 35 years in researching my own abilities. My first remembered use was at two and a half years of age.
By nine I was reading and using esp daily.
As Jesus Christ said, Let those that have ears hear, and those with eyes see.
The book will also show a very long history if verbal abuse by none believers, (happens in any prejudice), and also has many many pages of reference material so you can learn about it on your own.
Warning: Thinking for your self is a considered crime against any Government trying to protect it's power base, or any prejudice person. (By them not any rational person.
You can also read the yoga Sutas by Patanjali, (Science of Yoga by I.K. Taimni, does a nice job and is available through book stores and libraries), which will explain all these things and how to learn to use spiritual gifts.
 
Lucianarchy,

Again, you present your lies. And, again, your lies are revealed.

Re. Falluja:

  • It does not appear to have been planned since November.
  • It did not hit a "Western" target.
  • It wasn't even an attack on American troops. It was an attack on Iraqi police.
  • You were wrong about the number of casualties: There were not "hundreds +" casualties.
  • It wasn't a "particularly awful" attack.
  • You could not say anything about where on the planet it was.
  • You have admitted that "none are spot on direct hits".

Re. Ladybrook:

  • Your "ladybrook" "prediction" was not a prediction.
  • There were serious issues about the time of posting.
  • All you did was post a word.
  • Nothing about what, when, where, how, or even that it was a terrorist attack.
  • There was no terrorist attack - it was foiled.
  • It did not take place at Ladybrook.
  • You have even admitted before that it wasn't a terrorist "attack", but a terrorist "target".
  • You have changed your claims re. this several times, especially when you "predicted" it. 7 times.

Re. FTMB RV test:

  • You omit the parts of your guesses where you were wrong, e.g that your strongest impression was "an image of what appeared to be an eagle or an owl, with outstretched wings".
  • Your guesses were deemed misses.

These attempts at implying that the tests were done by JREF and FT merely emphasize your fundamental dishonesty. Neither the JREF nor the FT were involved.

  • You did not predict a terrorist attack.
  • You did not predict the Falluja attack.
  • You failed miserably in the FTMB test.

You are a pathetic, self-aggrandizing liar.
 
Rv. Coinflipper said:
Try reading Holographic Universe, by Michael Talbot.
It is a scientific understanding of ESP and it also mirrors much of the work I have done for the past 35 years in researching my own abilities. My first remembered use was at two and a half years of age.
By nine I was reading and using esp daily.
As Jesus Christ said, Let those that have ears hear, and those with eyes see.
The book will also show a very long history if verbal abuse by none believers, (happens in any prejudice), and also has many many pages of reference material so you can learn about it on your own.
Warning: Thinking for your self is a considered crime against any Government trying to protect it's power base, or any prejudice person. (By them not any rational person.
You can also read the yoga Sutas by Patanjali, (Science of Yoga by I.K. Taimni, does a nice job and is available through book stores and libraries), which will explain all these things and how to learn to use spiritual gifts.
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing such positive thought. I will indeed look further at Yoga as it appears the 'effect' certainly needs certain conditions from consciousness.
 
shaman_ said:
lol scientific literature.
.
Click to expand...

What is wrong with the SAIC series? Hyman couldn't even suggest any suitable candidate for error, flaw or fraud and the PEAR PRP series meets the replication that he called for. There are plenty more.
 
Actaully Hyman did suggest problems with the SAIC series..

http://www.csicop.org/si/9603/claims.html

"One obvious problem with the SAIC experiments is that the remote viewing results were all judged by one person -- the director of the program. "

also
"Neither Utts nor I had the time or resources to fully scrutinize the laboratory procedures or data from these experiments. "
 
That's the point. After not being able to find suitble candidates for error or flaw, all pseudo-skepticism can fall back on is invoking the highly unlikely scenario that each and every last positive result in the lab is either due to delusion or fraud. We true sceptics realise that Occam says that the most likely explanation is that the effect exists. Regarding Prof Utts:

"To conclude I briefly sketch the large body of research work on psychic functioning sponsored by the U. S. government during 1973-1989 at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and during 1992-1994 at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). I draw my summary from the review article by Professor Jessica Utts,[21] at University of California, Davis, one of two experts hired by the CIA to evaluate this research and the other expert, Professor Ray Hyman, University of Oregon, a well-known parapsychology critic. ....As in the ganzfeld and psychokinesis experiments, and especially in the latest studies, the experiments adhered to the highest standards of data collection and outside expert monitoring. As Utts says:


'Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that their results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud.'
....this careful work has generated an anomaly (agreed upon by both scholars) strongly suggesting-although not rigorously proving-the existence of remote viewing." http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/mansfeld.html
 
Lucianarchy said:
That's the point. After not being able to find suitble candidates for error or flaw, all pseudo-skepticism can fall back on is invoking the highly unlikely scenario that each and every last positive result in the lab is either due to delusion or fraud. We true sceptics realise that Occam says that the most likely explanation is that the effect exists.
Click to expand...

Having only the one person, the director of the program!, judging the results is a huge mistake that throws doubt over the rest of the data. With remote viewing, the hits and misses are open to interpretation. Your claims about your ability are a good example.

The point is that the SAIC series lacks credibility. The man you referred to in support for it, Ray Hyman, seemed to think so. Your quotes are from Professor Utts who he disagreed with.
 
They were both commissioned by the CIA to do the review. Hyman couldn't find any suitable candidate for error or flaw and you've seen what Utt's says on the matter. Hyman wanted more replications. He got them through the PEAR PRP, after that he doesn't say aything.

There are plenty more. I am confused why you initialy lol'd at the term scientific evidence as it is actually in favour of the effect existing.
 
Lucianarchy said:
Hyman couldn't find any suitable candidate for error or flaw ...
Click to expand...
Licianarchy go back and re-read my more recent posts regarding Ray Hyman as you seem to have forgotten them...

The research by PEAR has been thoroughly criticised. In 2001 they admitted they had found nothing in regards to remote viewing.
"Once again, there was reasonably good agreement among the six scoring recipes, but the overall results were now completely indistinguishable from chance."
from http://www.skepticreport.com/psychics/shapesintheclouds.htm

The only tests that seem to show anything positive for remote viewing are flawed or done by people with a vested interest. At this stage scientific evidence IS NOT in favour of the effect existing.
 
Well excuse me, but using your own logic here, 'skepticreport.com' is compiled by people with a 'vested interest' in debunking! In fact, I believe that article is an extraordinary misleading one if it made you believe PEAR think there is "nothing in regards to remote viewing" ! In fact, they actually say ( I use their site for informaton about what they actualy say and do) that ; "[...] the ability of human participants to acquire information about spatially and temporally remote geographical targets, otherwise inaccessible by any known sensory means, has been thoroughly demonstrated over several hundred carefully conducted experiments. "[...]
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/2a.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top