• 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.

Has remote viewing already been tested?

Nigel said:
I was following along, minding my own business, giving Ian the benefit of the doubt, until I read the following:


In my opinion, Ian has hung himself.

I agree. *shakes head*
Click to expand...

How so? Do you deny that some parapsychologists would say that certain parapsycholgical phenomena has been shown to exist?

Don't forget that it's not me asserting this.

No contradiction here, or if there is please explain what this contradiction consists of.
 
jackmott said:
I'm going to ask again, and I will never stop until you answer:

Where is this evidence/data, where can I look it up?
Click to expand...

The most complete resources for experimental evidence suggestive of parapsychological phenomena can be found in several Meta-Analyses published in the last couple of decades or so. You can find, for example, composite results for 587 studies of consciousness-related anomalies in electronic REG behavior described in 152 papers (most in peer-reviewed journals) by 68 principle investigators over a 30 year period, in Radin & Nelson, "Evidence for Consciousness-Related Anomalies in Random Physical Systems" Foundations of Physics, Vol 19 No 12, 1989. Utts published a survey of this and related work in Statistical Science in about 1992.
 
Interesting Ian said:


How so? Do you deny that some parapsychologists would say that certain parapsycholgical phenomena has been shown to exist?

Don't forget that it's not me asserting this.

No contradiction here, or if there is please explain what this contradiction consists of.
Click to expand...
Since I don't have access to what every parapsychologist has said on the matter, nor am I that interested, I probably would say that some would say that *certain* parapsychological phenomena has been shown to exist. That, however, is not the issue. My issue was that in consecutive posts, you clearly said that paranormal phenomena do and do not exist.
It has already been shown to exist.
Click to expand...
which certainly does not mean the phenomena has been shown to exist.
Click to expand...
Either it has been shown to exist, or it hasn't.
 
thank you

Interesting Ian said:


The most complete resources for experimental evidence suggestive of parapsychological phenomena can be found in several Meta-Analyses published in the last couple of decades or so. You can find, for example, composite results for 587 studies of consciousness-related anomalies in electronic REG behavior described in 152 papers (most in peer-reviewed journals) by 68 principle investigators over a 30 year period, in Radin & Nelson, "Evidence for Consciousness-Related Anomalies in Random Physical Systems" Foundations of Physics, Vol 19 No 12, 1989. Utts published a survey of this and related work in Statistical Science in about 1992.
Click to expand...
 
Nigel said:
Since I don't have access to what every parapsychologist has said on the matter, nor am I that interested, I probably would say that some would say that *certain* parapsychological phenomena has been shown to exist. That, however, is not the issue. My issue was that in consecutive posts, you clearly said that paranormal phenomena do and do not exist.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has already been shown to exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
which certainly does not mean the phenomena has been shown to exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Either it has been shown to exist, or it hasn't.
Click to expand...

Quoting out of context is meaningless. The first statement was a clarification of what some parapsychologists maintain. It was a simplification of the statement "the evidence is sufficiently compelling that a lot of parapsychologists think it is of no further worth pursuing the authenticity issue". Of course the issue of 'shown to have exist' does not have exactly the same meaning. But when simplifying, meaning is inevitably lost, otherwise if this were not so one might as well use the simplified expression in the first place!

And again, I reiterate my own personal position that I do not think the authenticity issue has been decisively resolved.

In short there is no contradiction in my 2 statements. This is what comes through quoting out of context. Been learning lessons from BillHoyt have you in this fine art? :rolleyes:
 
Interesting Ian said:
In short there is no contradiction in my 2 statements. This is what comes through quoting out of context. Been learning lessons from BillHoyt have you in this fine art? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The "fine art," is called critical thinking. This particular piece of it is even a more fundamental point of logic. If we assert A, then we have asserted not not-A. Either it has been shown to exist or it has not been shown to exist. It is pretty basic.

And please stop with the "taking out of context" whines. If that is so, then please point us to what was omitted from the context. Don't try either to baldly assert it was taken out of context or try to rewrite the history of posting.
 
Yes i couldn't stay away:)

Replys

Soapy Sam
Illuminator

"I earlier simply denied that RV is anything but hooey. This was a rant and may be described as unhelpful.

So why am I so sure it is hooey?

Two reasons.
1. If humans had the ability to observe objects at a distance, by any means whatever, natural selection would long ago
have selected humans for the ability as it so clearly gives a major selective advantage to its possessors.

Now we might respond that the ability may be a very recent evolutionary development, and so at a rudimentary level.
That's testable. We know a lot about genetic variation around the world. Does the ability have a geographic distribution?
That would have genetic implications."

REPLY: You assume natural selection plays a part. As far as i have seen psi ability can generally be accessed by everyone with practice, although like everything biological the are individual differences.

"2. If RV exists, not only must it be explicable in scientific terms (though not necessarily in terms we understand now),
but it must not contradict any tested scientific principle. "

REPLY: It could be explained somehow using quantum physics as no one is sure how the brain really works and quantum mechanics is still in its infancy. Also why must it not contradict any tested scientific principle? you forget all we have are theories nothing is hard and fast, the apple falls? why? we still only have theories, they explain it very well and fit in with everything else but its still only a theory. once the earth was proven beyond all doubt to be flat too the finest minds of the time as it 'was' blatantly observable, now it is proven beyond all doubt too be a sphere to the finest minds of the time as it is blatantly observable from another perspective.

Ed
god

"Well formed research is the enemy of fakes, that is obvious. The likes of PEAR, Targ, Schwartz et al. could not exist if
they conducted good research."

REPLY: What is 'good' research? research that is approved personally by you?



Soapy Sam
Illuminator


"My attitude to RV is much more hard line, simply because RV if true would cut across so much of well tested science,
(and everyday experience)."

REPLY: That is also true, it destroyed my perception of the world as i know and understand it.




Nigel
Thinker

"Cr@p. He's gone. I wanted to ask him why, if RV works so well, the US gov't spends hundreds of millions of $ on UAV
(unmanned aerial vehicles) like the Predator. Surely the gov't would have people who've practiced RV enough to know
where bin Laden is??

Guess with Mr. Black gone, we'll never know the answer to that question. Oh, I suppose olaf could answer it, but I'm not
holding my breath."

REPLY: You presume that the CIA/DOD don't know where bin laden is. Would it be in the interests of the bush administration to catch the man who has so empowered them? As for the planes? you can't bomb people on the say so of RV data, it must be confirmed optically first.



"The only hysteria I see here is found in your staggeringly fatuous hyperbole.
Any money, such as the $20+ million, would have better spent on education in critical thinking, which is apparently an
oxymoron to you."

REPLY: The full SRI-international project reports are in the hands of the DIA as far as I know, no one outside the people who worked on the program (who claim RV was a amazing success) have seen the full files. even on the AIR analysis they only saw a fraction of it i believe.

Also, would you trust the CIA too tell the truth?


Ipecac
Graduate Poster

Oh rats! The deluded nut is leaving! Whatever will we do?

REPLY: Depends on the perpective. From where i stand you are deluded one, from where you stand I am.


Yep the psi tech smart case was a ◊◊◊◊ up.

Ipecac
Graduate Poster

"But actual "scientists" don't seem to think that it has been shown to exist. I'll go with the scientists, rather than the
self-interested parapsychologists who can't seem to design a scientifically valid study."

REPLY: a psychologist or a parapsychologist is a "scientist" as you phrased it they conduct lab studies under the usual tightly controlled methods.




Basically I just don't trust randi at all. why?:

http://www.sheldrake.org/controversies/randi.html

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/nicholls.html

http://www.psicounsel.com/randiuse.html#ques

I don't actually think he has the million either now.

As for the PSI TECH counter challenge issued to randi? You just ignored that part of my argument.

Apologies for the lack of quote boxes etc. i will correct that and my grammer hopefully in future.
 
Joe_Black said:
Yes i couldn't stay away:)

REPLY: It could be explained somehow using quantum physics as no one is sure how the brain really works and quantum mechanics is still in its infancy. Also why must it not contradict any tested scientific principle? you forget all we have are theories nothing is hard and fast, the apple falls? why? we still only have theories, they explain it very well and fit in with everything else but its still only a theory. once the earth was proven beyond all doubt to be flat too the finest minds of the time as it 'was' blatantly observable, now it is proven beyond all doubt too be a sphere to the finest minds of the time as it is blatantly observable from another perspective.
Click to expand...

Oy. The old "They're just theories" chestnut.

Joe Black, you need to understand the definition of "theory" as used in science. It's not the same as you're using above. Someone will certinly come by shortly and explain it far better than I could. I know enough to know that you're way off base with this.
 
Joe_Black said:
Yes i couldn't stay away:)
Click to expand...

Ah, so you're a liar as well as mis-informed. To be honest, I'd be amazed if anyone thought you'd be able to resist posting again.
 
Joe_Black said:
REPLY: You assume natural selection plays a part. As far as i have seen psi ability can generally be accessed by everyone with practice, although like everything biological the are individual differences.
Click to expand...

By all means demonstrate:

http://clarion.no-ip.org/books.php



REPLY: It could be explained somehow using quantum physics as no one is sure how the brain really works and quantum mechanics is still in its infancy. Also why must it not contradict any tested scientific principle? you forget all we have are theories nothing is hard and fast, the apple falls? why? we still only have theories, they explain it very well and fit in with everything else but its still only a theory. once the earth was proven beyond all doubt to be flat too the finest minds of the time as it 'was' blatantly observable, now it is proven beyond all doubt too be a sphere to the finest minds of the time as it is blatantly observable from another perspective.
Click to expand...


You do not understand what you are talking about. Unless you really understand what quantum physics is and its implications, how can you say that it might explain RV? You might was well say that the reason my toaster works is because the bread contains dark matter. Besides, dropping an apple works reliable every time, as do the quantum experiments we have so far demonstrated. RV doesn't work. (Oh, I forgot your friend, the casino king)

REPLY: What is 'good' research? research that is approved personally by you?
Click to expand...


Look up the term "peer review".

REPLY: You presume that the CIA/DOD don't know where bin laden is. Would it be in the interests of the bush administration to catch the man who has so empowered them?
Click to expand...


Conspiracy theorist clap-trap.


Basically I just don't trust randi at all.
Click to expand...


So we see. And it's clouding your vision.
 
Joe_Black posted:

http://www.psicounsel.com/randiuse.html#ques

Egads, man! :eek:

Do you know who Dan Kettler is?! Do you know who John Benneth is?!

These fellows are out of their cotton-pickin' skulls. You'd do better to start getting your info from people who don't foam at the mouth, and howl at the moon.
 
Originally posted by Joe_Black
REPLY: You presume that the CIA/DOD don't know where bin laden is. Would it be in the interests of the bush administration to catch the man who has so empowered them? As for the planes? you can't bomb people on the say so of RV data, it must be confirmed optically first.
Click to expand...
First, I don't presume that the CIA/DoD know or don't know where bin Laden is. I don't have access to their information.
Second, I think it would be in the interests of the Bush administration to catch bin Laden. What a public relations coup it would be to catch and put on trial the man who was behind the biggest terrorist attack on US soil since WWII. I have no doubt Bush would use that to his advantage in every way possible, especially since he's running for re-election.
Third, if confirmation is required optically (and I presume you mean photographically, as in by spy planes or satellites, or even ground level eye contact by a human spy), then why use RV? It seems pointless to confirm someone is somewhere using a spyplane, then locate him by RV. Something like the SR-71 cost several million dollars a year to maintain and fly, uses a special jet fuel, and only a relatively few people can fly it. Spy satellites have to be sent into orbit at enormous costs. Why go to all that trouble if we can save hundreds of millions of dollars and time and simply RV the guy?
 
"My attitude to RV is much more hard line, simply because RV if true would cut across so much of well tested science,
(and everyday experience)."

REPLY: That is also true, it destroyed my perception of the world as i know and understand it.

**********************************************

I know exactly what this guy is saying. homeopathy has destroyed much of my world view also.

Wild, exciting.
 
Psiload said:
Hi, I'm Dan Kettler, and I've counselled people.

http://www.psicounsel.com/counsel.html

Be afraid! Be very afraid! :eek:
Click to expand...
I have helped people for much of my life, and was certified by The American Association of Professional Psychics as a "Professional Psychic Counselor." I was tested, and agreed to abide by the code of ethics.
Click to expand...
From the same site as above.
That reminds me of the junk you see on infomercials that come with a "certificate of authenticity", which is only as good as the people backing it. My trash collector could give me something he'd picked up from another house and provide me with a "certificate of authenticity". Doesn't mean a thing. It'd still be trash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom