Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

[kyrani99]

telepathy is real

I believe that the proper, safe, and civilized way to deal with my "telepathic problems" (hostile voices constantly trying to convince me to terminate my life, violent and abnormal voices, various forms of persecution...) is to honestly and consistently admit (acknowledge) my "telepathic specificity", always, not just one time or a few times in a short-lived "miracle of truth".

Firstly I would like to say you don't have a telepathic "problem", you have toxic people in your interpersonal environment who are wanting to cause you suffering for the purpose of gaining pleasure from seeing your suffering.

I don't know how the games are played to cause you to experience these with great intensity but whether greater or lesser intensity,, all suggestion made mentally follow the same basic foul game play. I have made a series of videos to describe how the foul games are played here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nxUl19yZU0 I have made five videos in this series and they represent the basics.

You made a series of excellent posts in 2013, after I posted the results of my second telepathy tests, for which I congratulate you (again?), but, a little later, you decided unfortunately to join the forces of dark, a little like Loss Leader. I can easily imagine it must feel better to be good friend with a majority of people (at least on this forum) than being a friend with me, even if the truth is a casualty. I am afraid this forum is a little bit like the North Korea of telepathy, in which you better not deviate from the official line.

Telepathy is a reality and everyone has it but many people don’t realize it. The medical industry and psychiatry deny it because it uncovers the true causes of diseases and so-called mental disorders. That means people could make themselves well and there is no money in that.

In order to deal properly with an exceptional telepathic phenomenon, you have to do a lot of testing, to interact with many people, in order to try to understand the assumed phenomenon better, but also to try to have it gradually recognized by all. Is telepathy with Auckland, NZ, the same as telepathy with this person sitting in front of me (I live near Brussels, Belgium)? When you know the answer to this crucial question, you begin to understand its electromagnetic nature, then Science begins. The understanding of telepathy by current science is very low, you cannot cure a disease if you don't understand it. There are some notoriously toxic pseudo-medications, but those have generally not even been tested regarding a possible effect on telepathic ability. I am of the opinion that trying to push me to swallow those pills is an act of a criminal nature. Of course, you can always grab a sledgehammer like Triple H and start striking violently on the telepath' skull. After a few minutes, all telepathic powers will be gone, like life. This is neither science, nor medicine, this is called a crime.

Most experiments on telepathy are double blinded and where they are not double blinded they use near impossible tasks for the average person, eg perceiving an image that someone else is visualizing in their mind.

For telepathy to be observed in scientific experiments, beyond any shadow of doubt there needs to be two very important conditions.

Relationship is the first necessary condition. Fundamentally we are related to everything in the universe but it takes a high degree of awareness to make use of this relationship. For 99% of the population some relationship and more especially close relationship (eg family members, close and trusted friends, long time work associates etc) is a necessary prerequisite for any sort of psi phenomenon and certainly for telepathy. The reason is that related individually are mentally entangled, which enhances the psi abilities.

The second condition, where telepathy is concerned, is that an idea must be dynamically presented mentally and not passively. Visualizing an image is a passive means. To be dynamic the one related party must mentally address the other related person for that person to perceive the idea presented or suggestion made.

[SNIP]

It is possible that I will try to explain this to a psychiatrist in some time, I think I have not been as clear as I should have been last time (I also am not perfect). I wanted to bring to the psychiatrist's office some printed results of tests, and some printed testimonies that I have obtained on various websites last time (in September of last year), but unfortunately, I forgot to take this material with me, I left it at home, so I had to just explain, with no concrete evidence.

Anyway, I think your job here is to contribute to the truth, not to defend fortress skepticism against all evidence. If I have good evidence that I can show, I am stronger against the psychiatric forces of dark, against the "evil empire". Probably nobody can really force you to do this (and the same is true for the other members of this forum), this has to come from you, and only from you.

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed inappropriate language to comply with Rule 6.

Legal threats of any sort are not taken lightly around this forum, please do not make them again. People have been banned for similar activity. This is your final warning

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis

IMO it is useless to try and convince a psychiatrist of anything. Firstly they are bound by the medical guidelines and those guidelines say telepathy is not real but delusion. Secondly psychiatrists have the worst track record of all doctors IMO. You only need to see videos by the chairman of the American psychiatric association to see that they intend to use people's life issues to create new mental disorders in order to sell drugs. Maybe where you are you might have someone who is willing to listen.

The important thing that I would like to say to you is that the battle is fought and won in the mind. It is useless to try and verbally or otherwise fight with anyone. You will only get yourself into trouble and you won't get the result you want. The result you want is to be able to overcome the mental attacks.

Have a look at the last image on this page. You can use remote viewing (I can show you how) to see the people who are offending against you and set directives to the universe to prevent them from attacking you. Here: https://kyrani99.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/solutions-what-you-can-do-to-prevent-heart-problems/

 

[MikeG]

Michel,

any "test" you conduct is worthless unless your proposition can be falsified. You know this, don't you? Unless you can say afterwards "Yep, that proved nothing at all" then it is a waste of time and effort. The test should also should be designed and conducted by someone else neutral, not by you. They should be testing your claimed abilities, not you. So, your new test should include 3 people: the tester, you, and the person you are "communicating" with, and it shouldn't be you writing up the conclusion, but this neutral tester.

That tester, of course, would have to satisfy themselves that there was no other way of information passing between you and your "communication partner" other than via your claimed telepathy.

Do all that, produce the results, and then a serious conversation here can begin. Until then, the default position is that telepathy doesn't exist, and your mental health problems are the reason for you thinking that it does.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I believe it would be difficult for me to find a person that I (can) totally trust...

You don't need to find them. Let them find you:

Pursue the idea of trying to project a different number each day. In two weeks (if telepathy was real) you could project a telephone number.

With potentially seven billion recipients, surely several millions would try to ring it, just out of curiosity (again, if telepathy was real).

Alternatively you could project an email address.

I've suggested this idea to you before. Can you think of a good reason not to try the experiment?

PS My offer of a couple of years ago still stands and is open to anyone: I'm thinking of my own phone number right now. And a code word. Call the number, say the word and I will give you £1,000.

 

[Daylightstar]

... The result you want is to be able to overcome the mental attacks.
...

And, considering the link you gave above:

... I have made a series of videos to describe how the foul games are played here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nxUl19yZU0 I have made five videos in this series and they represent the basics.
...

..... this is done with a quack attack?

 

[Michel H]

A question on telepathy testing

Let's assume you have some reasons to suspect that you are telepathically broadcasting your thoughts to much of the world, and you decide to launch a test on a skeptical forum like this one, in order to get some input from (hopefully) scientific (or educated) people.

You explain that you have written carefully (and circled) a number equal to 1, or 2, or 3,..., or 10 (10 possibilities, from 1 to 10), and you ask: "Please tell me the number I wrote, even if you are not quite sure!"

The results are rather surprising, however. In the first test, the target number (chosen by a random number generator) was a 4, and only one person mentioned a number in his answer, he said enigmatically:
"During my walk to the grocery store this morning, I saw four dogs".

The target number for the second test turned out to be a 8, and another member said, enigmatically also:
"The Solar System has 8 planets"
(and this second forum member was (also) the only one who mentioned a number among all members who responded to the second test).

Unfortunately, nobody ever mentioned a number any longer (although there were some comments) in later 1-10 tests done on that forum.

Now, let's say that you feel not everybody (understatement) seems to be very eager, happy and impatient to recognize your exceptional telepathy, even though it is (as far as we know) not a (good) quality, just a peculiarity, a special feature.

My question now is: Would you be entitled to state that your experiments have generated (positive) evidence for your assumed "telepathy"? (or not). I invite you to think a little before answering (the answer may not be that simple).

 

[fagin]

Thread merge in 10, 9, 8...

 

[Michel H]

Thread merge in 10, 9, 8...

Well, my treads have not always be merged, I hope you did not request it. This is not a "number guessing" thread.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

If you don't want the result of an experiment to be rejected as cherrypicking, then you need to describe beforehand exactly what clear criteria you will use to mark a response as positive or negative and you need to stick to it.

Can you remember how many times you have been told this already?

 

[The Atheist]

My question now is: Would you be entitled to state that your experiments have generated (positive) evidence for your assumed "telepathy"? (or not).

No.

What you're doing is selecting data that fits your assumption.

I invite you to think a little before answering (the answer may not be that simple).

It really is that simple. Testing for telepathy is irrelevant unless it uses double-blinding, which is why "telepaths" never do that.

You're welcome.

 

[Aepervius]

Let's assume you have some reasons to suspect that you are telepathically broadcasting your thoughts to much of the world, and you decide to launch a test on a skeptical forum like this one, in order to get some input from (hopefully) scientific (or educated) people.

You explain that you have written carefully (and circled) a number equal to 1, or 2, or 3,..., or 10 (10 possibilities, from 1 to 10), and you ask: "Please tell me the number I wrote, even if you are not quite sure!"

The results are rather surprising, however. In the first test, the target number (chosen by a random number generator) was a 4, and only one person mentioned a number in his answer, he said enigmatically:
"During my walk to the grocery store this morning, I saw four dogs".

The target number for the second test turned out to be a 8, and another member said, enigmatically also:
"The Solar System has 8 planets"
(and this second forum member was (also) the only one who mentioned a number among all members who responded to the second test).

Unfortunately, nobody ever mentioned a number any longer (although there were some comments) in later 1-10 tests done on that forum.

Now, let's say that you feel not everybody (understatement) seems to be very eager, happy and impatient to recognize your exceptional telepathy, even though it is (as far as we know) not a (good) quality, just a peculiarity, a special feature.

My question now is: Would you be entitled to state that your experiments have generated (positive) evidence for your assumed "telepathy"? (or not). I invite you to think a little before answering (the answer may not be that simple).

Firstly I would answer this is not a good test. Because there are far too many comfounding factors. very very often people will mention numbers in their sentences. So nubmers 1 to 10 , and to a certain extent up to 31, are no good test, because you want to eliminate accidental "hit" which have nothing to do with telepathy but jsut probability of a number appearing ina conversation.


So you want to project either a number which is beyond 31 and possibly a wide range (not jsut 10 e.g. not 32-41 but a 5 digits numbers taken at random e.g. 123843) and ask people say to chose a number , or chose something people usually don't mention often in conversation.

Also a friendly advice that I hope you won't ignore : to the experience I had with somebody in my youth (ETA: he had the same thought broadcasting feeling than you have) and discussing with medical specialist, "telepathic broadcasting" a very strong sign of schizophrenia. I hope you won't ignore this and check with a specialist.

 

[Michel H]

No.

What you're doing is selecting data that fits your assumption.



It really is that simple. Testing for telepathy is irrelevant unless it uses double-blinding, which is why "telepaths" never do that.

You're welcome.

OK, let me try to be very clear here. Let us assume you want to do a really serious investigation of telepathy (perhaps with some government funding), and, as an objective researcher, you are just as concerned about type II errors as you are about Type I errors:
... a type I error is detecting an effect that is not present, while a type II error is failing to detect an effect that is present. (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors).

This is serious business, "time for laughing is over". If you just obsess about Type I errors, and completely neglect risks for Type II errors, your bosses might not like it at all, and this could have very serious (detrimental) consequences for your later career in Human Sciences.

Now, obviously, you are led to ask this question: "let's assume I am a normal person, would such strange and enigmatic answers have been given?". Is this observation compatible with the assumption? Did you pay due attention to all the things that took place during your experiments?

 

[JoeMorgue]

My question now is: Would you be entitled to state that your experiments have generated (positive) evidence for your assumed "telepathy"? (or not).

No.

Listen I'm not sure if you're aware of a few things.

1. You are not telepathic.
2. Telepathy doesn't exist.
3. Starting another thread asking the same question doesn't make telepathy exist.
4. You have no idea how much this board doesn't need another thread with someone desperately begging down the concept of "evidence" trying water it down enough to make it apply to their woo. We already have one of those that has been going on since 4 seconds after the Big Bang that is spectacular in its absurdity.

 

[Michel H]

...

Also a friendly advice that I hope you won't ignore : to the experience I had with somebody in my youth (ETA: he had the same thought broadcasting feeling than you have) and discussing with medical specialist, "telepathic broadcasting" a very strong sign of schizophrenia. I hope you won't ignore this and check with a specialist.

Please answer the question Aepervius, and avoid "Go see a doctor" answers.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Please answer the question Aepervius, and avoid "Go see a doctor" answers.

Why bother asking the question if you already have decided what answers you want to get?

 

[Michel H]

No.

Listen I'm not sure if you're aware of a few things.

1. You are not telepathic.
2. Telepathy doesn't exist.
3. Starting another thread asking the same question doesn't make telepathy exist.
4. You have no idea how much this board doesn't need another thread with someone desperately begging down the concept of "evidence" trying water it down enough to make it apply to their woo. We already have one of those that has been going on since 4 seconds after the Big Bang that is spectacular in its absurdity.

And what kind of thread would then be welcome on this board, Joe?
One that doesn't make you think too much?
Or one that shows convincingly that "America is the greatest of all countries"?

 

[Arisia]

If incontrovertible and reproducible evidence is presented, I would think most people here would be open-minded enough to accept it. Many experiments on telepathy have been attempted over the years (including by various governments) and none of them have produced the aforementioned evidence.

 

[devnull]

Probably a great reluctance to fully admit my (apparent) telepathy or "thought broadcasting", a lack of motivation I suppose.

 

[kyrani99]

And, considering the link you gave above:


..... this is done with a quack attack?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating!

 

[Jack by the hedge]

OK, let me try to be very clear here. Let us assume you want to do a really serious investigation of telepathy (perhaps with some government funding), and, as an objective researcher, you are just as concerned about type II errors as you are about Type I errors:
... a type I error is detecting an effect that is not present, while a type II error is failing to detect an effect that is present. (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors).

This is serious business, "time for laughing is over". If you just obsess about Type I errors, and completely neglect risks for Type II errors, your bosses might not like it at all, and this could have very serious (detrimental) consequences for your later career in Human Sciences.

Now, obviously, you are led to ask this question: "let's assume I am a normal person, would such strange and enigmatic answers have been given?". Is this observation compatible with the assumption? Did you pay due attention to all the things that took place during your experiments?

OK. Let's assume you are a paranormal researcher and want to design an experiment to demonstrate the presence or absence of telepathy. You won't get far if you ask questions like "would such strange and enigmatic answers have been given?" because 'strange' and 'enigmatic' are subjective qualities and not measurable.

First you would need to decide exactly what hypothetical effect it is that you want to test, and how you propose to measure it.

 

[ehcks]

There is no such thing as telepathy. These are lucky coincidences and confirmation bias ignoring all the times numbers didn't match.

There are no psychics. There is no telepathy. There is no magic. You don't have special powers. You have a mental illness. Get help.