People really do exist that can read your mind.

[Slimething]

Can you see that it's possible to make general points about what is known to have happened in history, without having to specify one particular example or aspect of the phenomenon?

I mean, for example, if I were to make the general historical point that WWII ended in 1945, would I have to provide citations for that on here? And if I didn't would my general point be dismissed due to lack of supporting evidence?

I didn't get that you were making a general point with your reference to governments trying out psychics. Your first post in this thread was to insinuate that we were all brainwashed/indoctrinated into dismissing psychics. Therefore, we took your mention of spy psychics as confirmatory evidence that this phenomenon exists. Do you believe that was an understandable assumption on our part?

This is where the discourse on here spirals down into pedantry.

No, you need to work on your communication skills.

The fact that intelligence agencies and police forces have used psychics is well known, and to focus in on one particular case is unnecessary to support the statement.

Unless you are using your "general point" as any type of evidence that psychic phenomena exist. So, I take it from what you are writing now that you used this fact as merely a throw-away line and you did not mean to use it as evidence that psychics are real.

So, here we have it, folks. Nothing to see here. Believe me.

 

[Miss Whiplash]

Vampire...

The word is that Plumjam is right...

DB

Part right. The CIA tried many things but a but abandoned them after they proved fruitless, like LSD for mind control.

[QUOTE = Plumjab]
I don't know why you insist in using the standard lazy demand for evidence. Google it and you'll see there's loads of stuff detailing the history of it. Try "CIA psychics"[/QUOTE] You first. Show me you can Google in that hoodie. I'm sure you can if you try.

 

[Miss Whiplash]

If anyone wants to trawl thru the archives...you'll find me posting links to a police chief who claimed to use psychics...and the following emails that ensued...

DB

Been there, done that.

 

[RayG]

I mean, for example, if I were to make the general historical point that WWII ended in 1945, would I have to provide citations for that on here?

Why, is the ending of WWII in 1945 in dispute?

The fact that intelligence agencies and police forces have used psychics is well known...

.
Yes, but where are the well known reports of them being used successfully?

RayG

 

[Senex]

To doubt that the US or any other country holds psychic secrets is ludicrous. Why do we torture people? Why can't we find Osama Bin Laden with remote viewers? It's because woo doesn't work. It doesn't work if the CIA spends millions of dollars for many years or not. Woo is BS and the failure of our CIA helps to prove that.

 

[Little 10 Toes]

just a point to ponder here,

if you were the head of an intelligence agency that found a good and reliable psychic would you:

a) tell the world about him/her, reveal his/her identity, subject him/her to independent lab studies open to the media?

(thus risking the psychic to kidnap by another intelligence agency, and also encouraging other intelligence agencies to find and use their own psychics)

or

b) make it public that psychics were tried out in your intelligence agency, but proved ultimately fruitless. reveal the identities of the ineffective psychics to the media. Continue employing the more successful psychics, keeping their identities secret, and claiming that all such use of psychics ended some years ago?

(thus keeping your genuine psychics safe and discouraging competing intelligence agencies from developing their own psychic programs)

Ok, call me a cynic... but when it comes to intelligence agencies this kind of tactic would be pretty standard procedure.

But couldn't the psychics determine if they were in danger by using their powers?

I would use the common sense reasoning that any program that endured for a matter of decades would not have received such protracted funding if it had produced no useful results.
A program producing no useful results would have been discontinued after a year or two at most.
So, it seems more likely to me that useful results WERE produced, yet these were kept concealed from public view, and programs are probably still going on.

But what about the Catholic Church? Have they shown results? Not to pick on them, but name a bigger worldwide religon with a guy wearing a funny hat? I am not a Catholic, but I am one of their "wrong religions".

Also, from the Remote Viewing link in Wikipedia (next to last paragraph in the Governmental Sponsorship subheading), "However, by this time [early 1990] [senior Defense Intelligence Agency official Jack] Vorona, [Army general Albert] Stubblebine and [Army general Edmund] Thompson had all retired, and the program's support essentially depended on a key group of Senators, especially Democrat Robert Byrd, who chaired the Appropriations Committee. One of Byrd's top aides, Richard D'Amato, was the boyfriend of a female remote viewer, and evidently on the order of the supportive Senators kept the program alive with earmarks to appropriations bills. After the Democrats lost control of the Senate in late 1994, and Byrd could no longer exert the same level of control over appropriations, the remote viewing program was effectively doomed."

Review the earmarking and pork barrel entries.

Please also see http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,983829,00.html which was given as a Time magazine reference.

Can you see that it's possible to make general points about what is known to have happened in history, without having to specify one particular example or aspect of the phenomenon?

I mean, for example, if I were to make the general historical point that WWII ended in 1945, would I have to provide citations for that on here? And if I didn't would my general point be dismissed due to lack of supporting evidence?

Depends on your example(s) and how general your example is. If you say everyone has eaten a McDonalds hamburger, I could point out that the poor people in India may never have enough money to even buy one, let alone want to eat one since it may violate their beliefs of their religion. If you want to say that USA, USSR, and PRC put money into researching psychic programs, I would agree. If you say that those programs were sucessful, I would need proof.

 

[Civilized Worm]

lol

btw, who is punching who in your avatar thingy?

It's Buzz Aldrin punching Bart Sibrel after Sibrel called him a liar for claiming to have gone to the moon.

 

[linusrichard]

Why, is the ending of WWII in 1945 in dispute?

I think most of us would agree that WWII ended in 1945. But wait...

Such overwhelming unanimity of belief ... is pretty remarkable.
I'm sure any practitioners of "brain-washing", mind control, or religious indoctrination would feel astoundingly successfull if they could get similar results.

Clearly, the fact that we could all agree that WWII ended in 1945 is evidence of our own gullibility/uncuriosity, and somehow also evidence that WWII didn't end in 1945...

 

[plumjam]

It's Buzz Aldrin punching Bart Sibrel after Sibrel called him a liar for claiming to have gone to the moon.

lol... good old Buzz

although I'm generally a "skeptic of the Skeptics", I do believe that they went to the moon. Not particularly from any citable or technical rationale, but more from having seen the astronauts interviewed. Not all of them could be such great actors

 

[plumjam]

But couldn't the psychics determine if they were in danger by using their powers?

who can tell in what circumstances their psychic powers would necessarily have to work?, some might only be able to look at stuff that didn't involve themselves. Many, like the rest of us, may not be concentrating very much for 90% of their waking experience

But what about the Catholic Church? Have they shown results? Not to pick on them, but name a bigger worldwide religon with a guy wearing a funny hat? I am not a Catholic, but I am one of their "wrong religions".

Lots of Catholic Saints report being able to predict the future, read the minds of the people confessing to them, bilocate... lots of stuff.. a good modern examples is Padre Pio, if you care to google him

Also, from the Remote Viewing link in Wikipedia (next to last paragraph in the Governmental Sponsorship subheading), "However, by this time [early 1990] [senior Defense Intelligence Agency official Jack] Vorona, [Army general Albert] Stubblebine and [Army general Edmund] Thompson had all retired, and the program's support essentially depended on a key group of Senators, especially Democrat Robert Byrd, who chaired the Appropriations Committee. One of Byrd's top aides, Richard D'Amato, was the boyfriend of a female remote viewer, and evidently on the order of the supportive Senators kept the program alive with earmarks to appropriations bills. After the Democrats lost control of the Senate in late 1994, and Byrd could no longer exert the same level of control over appropriations, the remote viewing program was effectively doomed."

I don't condemn all that as necessarily false, but why would the government intelligence services feel a great pressure to tell the truth about anything? I mean, look at mainstream government in Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.. practically everything they said was untrue. In more secret departments of government you're hardly likely to find greater honesty.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

"Lastly, question 10, asked: "Would the case have been solved without the assistance of the psychic?" Everyone answered YES!"

 

[thaiboxerken]

He asked me to think of a number. He would then write the answer down, fold it up, then pass it to me. I would unfold the paper to look at the answer. He did this over and over again. Is there a link you have regarding how this is just a simple basic mentalism trick, because I am still not convinced it is a trick.

I can do exactly that and I am no telepath. It's a trick and it's not even that hard to do.

 

[Locknar]

Lots of Catholic Saints report being able to predict the future, read the minds of the people confessing to them, bilocate... lots of stuff.. a good modern examples is Padre Pio, if you care to google him

Catholics believing in the paranormal was not the issue, and you know that. The simple fact is, nobody has ever been shown to have paranormal abilities.

I don't condemn all that as necessarily false, but why would the government intelligence services feel a great pressure to tell the truth about anything? I mean, look at mainstream government in Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.. practically everything they said was untrue. In more secret departments of government you're hardly likely to find greater honesty.

Practically everything "they" said was untrue...and what does that have to do with this thread? This is a derail attempt and a false argument as lack of proof/information is not proof.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Sounds overly complicated. Why fold it up to pass to you just for you to unfold it? It's not like there needed to be a big 'reveal' for an audience. Are you sure you're not misremembering this (it was 15 years ago) and he was doing the much simpler (especially for a 1 to 1 classroom trick) write it down on a pad and then turn it to show you...after you've given the answer? If so, it was a straightforward trick - pretend to write it down, get the answer, write the answer with a pencil lead under the thumb nail with movement hidden behind the paper. This simple trick can look extremely impressive.

If not that, then he may, as others have suggested, just been putting the most common answers down - you'll be amazed how predictable we are. Also once he started to get some wrong he'd have just explained how he was 'getting tired' or it wasn't coming through as clearly. Similarly a common technique when selecting numbers is to claim a partial hit if you just get some of the digits right.

Are we not supposed to keep magician secrets secret? Please don't post any more explanations.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Don't they need the ATM card first?

That's why you'd hang out near the ATM machine, so you can simply roll the person over and take their ATM and then use it. No use in mugging a guy for their ATM if you don't know the PIN.

 

[plumjam]

Catholics believing in the paranormal was not the issue, and you know that. The simple fact is, nobody has ever been shown to have paranormal abilities.



Practically everything "they" said was untrue...and what does that have to do with this thread? This is a derail attempt and a false argument as lack of proof/information is not proof.

normally i'm moderate and polite, but from reading many posts you've written in which i have been involved, you are persistently full of *****, and must realise it somewhere deep down, maybe you can try to work out why. Like sometimes you will reply to an orginal post i wrote and you'll go to all the trouble of writing something like "troll"
This is all pretty childish.
I don't know your age, maybe you are 14 or 15, in which case i'll readily forgive you.
God Bless

 

[JoeEllison]

lol... good old Buzz

although I'm generally a "skeptic of the Skeptics", I do believe that they went to the moon. Not particularly from any citable or technical rationale, but more from having seen the astronauts interviewed. Not all of them could be such great actors

Folks. This is what I mean when I say that the psychology of certain posters is incredibly interesting. Here we see a case of someone believing something that is almost certainly true, for the absolute worst reason possible. "Intriguing" doesn't even begin to cover it.

 

[Locknar]

normally i'm moderate and polite, but from reading many posts you've written in which i have been involved, you are persistently full of *****, and must realise it somewhere deep down, maybe you can try to work out why. Like sometimes you will reply to an orginal post i wrote and you'll go to all the trouble of writing something like "troll"
This is all pretty childish.
I don't know your age, maybe you are 14 or 15, in which case i'll readily forgive you.
God Bless

Do you have anything meaningful to add that supports your various claims, or just more derail attempts and taunts?

 

[Slimething]

Folks. This is what I mean when I say that the psychology of certain posters is incredibly interesting. Here we see a case of someone believing something that is almost certainly true, for the absolute worst reason possible. "Intriguing" doesn't even begin to cover it.

Actually, they're too painful to observe for very long. These people bounce through life via Brownian motion. Let's hope plumjam is luckier than most who rely on unexistent forces to watch over them.

 

[plumjam]

Folks. This is what I mean when I say that the psychology of certain posters is incredibly interesting. Here we see a case of someone believing something that is almost certainly true, for the absolute worst reason possible. "Intriguing" doesn't even begin to cover it.

trying to be witty, but just working out as nonsensical, go read some books maybe