• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Deeper than primes - Continuation

Status
Not open for further replies.
PiedPiper said:
From what I've researched, ...
Click to expand...
Please demonstrate how exactly you have researched it.

It will help me a lot to communicate with you about how things are actually researched and can be used by practical and useful ways.
 
PiedPiper said:
... it appears to be a good relaxation technique ...
Click to expand...
PiedPiper please think very carefully about the following statement:

"Wars start and end in people's minds, so the solution is profoundly related to people's minds"

PiedPiper said:
You're never going to convince the entire world to become practitioners of TM.
Click to expand...
Maybe it is not needed if Maharishi effect really works ( http://scholar.google.co.il/scholar?q="maharishi+effect"&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 ).

Do you think that you are qualified to comment on this topic?

If your answer is "yes", then explicitly demonstrate it.

Maybe http://ts-si.org/files/DavidRLefflerNewRoleMilitary.pdf or http://www.wholistichealingresearch.com/user_files/documents/ijhc/articles/Orme-Johnson-3-3.pdf can help you.

PiedPiper said:
I don't see how TM is going to save us from destruction.
Click to expand...
What are your qualifications that are used by you to conclude such a thing?

PiedPiper said:
I also fail to see much of a connection between TM and the math that you've been tossing out for the past 10k posts. If there is a link, explain it to me in a short, easy to read single paragraph that uses layman terms and words of short syllables. Failure to do this indicates a lack of a connection.
Click to expand...
Failure to do this indicates a lack of connection by your layman point of view.

Until this very moment you did not ask any detailed questions or detailed remarks that are related to http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10100311&postcount=4128 content , or in other words, all you demonstrate until this very moment is no more than hands waving communication style about this topic.

So please stop your hands waving communication style and ask some detailed questions or express some detailed remarks about http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10100311&postcount=4128 content.

Nobody is going to replace you in order to do this.

So if this time you are going to supply more hands waving communication style (by avoiding detailed questions about or express some detailed remarks http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10100311&postcount=4128 content) I am going to ignore it.
 
Last edited:
jsfisher said:
Sometimes--frequently in this thread as it turns out--the the problem is that there is nothing to get.
Click to expand...

Frequently in this thread as it turns out ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10066680&postcount=4095 and your "response" to it in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10066748&postcount=4096 ) you are doing nothing in order to get http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10100311&postcount=4128.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
PiedPiper said:
No wishful thinking. No statements that aren't supported. No self-beliefs pushed forward as facts. An example of a post that would convince me is something like this:

"XYZ has been shown (citations) to do ABC. People who practice XYZ have been shown to experience less disasters (citations). Therefore, I advocate that more people learn about XYZ, because it will help them avoid disasters. Also, this positive experience with XYZ has been demonstrably shown to convince normal, skeptical non-practioners of XYZ to begin practicing XYZ (citations). Therefore, XYZ will eventually lead to a worldwide reduction of disasters".
Click to expand...
Some examples:

http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ996375

http://www.davidlynchfoundation.org/research.html

https://consciousnessbasededucation.org/uploads/file/pdf/20p-CBE-sciRes_Sep10_A4.pdf

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J076v36n01_03#.U8BMT7HlZaU

http://journals.lww.com/jhypertensi...critics_of_research_on_Transcendental.29.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-h-schneider/
 
Last edited:
sympathic said:
Wow! for someone who is practicing TM, your approach is quite destructive....
Click to expand...
Wrong. If you or AdMan wish to reply, it simply has to be done in details.

My approach is quite straightforward about that, and it is uncomfortable to persons that use hands waving style.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
jsfisher said:
...but since you yourself fail to understand them...
Click to expand...

Please support you claim in details according to what is written in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10100311&postcount=4128 , including the links and my two posts above it.
Click to expand...

Doron, you really need to try harder with your reading comprehension. Your response, coupled with a link to an irrelevant post, is a complete non sequitur.

Let's take this in parts, then. Which part of:
jsfisher said:
I ask you which part you didn't understand, and you point me to one of your posts.
Click to expand...
Did you not understand?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom