Looking for Skeptics

[chillzero]

Yes one has to listen multiple times.

If one was to record a distant private conversation between a group of people. One would replay the recording over and over to follow each voice/sentence that could be heard. I don't apply interpretation, if I don't hear it, I discard it.

On the contrary, flaccon, you absolutely do apply interpretation. You didn't quite answer what I asked - you did it in a haphazard mannaer, and I think that you would gain a hell of a lot from this thread if you would simply slow down - learn to read posts slowly, and more than once to absorb exactly what is being asked. You have a tendancy to pick out one little part, often what's not the main point of the post, and wander off on that.

Now, I asked:

flaccon, do I understand correctly that not only do you need multiple times listening to each recording to identify what the words are, but that when you finally have the words you also need to apply further interpretation to what the 'clear and unequivocal' sentence actually means?

The main question was not 'do you have to listen multiple times', which is what you mostly answered, but 'do you need to apply further interpretation' which you have brushed off at the end of your post very briefly. Doing this, you ignored exactly what I responded to and quoted, from your own previous post:

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough due to not fully understanding their explanations myself. As far as I glean, spirits operate within us. They see through our eyes, taste our foods, and help fight off infections/diseases. They claim to have travelled through my fingers and into the electric wires of the laptop. They said "Some of this will help with other systems" meaning they do not require the laptop itself.

Now, that says to me that you are interpreting the words you hear to mean something that may, or may not, actually follow from those words.

So, your process seems to me to be as follows:
You record a blank file.
You ask a question.
You play back the recording and listen.
You do this lots of times until you believe you hear some words.
You note down the words.
You read those words that say one thing, and you then interpret them to divine a meaning. The quote above is not the first time you have said "The spirits said X, which means Y".

I feel that you need to be aware of this, as it is important to what is going on here.

 

[chillzero]

You were expecting your husband soon, so a sound in your hall or even outside your front door would unconsciously immediately associate with that expectation of an arrival in the house. You don't mention whether you had a family pet at the time, but a dog in the house could easily account for all the things you describe.

...

What do people think?

I have a dog, but what happens more often is hearing my neighbours running up stairs and closing doors, and thinking the sound is in my own house.

I think we should all stop posting on this thread until flaccon can bring herself to acknowledge the possibility that the spirits aren't real, and commits to such a test in order to find out.

Reasonable suggestion.

 

[Cassidy]

Are these from flaccon? What's the story here?


(There are a lot of people posting and I am a bit confused)

Where are these recordings from?

 

[laca]

I think we should all stop posting on this thread until flaccon can bring herself to acknowledge the possibility that the spirits aren't real, and commits to such a test in order to find out.

Ain't gonna happen. She said multiple times that she's not open to the possibility that the spirits aren't real.

 

[laca]

Now, that says to me that you are interpreting the words you hear to mean something that may, or may not, actually follow from those words.

I might even go as far as she's listening to the recordings until hearing some words that come closest to a "message" she wants to hear.

 

[Cassidy]

I have a dog, but what happens more often is hearing my neighbours running up stairs and closing doors, and thinking the sound is in my own house.


Reasonable suggestion.

. Pre-recorded messages (voiceless/silent) should not alter by containing a voice. Its just the one voice. No squeek, no high-pitch.

They have altered someone else's pre-recording. If I was to transfer to here, it would become distorted and dismissed. If posters here feel I should shut up, I can do that.

Alderbank and I discussed in brief on how to show a change in pre-recorded messages. I have been working out how best to do this. The results were worlds different than I imagined them to be.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

. Pre-recorded messages (voiceless/silent) should not alter by containing a voice. Its just the one voice. No squeek, no high-pitch.

They have altered someone else's pre-recording. If I was to transfer to here, it would become distorted and dismissed. If posters here feel I should shut up, I can do that.

Alderbank and I discussed in brief on how to show a change in pre-recorded messages. I have been working out how best to do this. The results were worlds different than I imagined them to be.

This seems to confirm what you claimed earlier - that a friend sent you a recording and that by playing the recording to listen for voices, the recording was changed.

Can you explain carefully what exactly it was that you did with the sound file your friend sent you?

How you know the file itself was changed?

Why do you think if you transferred the file it would be distorted?

 

[Cassidy]

On the contrary, flaccon, you absolutely do apply interpretation. You didn't quite answer what I asked - you did it in a haphazard mannaer, and I think that you would gain a hell of a lot from this thread if you would simply slow down - learn to read posts slowly, and more than once to absorb exactly what is being asked. You have a tendancy to pick out one little part, often what's not the main point of the post, and wander off on that.

Now, I asked:

The main question was not 'do you have to listen multiple times', which is what you mostly answered, but 'do you need to apply further interpretation' which you have brushed off at the end of your post very briefly. Doing this, you ignored exactly what I responded to and quoted, from your own previous post:



Now, that says to me that you are interpreting the words you hear to mean something that may, or may not, actually follow from those words.

So, your process seems to me to be as follows:
You record a blank file.
You ask a question.
You play back the recording and listen.
You do this lots of times until you believe you hear some words.
You note down the words.
You read those words that say one thing, and you then interpret them to divine a meaning. The quote above is not the first time you have said "The spirits said X, which means Y".

I feel that you need to be aware of this, as it is important to what is going on here.

I did not brush that off? I replied that if I don't hear correctly I discard it. There are many words that don't require intense listening, but lots of it does.

My process is to record the silence, and play it back. Sometimes I ask questions, sometimes I listen to their thoughts. I don't do this over and over until I believe I can find words. I only do it over and over to try to get to hear out a full sentence. If I cannot complete the sentence, nor get the gist of it, I discard it. I do note down words and names that are clearly heard.

I don't miss posts out here, or briefly read. I take a lot of time and I absorb. If there are posts I don't reply to, its due to missing them accidently.

 

[PartSkeptic]

I don't like to call it a frequency, I call it entanglement, but I refer to it as a frequency because posters mention frequency. I understand the word frequent.

Why do you use the word entanglement? Any connection to quantum entanglement? Just curious.

http://www.hardsf.org/HSFTEnta.htm

Some people have suggested that psychic powers do exist or other communication could exist using quantum entanglement to allow instantaneous messages over any distance.​

 

[chillzero]

. Pre-recorded messages (voiceless/silent) should not alter by containing a voice. Its just the one voice. No squeek, no high-pitch.

They have altered someone else's pre-recording. If I was to transfer to here, it would become distorted and dismissed. If posters here feel I should shut up, I can do that.

Alderbank and I discussed in brief on how to show a change in pre-recorded messages. I have been working out how best to do this. The results were worlds different than I imagined them to be.

Again, as I noted above, you are not addressing the point in the post you responded to. I was talking about your comments about hearing someone come into your house, close a door and run upstairs, or run downstairs, and close the door. Nothing at all to do with any recording. Slow down, and pay attention.

I did not brush that off? I replied that if I don't hear correctly I discard it. There are many words that don't require intense listening, but lots of it does.

You did brush it off, but again have conflated two comments and responded to one.
What I said you brushed off was the fact that you interpret the words you hear to mean something other than the words themselves actually say. You heard the words ""Some of this will help with other systems", and you said they mean "they do not require the laptop itself". Can you please pay attention and give this consideration? You are interpreting the sentences you claim to hear, and divining your own interpretation and meaning from them. You are not accepting the words themselves to be what they are.

Added to the fact that you have contradicted yourself several times, in backpedalling on the claim that all voices speak in clear and unequivocal sentences to actually saying that you have to listen over and over and over again in order to make any sense out of the noise, this is a great concern for trying to identify your actual claim, let alone design tests.

My process is to record the silence, and play it back. Sometimes I ask questions, sometimes I listen to their thoughts. I don't do this over and over until I believe I can find words. I only do it over and over to try to get to hear out a full sentence. If I cannot complete the sentence, nor get the gist of it, I discard it. I do note down words and names that are clearly heard.

The highlighted part contradicts the part before, and supports what I said. And what you said yourself a few times earlier in the thrread.

I don't miss posts out here, or briefly read. I take a lot of time and I absorb. If there are posts I don't reply to, its due to missing them accidently.

I am not talking about posts you miss. I think I explained clearly that you do not respond appropriately to the posts you quote. You half-read them, and you pick out one thing to respond to whether that was the point of the post or not.

 

[iknownothing]

I might even go as far as she's listening to the recordings until hearing some words that come closest to a "message" she wants to hear.

Her easy answer to that (previously in this thread) is that they have told her things she doesn't want to hear.

Maybe a better way to say it is, she listens until she hears words that come closest to a message that sounds like something spirits, to her understanding of them, would say.

 

[iknownothing]

Why do you use the word entanglement? Any connection to quantum entanglement?

Oh for goodness sake. Why bring quantum physics into it? You'll have her reading just enough off of some crazy website to start thinking she can explain her spirits with it.

Pretty clearly, the way she means "entanglement" is that the voices sound tangled together.

 

[iknownothing]

I did not brush that off? I replied that if I don't hear correctly I discard it. There are many words that don't require intense listening, but lots of it does.

You said:

They said "Some of this will help with other systems" meaning they do not require the laptop itself.

The spirits said one thing, and you had to add the yellow half of the sentence to explain what that meant.

Why didn't the spirits just say "We do not require the laptop itself" if that was what they meant? How are you certain that they didn't mean something else? That is the interpretation you are applying. "Some of this will help with other systems" is actually a pretty vague statement that could be interpreted many ways.

So instead of clear messages from the spirits, they need interpretation. What about their messages of world peace -- are those clear, or do they need you to interpret what they mean?

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Some people have suggested that psychic powers do exist or other communication could exist using quantum entanglement to allow instantaneous messages over any distance.​

"Some people have suggested" is usually the best way to start a sentence on the JREF forum. It lends high credibility to what follows. Way to go.

 

[iknownothing]

[qimg]http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Earth/Eyes/Face_005.jpg[/qimg]

I believe that spirits may be communicating with us through cloud formations. As a test of my claim, I'd like to see how many people can independently see a face in this picture. If enough viewers can confirm it, there will be too many folks involved to attribute the phenomena to mere pareidolia.

I see it too! Now it's been documented!

 

[Alderbank]

Flaccon

My daughter has rung me at work to say that you have made an offensive call to her on our home phone. I have not shared my home phone number with you although I am easy to find, and this is completely unacceptable.

I have never been other than polite and respectful to you. I can only think that your action is because moral pressure from other posters here has forced you to take down your disgraceful website.

Please confine your future communication to the open forum. If you make another call like that to my home I will go straight to the police.

I, and I hope other posters here, expect an apology from you

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Her easy answer to that (previously in this thread) is that they have told her things she doesn't want to hear.

Maybe a better way to say it is, she listens until she hears words that come closest to a message that sounds like something spirits, to her understanding of them, would say.

Yes. It's a bit misleading to talk about the voices saying things one wants to hear. Better to say they say things one expects to hear.

 

[jsfisher]

Flaccon

My daughter has rung me at work to say that you have made an offensive call to her on our home phone. I have not shared my home phone number with you although I am easy to find, and this is completely unacceptable.

I have never been other than polite and respectful to you. I can only think that your action is because moral pressure from other posters here has forced you to take down your disgraceful website.

Please confine your future communication to the open forum. If you make another call like that to my home I will go straight to the police.

I, and I hope other posters here, expect an apology from you

Whoa!!

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Flaccon

My daughter has rung me at work to say that you have made an offensive call to her on our home phone...

Oh my. I'm profoundly sorry to hear that.

I know I'm not the first to begin to wonder if there's more going on than simple pareidolia (and I don't mean spirits).

 

[bluesjnr]

Flaccon

My daughter has rung me at work to say that you have made an offensive call to her on our home phone. I have not shared my home phone number with you although I am easy to find, and this is completely unacceptable.

I have never been other than polite and respectful to you. I can only think that your action is because moral pressure from other posters here has forced you to take down your disgraceful website.

Please confine your future communication to the open forum. If you make another call like that to my home I will go straight to the police.

I, and I hope other posters here, expect an apology from you

Calm down. I certainly don't expect flaccon to apologise to me for phoning you.

Dealing with this on an open forum is not the way to proceed, if you think there is reason for concern then you should not hesitate to contact the police rather than play out the drama here.