To All Esp Skeptics: Read It And Weep!

N

NEMESIS

Registered Senior Member
I have read thread after thread of supposedly "scientific" types categorically disposing of ESP because....? Because they can't get their in-the-box thinking to wrap around the truth it seems. So for all you skeptics, read this and weep. For it seems some scientific types, like Professor Josephson who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1973 (and where are all your Nobel Prizes being displayed?) for proving that some materials could act as switches operating close to the speed of light, and could revolutionise computing and power transmission. He has said that he deliberately used his booklet to redress a serious imbalance in reporting paranormal research work. ´I think journals like Nature and Science are censoring such research,´ he said. ´There is a lot of evidence to support the existence of telepathy, for example, but papers on the subject are being rejected - quite unfairly.´

Here is the link:

http://arxiv.org/html/physics/0312012

and here is part of what is said:

"1. Introduction

Critics of claims of the paranormal, e.g. Deutsch (2001), have declared extrasensory perception (ESP) or other paranormal phenomena to be ‘nonsense’ ._ Such absolutist positions give little weight to the experimental evidence (Radin 1997) in support of the reality of such processes, and seem naive given the range of imaginative proposals concerning the nature of reality currently being put forward for serious consideration by conventional physicists._ One important advance has been the superseding of the so-called Standard Model as a fundamental theory of nature by string theory (http://superstringtheory.com), where the Standard Model features merely as a subset of the set of permitted possibilities._ As Carr (2001, 2003) (whose approach is centred on the alternative Randall-Sundrum picture) has suggested, such a change in perspective opens up new possibilities in science, including the possibility of accommodating paranormal phenomena within physics._ In the following a number of concepts are combined, each in essence consistent with accepted ideas, resulting in a qualitative explanation for ESP, with the promise of an eventual clear cut basis for understanding paranormal phenomena in general.

2. A separate mental reality

A key assumption we make is one which, while it has no clear connections with experimental physics, does make contact with a position that was advocated by mathematicians such as Gödel (Davis and Hersh 1981, Penrose 1994)._ This is the idea that some aspects of mentality involve a realm of reality largely, but not completely, disconnected from the phenomena manifested in conventional physics._ The idea of a disconnected realm does have precedents, for example in the way two of the fundamental forces (the strong and weak forces) play no role in large areas of physics and chemistry, whilst in other contexts they have a very important part to play._ Next note that string theory, involving as it does spaces having more dimensions than the usual three, and also a non-unique vacuum state (and according to Susskind (2003a, b), a very large number of such states), is consistent with there being such a ‘separate realm’, in a way that the Standard Model, with its unique vacuum state contained within a limited number of spatial dimensions, did not. ..."

"... 3. A model for ESP

We need to add another piece of detail to our model._ In order that it can model individual thought, we suppose that individual life forms can perturb the background state so as to create a localised ‘thought bubble’, tied to the individual concerned._ This suggests that the vacuum state involved is close to a phase transition, so that an appropriate perturbation can create a domain with a different kind of order to that of the vacuum.

Assuming the validity of the scenario that has been described, the picture proposed can be adapted to account for the phenomena we set out to explain, namely telepathy or ESP._ In the first, the grounds for the existence of such a process can be taken to be the advantages that might be conferred in certain situations if two life forms could in some way share their mental states (there could also be accompanying disadvantages, the significance of which will become clear later)._ It is natural to postulate, in this case, that a shared ‘mental bubble’, whose contents are available to both life-forms, is involved._ We assume, as would need to be assumed generally in the model, that the state of this bubble plays the role of information that is meaningful in the context and, by virtue of this, usable by the connected systems.

The physics involved in the ‘sharing’ that has to be assumed in the above can be clarified by means of an analogy based on the Mössbauer effect, which is a phenomenon involving the decay of radioactive nuclei embedded in a crystal (Mössbauer 1961)._ In a certain fraction of cases, depending on parameters such as the decay energy and the temperature, the recoil from such a decaying nucleus is in effect transmitted to the crystal as a whole rather than generating activity in the vicinity of the decay._ These ‘no local recoil’ processes involve a certain subset of all possible final states of the system, for which, as quantum mechanics allows, the state of the lattice vibrational system (phonons) is unchanged by the decay._ This somewhat esoteric possibility suggests a mechanism, dependent on analogous constraints upon the possible states of the thought bubble, that could fit our requirement of a system state being shared by two individuals as in the ESP situation."

So there is the possibility as presented by Josephson. I believe the line for apologies starts on the right. It may help to deliver that apology to all you have offended on your knees for it seems that is where we all belong in relation to the understanding of the great mysteries of the universe.

Sat Nam (said on MY knees, tongue firmly held in cheek) to one and all,



NEMESIS




;)
 
Very simply, if the claims of ESP are true then somebody should be able to demonstrate.

This has yet to happen.
 
Originally posted by Persol
Very simply, if the claims of ESP are true then somebody should be able to demonstrate.

This has yet to happen.
Click to expand...


Dear Persol:

I, myself, have demonstrated it many times. I think what you want is a scientific test. I don't even know how you would construct one. Also (if we are being serious about this) is the problem that ESP may occur in a random pattern. In other words, not a light switch that is either off or on. So I think this also may cast someone truly psychic in a bad light and cause a test to conclusively prove they are NOT psychic when in fact they are.

I used to read tarot cards. I've read for many people. I can remember hundreds of times where I predicted something that seemed by all rational thought to be impossible. One example, a woman called me and said she had just met a man she liked. I did the cards for her and said the cards showed he would come into her life in a serious way in August. I told her that it would be her choice as to what she did, but that according to the cards they would be married by the end of the year. Well, she called me every single week til April giving me blow-by-blow why this couldn't be so. They had had fight after fight. He had moved back in with his ex-wife, etc. Each time I did the cards, I told her the exact same thing. Finally, I had had enough and told her not to call me anymore. I had told her what was going to occur and to leave me the hell alone. Well, she did except for one call she made to me at the end of the year. She called to say she had just gotten married to the man who indeed had come to her in August and, of course, to APOLOGIZE. Big-time! I also in that first reading had asked her if she knew anyone in North Carolina. She said she didn't. I told her that was odd because she was moving there. She did when she got married. I would give you more examples, but this is not about me and I don't want you to fall asleep.

So suppose I am telling the truth and this did indeed happen? Then let's suppose I tell someone else something that didn't happen? Would that mean there was not a true psychic experience the first time? I mean do you decide by numbers? What about the cases where someone has a premonition of a plane crash? They have never had such a though before and will never have one again and yet they know a certain plane will crash and it does? How do you account for or count that? A lucky guess because they can't repeat it? Do you see what I'm getting at here? Or how about falling in love? Do you say you weren't in love because you are not now in love? Or take Einstein for example. Some of what he said is just being proven today. So again, did that make what he said invalid when it wasn't proven?

I just think it is extremely interesting that a brilliant man has given this validity. It's been a long time coming. As to whether it convinces anyone, well, again what is proof for there certainly is evidence. It's almost like saying the Yankees are not a good ball club because they didn't win the World Series. Or that another team didn't really win it because they only won it one year. Statistics are just that. Numbers that can be interpreted and predict what you want them to show.

To me this is fascinating. It neither proves nor disproves anything. But it presents a possibility and isn't that what life is all about?
 
Too right just because something is intermittent doesn't make it invalid.
The problem with testing is that the subject being human tends to tense up when needing to prove it. So they invariably can't prove their ability.

But in all fairness if an Esp wants to be recognised by science then he must submit to the rules of scientific proof.

Just because it can't ( yet) doesn't mean that it is invalid just that proof is elusive. Suffice to say that is so often reported that there must be some validity.

AS far as I am concerned personally I have no need for proof. It is only the skeptics that do.
 
The fact that somebody was a great physicist in 1973, doesn't make him an authority on ESP in 2003. The fact that he presumably was a rational thinker 30 years ago does not attest to him being one now.

Do you know that your stance: "I don't know how it could be scientifically tested" is typical woowoo? It is really very simple: If you claim that your ability has an impact on the real world, then it is testable, period.

If, as you claim, it has a random nature, test protocols might be more complicated, but it is not untestable.

What exactly, in a few sentences, is your claim? In other words, under which circumstances do you claim to be able to do what?

I have an 800,000 US$ award for you if this works out! (Actually, it's 1 milion, but I thought it reasonable to collect a tiny fee for my mediation).

Hans
 
ha ha MrcHans 200,000 big ones, by golly small commission hey?

The problem is that in the realm of the psychic the motor coordination of thought and imagination are very suseptable to interference especially from skeptics. The energies they produce interfere with the psychic mind considerably. The psychic feels this intuitively and shuts down due to the effort needed to repell the skepticism.

This means as you will probably suggest that until the skeptics stop being skeptics or the psychic can over come the interference then there will be no scientifically provable proof. And again the proof paradox sounds only like wooo wooo.......ha ha love that word. Even the mere notion of provability tends to shut people down.

I have seen this so many times. The psychic mind is just so senstitive, well it has to be to pick up the quantum level information that makes it all work.

A skeptic also creates this information but it is directed at the psychic thus focused with a challenge causing real problems.

As yet there has been no method discovered to insulate people from other peoples thoughts (like a room of some sort) malicious, skeptical or otherwise.(Padded cells used to be popular but that didn't work either)

It is only with rigourous training and discipline that any coordination of the psychic mind or brain is possible.
 
Originally posted by MRC_Hans
The fact that somebody was a great physicist in 1973, doesn't make him an authority on ESP in 2003. The fact that he presumably was a rational thinker 30 years ago does not attest to him being one now.

Do you know that your stance: "I don't know how it could be scientifically tested" is typical woowoo? It is really very simple: If you claim that your ability has an impact on the real world, then it is testable, period.

If, as you claim, it has a random nature, test protocols might be more complicated, but it is not untestable.

What exactly, in a few sentences, is your claim? In other words, under which circumstances do you claim to be able to do what?

I have an 800,000 US$ award for you if this works out! (Actually, it's 1 milion, but I thought it reasonable to collect a tiny fee for my mediation).

Hans
Click to expand...

Dear MRC Hans:

Let’s start with your first statement. You call me a woowoo and then in the same breath, use similar logic. Does this mean you have joined our side? You say that just because someone was a great physicist in 1973, that doesn’t mean he is one now. Isn’t that what I said in my argument as to why it would be difficult it would be to prove ESP exists? The mere fact that one was so “inspired” at one time, either in physics or in ESP, does NOT mean they can be so inspired again. It does not mean that they were NOT inspired the first time. It also does NOT mean they can sit in a goddamned laboratory and repeat the process just because you would like to win some money. If you feel that test protocols can so easily be set, set one to determine whether this man that had an inspired thought in 1973 which won him a Nobel Prize, is now capable of such a thought again. Would this not be predicting a random pattern? How would you know? How would you prove it? If you are so wonderful at setting protocol, set one now. It is almost like guessing at whether a best-selling author will write another best-seller. It is further predicting whether you will like it as much. Inspiration is not determinable. One can see a pattern over an extended period of time, that a certain author goes to the top of the best-seller list each and every time, but does that mean they will always do so? But even that would be cheating because the pattern has already been established and it would be like reading a book already written.

Now we get to the next point where you want to know what exactly is MY claim. I believe I said this is NOT about me. I merely gave one example where by conventional scientific and logical means, it would have been impossible to determine the outcome of this one particular woman meeting this one particular man, neither of whom I knew. So if it wasn’t ESP what is your best intuitive response as to how this occurred? Oh, come on now, give it a try! As to the exact claim, my EXACT claim is someone (a stranger) asked me a question about another stranger and their interaction. I shuffled a deck of cards, read the pattern shown by using an intuitive part of myself and was able to accurately predict what would transpire between the two strangers. I should further add that this woman called me on the phone so I never saw her. Someone had given her my name and phone number so I did not have any information about her to base any rational or logical “guess” on. Obviously the man she met was even further removed from me for he hadn’t been referred by anyone at all. So I relied totally on what I saw in the cards. I further CLAIM that this is a different part of myself and different part of my brain from where I normally “think.” How do I know? Because very often when someone would ask me a question, “I” would immediately have a rational answer for them formulated on logic. But when I asked the question of the cards and would do a spread, the cards very often (most times) came up with a much different answer. I ALWAYS gave the seeker the information the cards told me.

I believe Quantum Quack (gotta love that name) is completely correct. The Observer Effect and the Delayed Choice theory would seem to prove to a very large extent the influence an observer exerts on things. In the Delayed Choice theory, the observer can even CHOOSE the outcome even after the outcome has occurred.

In terms of scientific testing, first you would have to NOT call me a woowoo as this is a sign of disrespect as would anyone saying, “Hey, ya lyin’, stupid bitch! Belly up to the laboratory for it’s time to test ya!” I don’t think anything other than the garden variety Westminster blue ribbon bitch would show up. In case you can’t tell the difference, I’m the one without the lead. So, first, a modicum of respect would be lovely. Next, we come to this issue of money. Why would one even want to acquire a million dollars in this way? Do you project onto me some sort of fantasy of yours? I would not ever get involved with that type of experimentation as sideshows and spectacles do not meet MY criteria for legitimate research. Next we come to the issue of testing itself where I feel you have completely misunderstood what I had to say.

I am not saying and did not say that this could NEVER be scientifically tested and determined to be legitimate — only that it would be difficult for the reasons I outlined. So before we get to what I think, let us see what you think. Do you agree that the observer exerts an influence? Next, do you agree that “nerves” (because of the observer?) play a factor in this? Let’s use an example.

A child practices a piano piece for a recital. They practice and practice and manage to perform it perfectly each and every time. On the night of the recital, nerves kick in and they make numerous mistakes, breaking down in tears. Now would you conclude from this that they were incapable of playing the piece? Would you say that they had the ability, but failed due to variables and outside influences? Would you say they had no talent to begin with and were wasting everyone’s time and money because they were obviously a woowoo?

Next, we follow-up on the notion of inspiration and something that is very difficult to pinpoint. Say an Olympian weightlifter is completely psyched, in excellent physical condition and has the crowd with him giving him that extra confidence. Let’s further speculate that he lifts a weight and sets a new Olympic and World record. Now a scientist wishes to map and see what exact physical exertion went into lifting that weight. So he hires the weightlifter to let him strap him up to a bunch of machines in an attempt to measure the stress, etc. in lifting the weight. The weightlifter agrees and arrives at the laboratory. He is unable to lift the weight no matter how hard he tries. The weightlifter further enters numerous competitions and is never able to repeat his world-record setting record. So what would be the conclusion? That he never lifted the weight because it couldn’t be done under laboratory conditions? That it was a fluke? Or that when all the factors come together a sum that is greater than the ordinary total of the parts happens? A zone fusion perhaps. I believe we’ve all had athletic experiences when we can seemingly do anything. The next day, we are back to normal, stumbling over blades of grass and running headlong into trees. We feel something different inside us, but what the heck is it? And why can’t we just enter this zone at will? I certainly would if I could.

As for proof that telepathy of some kind exists, I’ll tell you a personal story that has been repeated with experiments on dogs. I don’t know if an experiment has been performed on kitty cats. In any event, my mother was staying with me a couple of years ago. It was during the summer and I was working at a job. I was trying to save as much money as possible, so I began working a lot of overtime. I didn’t know when this overtime would occur, but when it did I would just offer to stay at the last minute. Consequently, I was getting home at all sorts of different times. There was no pattern. It would vary by hours. The first few nights, my mother was surprised and caught off guard when I arrived home. She would pop what she cooked in the oven to warm it up so that we could eat dinner. But then I arrived home (again at an hour that was random) and the meal was cooked and ready. She had it out on plates for me. I was surprised. To say the least. When we sat down to eat I asked her how the heck she knew I was coming home at that exact time since I didn’t even know nor did I call her? Was it a lucky guess? She said that she knew because of my cat. She said that she finally figured out my cat’s pattern as my mother had been watching her for a few days. She explained that thirty minutes before I arrived home, my cat would come out of the bedroom and sit on the couch, looking in the direction of the door. Ten minutes before I got home, my cat would go to the door and sit in front of it. Now at the time, I lived in NYC. My cat was in a closed apartment and had no way to see, hear or smell me. I was taking the subway home, so there was no sound of a car or anything familiar she could discern. Ten minutes was also the time that I would emerge out of the subway station and begin to walk to the apartment. Now this story doesn’t necessarily mean anything to you, but it should. For it shows that there is some sort of ESP or telepathy at work since there could be no other sense being used to predict my arrival home. And yet each and every night, not only was my cat able to predict the accurate time of my arrival, my mother was able to know this by watching my cat and interpreting her actions.

So to return to your assertion that ESP should be able to be proven, what exactly would be the protocol you would set to determine if someone was indeed psychic beyond a moral certainty? I am extremely curious as to what your “rational” thinking comes up with.

Sat Nam,



NEMESIS
 
Last edited:
Another point that may be worth considering is that if we drop the issue of extraordinary for a moment.

Does science know how it is we think at all ( normally)?

Can we prove our ability to think scientifically?

Can a person repeat an exact same thought more than once?

How is it that humanity can share a similar perception of reality.

"An apple is an apple to me and it is an apple to you as well"

How is it so ?

Can science prove the nature of love and why some persons care about others even when it is to their own detriment?

Maybe we should look closer at the ordinary psychic mind/heart instead of just concentrating on the extraordinary Psychic mind/heart.

AS the Letters suggest ESP is just that Extra ordinary sensory perception.

So how does science prove OSP Ordinary sensory perception?

How do we define the adjective Ordinary. Is Bill Gates "ordinary"

Is Steven Hawkings Ordinary?

Was Mother Teresa ordinary?
Are you ordinary?
 
Dear Quantum Quack:

Point very well taken!

My favorite answer to this idea of "proving" things is to prove to me that there is love. I mean it is a universal concept that a large percentage of the population has felt, but what the heck is it? How much does it weigh? What color is it? Who has isolated this feeling of love in a laboratory? Can it exist outside the body? We know nothing about it, and yet most of us have felt it.

So ESP may well just be something we all use, and yet, are unaware we do so.
 
It's sad that people are so submissive.

That goes for people who believe in parapsychology and people who believe that it doesn't exist.

The key word here is *believe* So tell me, do you beleive or do you know?

Personaly there is very little that I know. So what can I do about this? Perhaps I should take a pick from all the things others have said... Obviously I'm just too stupid and lazy to find out for myself.
 
Originally posted by exsto_human
It's sad that people are so submissive.

That goes for people who believe in parapsychology and people who believe that it doesn't exist.

The key word here is *believe* So tell me, do you beleive or do you know?

Personaly there is very little that I know. So what can I do about this? Perhaps I should take a pick from all the things others have said... Obviously I'm just too stupid and lazy to find out for myself.
Click to expand...

Dear exsto_human:

I, for one, do not understand your point. Ignorance is the cause of all suffering. So it would seem most of us are in a profound state of ignorance. This indeed is sad if it causes us to be locked into suffering. If one is in bondage they are submissive to a degree. This is already a given. So?

In terms of using the word "believe" and "know", I do this purposefully. I do not like to use the word, "know" unless I understand everything in all its aspects. I don't. Therefore, I use the word "believe" to let everyone know I am relating an observation and not something I can confirm, explain and understand fully. In other words, I "know" that ball lightning exists, but do not understand it the way Tesla did and cannot therefore create it, lead it in any direction, and make it obey. Therefore, I simply can only "believe" this can be done because it would appear Tesla did this.

In terms of ESP, I would say that it has been written about in the Yoga Sutras. Patanjali firmly states that anyone undergoing a spiritual awakening will find they have these "magic" or "extraordinary" (this is in relation to the norm of society or what the average believes they "know") powers. They can therefore look at any pattern, from a flock of birds to tea leaves, and detect the future. They can read thoughts and be in direct communication with animals. While I have had such experiences and "know" these instances occurred, I choose to use the word "believe" because I simply do not "know" exactly why this is happening.

I hope this clears up why "I" use this terminology. Also in yoga, you are taught quickly to only use the word "observation" to refer to that which you see. It is important to start separating what you observe in this false state to what is the truth. So I "know" the experiences I related have happened. But in terms of "knowing" all that went into it and "knowing" exactly why it happened, I don't. What does go into this setting up or development of ESP? Why does one become "more" intuitive? I have tried myself using the brain paths outlined in Greek mythology. The point in my brain where this intuition seems to come from is indeed a point. If you let me open someone's skull (please do NOT allow me to do this for I can never get it together again properly), I could point to the area. It is in close proximity to the area of the brain I use for writing, poetry, music, etc. I "know" that area is activated when I am engaged in these activities. Why? I don't "know."

Therefore, I try to not use this word in connection with something I simply do NOT fully understand, yet "know" exists.

I will let others speak for themselves as concerns your comment.
 
Obviously I'm just too stupid and lazy to find out for myself.
Click to expand...

A bit off topic but this quote prompted me to recall that words have significant power on how we see ourselves and how we develope our self esteem etc.

To say the words quoted you are suggesting the role of the suplicant the role of the inferior and to you, you invite stuff that maintains your position of seemingly low self esteem.

The power of the words we use and read is not to be underestimated I feel.

Personally I do not know the meaning of the words "Stupid"and or "Lazy", they hold no truth to me. Maybe they are words that have been yelled at you at some time, maybe they are words that you believe in. They hold no belief with in me.
 
But in all fairness if an Esp wants to be recognised by science then he must submit to the rules of scientific proof.
Click to expand...

This is the point to me. I can only perceive the world through experience and I can only base the things i believe to be true on what I've sensed (saw, felt, smelled, tasted and heard). Unlike aerodynamics (I've been in airplanes, seen birds in flight, I know they work) or gravity (so far, every time I drop something, it falls down) things like ESP, atoms, dark matter or souls force me to guess based on things beyond my personal experience. The best I can do in this situation is go with the best evidence, at this point in history science does the better job.

I'm willing to believe in ESP but there is little substance showing the opposing arguments are wrong. People claim a lot of things, too many in fact, at some point you need proof ... the more 'out of the box' an idea is, the more proof is required.

So far ESP is just conjecture, I'm not saying it isn't possible I'm just saying ... show me. Testing something isn't some weird thing done by wild haired scientists, in dark laboratories. We rely on it everyday of our lives to define our understanding of the world.

As long as ESP is only described and shown with anecdotes that can't be repeated, it's just one among millions of unproved ideas.
 
Last edited:
Dear Nemesis,

My meaning is that the words belief and knowledge(gnosis) are the direct antithesis of each other. If we *believe* we follow illusions, like mirages on the horizon they have no substance no true manifestation. However if we seek knowledge, only then can we truely experience the world as what it avtualy is.
Don't get me wrong, I do in no way fully experience the world as it is. And in this sense my autority is limited in this context. Many are the negative states that plague and interupt my conciousness. However there are things and the truth of which I have proved for myself without doubt, and beyond any intelectual inference. Among these are astral projection, the pluralized selves, and the existance and influence of my divine parents, most notably the mother kundalini, also the existence of certain divine and awakened beings that help us along the spiritual path.*
So what I am saying is that if one chooses to simply believe in someone elses words, one will never see for themselves.

Obviously since you have experienced these then you know that they infact do exist. If you had not experienced them then it would simply be ignorance that you are conveying. And meaningless in its content.
So apparently what we have here is simply a missunderstanding of semantics, which is not unsual.

Sat Nam. :)

Dear Qantum Quack.

I was using those words in a sarcastic sense, and perhaps it was folly to do so as my message was not clear. What I'm saying is that people too often submit to anothers thought system, and the reason for this is the persons own ignorance and sloth. Anyone who calls them self an -ist in a more than categorical sense of the world would probably fall under this. On a different note there are people who actualy try to find out for themselves and who are mistaken (everyone can't be right!), they have atleast made an effort to find out even though they failed. This is alot better than simply following someone else.

* no doubt most will find me a lunatic after reading that, so be it.
 
Originally posted by exsto_human
Dear Nemesis,

Among these are astral projection, the pluralized selves, and the existance and influence of my divine parents, most notably the mother kundalini, also the existence of certain divine and awakened beings that help us along the spiritual path.*
So what I am saying is that if one chooses to simply believe in someone elses words, one will never see for themselves.

Obviously since you have experienced these then you know that they infact do exist. If you had not experienced them then it would simply be ignorance that you are conveying. And meaningless in its content.

So apparently what we have here is simply a missunderstanding of semantics, which is not unsual.

Sat Nam. :)

* no doubt most will find me a lunatic after reading that, so be it.
Click to expand...

Dear Exsto_human:

I don't find you a lunatic at all and am glad to meet a fellow gnostic.

The ONLY thing I know for certain and that I would consider a "gnostic" experience is that there is a divine spirit, separate and apart from who we think we are, alive and well within our hearts. When this part of ourselves ascends and is in charge, we KNOW who we truly are. This divine being, our TRUE self, is trapped and begging for us to release it from bondage.

The rest of it I am discovering for myself as everything somehow relates to this divine being within ourselves. How or why this occurs I do not know. So, personally, I will use the word "believe" to describe the ancillary experiences connected with this vital "awakening."

And Sat Nam back at ya!




NEMESIS
 
Science doesn't care if it works 100% of the time. That's what probability is for. Nobody who claims to have esp abilities has demonstrated above guessing average.

If you are effectivly 'lying' half the time and telling the truth the other half, the ability is worthless.
 
Especially hilarious is the claim that various supernatural powers are set out of function whenever there is a skeptic in the room :rolleyes:.

You know, it is really very simple, and all boils down to this:

- If it has an impact on the real world, then it can be tested.

- If it does NOT have an impact on the real world, how do you know it exists?

Hans
 
Well you know MRC Hans, a little known man called Jesus was to supposed to have supernatural powers. Now whether you believe in him or not is not important but to say he had no impact on our reality is quite an understatement. ( as history shows)

I know where you are coming from and I agree but I make a distinction as to what you consider impact on reality.

May be next time you pick up the telephone "knowing" who it is before you speak to them you may reconsider the absolutest notion of proof that you require.

The next time you feel the warmth of your friends when you miss them you may reconsider the value of quantum emotional communications.

Of course all these things are not verifiable and you know maybe they should never be so as I am sure It may spoil the picture for every one.
 
Originally posted by Persol
Science doesn't care if it works 100% of the time. That's what probability is for. Nobody who claims to have esp abilities has demonstrated above guessing average.

If you are effectivly 'lying' half the time and telling the truth the other half, the ability is worthless.
Click to expand...

Dear Persol:

You are completely missing the point.

The point is if you first do not know what ESP is, then how can you set an average for it? For if we use the hypothesis that this is a "function" then how the hell do we determine a "guess" from using "ESP"? Can't you see that ESP may well go into what people would consider a "guess"? So the root numbers or percentages that you are measuring against may well be skewed by ESP being used.

I also love it when perfectly rational questions as concerns methodology and protocol are completely ignored and not answered in favor of mocking. Do you really think this is a valid way of determining whether anything has validity?

So I ask you and MRC Hans again what would be the correct protocol for determining whether such a thing as ESP exists?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top