FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Psychic Abilities?





LittleBlackKitten
Does anyone have any psychic abilites that have come to save someone's life?

One such incident of mine was where a friend in another city (different weather systems, we did not have cable or internet) called me up and told me she was going to go shopping at the usual mall and was excited because half her grocery list was on sale so she could buy a present for her 2 year old son for once since her cash was so tight, and I suddenly got a sense of urgency and panic, and saw in my mind a vision of a steel roof and its gurters collapsing, and I recognized her grocery store right away from when I'd been there to visit a few years back, and I urged her not to go. She thought I was insane but agreed to go the next day instead since traffic was nuts and it was a holiday anyway so she could bring her son and let him pick something out...

That afternoon, her city got a sudden and unexpected blizzard which developed within an HOUR, and the roof had collapsed right at the time she would have been there after picking her son up from daycare and dropping him off to daddy...

The weight of the snow along with sudden freezing of rainfall from the day before combined with structural rot and poor maintenance collapsed the roof...
ocalhoun
Well, I've never saved anybody's life with them, but I do have a few 'paranormal' abilities that I've noticed.
They're small-scale, and don't work reliably enough to be 100% certain though. (Though they still give much better than chance outcomes.)

Never had the kind of 'vision' you're talking about though... For me, it's more of feeling something I have no way of knowing, and sometimes affecting the outcome of something by focusing on that outcome (and, I suppose sometimes the two are hard to distinguish).

The only practical use I've ever had for them so far is test taking. Give me the answer sheet for a multiple choice test (4 answers for each question), but don't give me the questions, or the answers, just a sheet of (a) (b) (c) (d). If I put effort into it, I can feel which option is correct, and if I fill the whole sheet that way, I'll get a 50% grade on the test, when random chance should give 25%. (Yes, I have actually done this experimentally.)
50% isn't a passing grade, of course (I did say it wasn't too reliable, right?), but it does help greatly when I need the answer for a question I have no idea about. (I've always been a good test-taker, seemingly extremely lucky at guessing the right answers when I'm not sure... only in the last few years have I become aware of why that is.)
watersoul
Never had life saving experiences that were unexplained but I've thought of my twin sis a few times over the years and phoned her at the exact same time she's been phoning or texting me herself.
It's always something we notice but has happened enough times that it's almost become something not worth being considered too important...more normal than anything Smile
ocalhoun
watersoul wrote:
...more normal than anything Smile

Maybe more normal (and more paranormal) than you think...
There are some very interesting psychic phenomena associated with twins.
*google time*
From http://www.mindcafe.org/tag/psychic-twins
Quote:
No, they have not been featured in a Budweiser ad yet…at least we don’t think so. Of all psychic phenomena, it would be safe to say that individual accounts of psychic abilities between twins are among the most highly documented. Beyond the recently famous psychic twins Terry and Linda Jamison (they were on the Tyra show, they have to be legit!), records of uncanny connections of twins have become so common, they’ve almost crossed the line from supernatural, to just-plain-natural. From stories of twins being adopted at birth by different parents, living completely separate lives, and later reconnecting to discover that they had the same hobbies, same career, and both married men with the same name; to stories of one twin experiencing severe cramping at the very moment the other twin went into labor (sounds like an unfortunate twist on sympathy pains).

With all of the documented cases out there, this phenomenon might be closest to being scientifically proven, as there have been a few studies in which twins were separated and one was exposed to different distressing stimuli, resulting in a definite reaction of distress to the isolated twin who wasn’t exposed.

Given that, it would seem that the simultaneous phone-calling could be an expression of the same phenomena.
Bikerman
Documented cases?
I'd like to see any properly controlled scientific study that shows any effect before I become a believer....
deanhills
I'm not psychic, I would rather refer to any abilities I may have as instincts and learned behaviour, mostly with regard to people I have a close bond with such as in family or other close relationships. I probably picked this up from my father who had developed antennas that could pick up on almost anything, i.e. being very alert and aware of everything that goes on around him, and prepared for any eventuality. I can be in a heavy discussion, yet notice things that are happening in my periphery and react in an instant. Such as as being at a swimming pool and someone getting into difficulty. One situation was when I was about 9 years old and I knew my sister was alone and just had a feeling I had to check whether she was OK. It was in winter and one of those electric blow type heaters had sparked and one of the curtains had started a fire. One could probably also say it was a huge coincidence, but I just "had a feeling" about it. The fire was too big to put out by myself but I did get her out and was able to raise the alarm. Those instincts also helped me a great deal in South Africa where there is a high level of danger in the streets in Johannesburg. I could pick up on when it was safe and when it was not and I could also pick up on people to watch out for. I was also the one in the family that could tell people where their lost keys were, and if not immediately, find it quite easily most of the time. There was only one time I remember that I could not figure out where my mom had hidden something, and that was really a good hiding place. It was up the hole from where the piano pedals were of one of our pianos.

@Ocalhoun. Now that I think is really gifted and I am not surprised with the 50%. I've sensed some of that ability in your postings as well. Almost like being able to look at all the posts and immediately get the right picture instinctively, whereas people like me may need to read through the postings. If I know the poster then it gets easier as I can get a feeling of what the person is saying once I've read the lead paragraph. But with those I don't know, I have to read all of it and sometimes twice, such as Pentangeli. As he has a unique style of writing.
saratdear
The only time I believe I had precognition was once when I was up with a high fever in bed. Me and my friend had attended a test some days back, the results of which were due on that day. He called and told me his results, but I could not get up and drag myself to the computer. After his call, it was as though someone had whispered in my ear my exact marks - 159 (just don't ask out of how much Smile ) (And no, it was not my friend saying it on the phone and me forgetting it). After a few days, I checked my score and sure, it was 159.
watersoul
Bikerman wrote:
Documented cases?
I'd like to see any properly controlled scientific study that shows any effect before I become a believer....


My logic based mind means I've got to go with that as well, because my 'evidence' is anecdotal at best. We certainly agree that there is a high 'coincidence' rate, but is that because we notice or look for it?
In my social circle I'm friends with an unusually high percentage of twins, we seem to attract each other if only because when meeting another twin then the conversation always ends up being deeply about similar shared 'twin' experiences.

6 of the other twins I know are in the same position as me living miles away from their 'other half' so we often talk about experiences of phoning the other twin when they are suffering some emotional issue and 'needed a chat' at that exact time.

Like I said, none of this is scientific at all, but there is enough to convince us all that there could be something in it. Especially as I and my other twin friends do not share the same experience with other siblings that we each have.
Bikerman
Well, I would certainly expect a greater degree of 'concordance' between identical siblings than non-identical. That is for sound scientific reasons - almost identical genes mean that whatever element of character and behaviour is 'innate' will be closely shared. If you believe that a person is x% genes and 100-x% environment, as I think most reasonable people accept, then obviously identical twins are going to have that x% in common.
Then you have to add the fact that identical twins are often closer than other siblings which means they will tend to think about each other more; which, in turn, means the potential for 'coincidence' is higher. If one typically thinks of one's twin several times a day, it is almost a statistical certainty that on some occasions this will coincide with them ringing..

Like most human memory/experience the problem is that we always tend to disregard the 'non hits' - how many times do you think about a twin when they DON'T ring, for example.

All I can say is that there have been many studies into twins and supposed psychic/paranormal abilities - ranging from telepathy through to remote viewing and empathic response to stimulus. All the studies I have seen are either null result or were conducted with pretty shoddy methodology....
watersoul
Thats a well reasoned argument and yep, I certainly think about my twin more often than my other siblings.
When you've shared everything in your childhood and worked as a team for the most important part of your life, the 'other half' still continues to dominate your thoughts in adulthood.

All my other twin friends agree with that and the 'team' set up is surprisingly important in childhood. With almost every experience shared, twins often adopt different roles in the relationship, one being dominant and 'the defender' so to speak, while another is the passive or submissive peace-maker.
In the independence of adulthood it can take some adjusting to learn to play 'both' parts in ones own life path.

So yes, with someone else so important in an individuals life, they will always be in their thoughts more than other people.
watersoul
On the subject of coincidence and the possibility of 'connections' with other people, I had one experience some years ago that I thought was very unusual.

While away travelling with a girlfriend, we argued on an island off Malaysia and she 'stormed off' with some Swedish girls heading for Cambodia. I refused to follow, but after a couple of days sulking I swallowed my pride and desperately wanted to be with her again.
Our only communication was email so my plan was to get to Bangkok, email her from there and also make arrangements to get to wherever she was in Cambodia.

I left the island, travelled north through Malaysia, caught an 18hr train up through Thailand, arriving in Bankok some 4-5 days after we'd last seen each other. I caught a Tuk-Tuk to the heart of the city and sat down in one of the many hundreds of internet cafes to email my girlfriend.
After logging into my hotmail and starting to compose my message I looked to my left and 3 computer desks away from me was my girlfriend doing exactly the same thing emailing me.

In true movie style, our eyes met and we rushed to hug each other, both absolutely amazed at the number of different events and choices that could have been made to allow this to happen. In a city of over 9 million people and the thousands of miles we had seperately travelled, I wil never forget that experience, indeed, although we're not together anymore, I often chuckle about it with the girl concerned whenever we 'bump into each other'
Bikerman
Hmm, possible explanations:
presumably some similarity in tastes was part of the attraction. Thus selecting a place to stop, rather than being a random probability might have been more of a 'forced choice'...It may also be that the particular internet cafe is the first obvious stop after getting off the Tuk-Tuk which may also be where she travelled to...perhaps...?
I would imagine most tourists would head for the city-centre and so the location is not so improbable.

Alternatively it could be just one of those '1 in a million' chance occurrances that, statistically speaking, MUST happen frequently Smile

I can actually beat that.
Years ago when I was honeymooning with my wife, we were staying in a hotel in Tangier before setting off into Morocco proper (we were backpacking, but thought we'd treat ourselves to a night of comfort). Sat by the pool that evening, we were quite happy to notice no English tourists (I really prefer to be away from my countrymen when on holiday - too many bad experiences with clingy, loud couples you meet once and can't escape from). Looking round the pool I noticed one couple who were sunburned and wearing FCUK t-shirts. I figured they had to be brits. Unfortunately the guy caught me looking and decided to come over and introduce himself and his partner.
His name was Chris Maddocks and his partner was Caroline Snowden.
(My name is Chris Snowdon and my wife's maiden name was Carolyn Maddocks).

I never found a statistician who could help me compute the odds....but they must be pretty remote...
watersoul
Wow, that's got to be in the top ten of statistically strange incidents!
Bikerman
watersoul wrote:
Wow, that's got to be in the top ten of statistically strange incidents!

Yes, its certainly a good one. The thing is, though, we have a poor grasp of probability (in fact the whole field of probability is a much more recent development than people think - Pierre de Fermat and Blaise Pascal (1654) were the ones who really started our modern understanding.
Given a large enough sample group and a sufficiently vague or unspecified criteria, amazingly improbable things happen quite routinely (and MUST happen according to stats).

A good example is Uri Geller - the slimy spoon-bender and self-publicist.
At the height of his fame he appeared several times on TV shows and pre-warned people that he would cause their watch to stop. Sure enough hundreds of people rang the programmes after the event and reported that their watch/clock had indeed stopped. The credulous saw this as vindication of Geller's claims to psychic abilities. The statisticians, on the other hand, sat down and calculated. Given an audience of around 500,000 with an average number of timepieces of 1 each, then what is the probability of a single timepiece stopping at a predetermined time? I can't remember the exact probability (yes, someone actually calculated it) but it was a few thousand to one. Therefore, statistically, it was very likely that several tens, if not hundreds of timepieces would stop during the show.....

Here's an illustration of how naturally bad we are at computing odds.

In a class of 23 children, what is the chance that 2 will share the same birthday?
watersoul
Bikerman wrote:
In a class of 23 children, what is the chance that 2 will share the same birthday?


Good one, I was introduced to that same question many years ago and my mind still struggles (as then) to 'accept' 50%, even though I can see the formula is correct Laughing

*Edit* Lol@ Uri Geller - the slimy spoon-bender and self-publicist.
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:
Documented cases?
I'd like to see any properly controlled scientific study that shows any effect before I become a believer....

Or, even better than that, simply experiencing it first-hand.
I wouldn't expect anyone else to believe me, but I've experienced enough to need no further proof.
(And not just Jung's coincidences either.)

As an aside, I think many scientific studies of it fail to show it, because in the end, it does balance out. A 'psychic' usually does quite well at first, then drops off, and begins to do worse than statistically likely. I've noticed it on my own little experiments; take the test-taking example... On a test of more than 50 questions or so, it doesn't work as well, and it tends to average out to the expected grade of 25%. The odd thing though, is the first 50 questions or so will be above average every time... with the next 50 or so being below expected average.
*edit for clarification*
Give me a 150 question test... Then split it into three and grade each third individually.
The first 50 will be amazingly high, around 50%.
The next 50 will be amazingly low, around the 10% range.
The final 50 will be average, around 25%... as would any further questions given without a break.
(Give me a 50 question test though, and it will work the whole way through.)
*end edit*

-However it is that the ability works, it seems to burn out and actually work negatively after being used too much. I've seen this trend in every experiment I've done, I've heard the same trend described in others I've talked about this with, and the same trend is described in most books I've read on the subject.


(At any rate, this is the faith forum, so this is not the place for an in-depth discussion about the reality of such things.)
Bikerman
Well, I'm afraid that I don't believe this.
Patterns such as you describe (high success rates balanced over time by poorer results) would be immediately obvious in the results when analysed and would be statistically significant. The sort of statistical analysis used on well setup experiments is much more sophisticated than simply averaging over the piece - any significant positive run would be obvious and it would be relatively simple to redesign an experiment to test in short bursts.
If we take Zener cards as an example (the cards with different symbols used to test psychics) then a statistically significant run would only need to be around 20 cards. The probability of getting 15 out of 20 is low, but not so low that it would not occur by chance occasionally. So repeat. Now, if a supposed psychic can manage 15 on one try, but can't do it in the next half dozen (with as much break as you like) then they ain't psychic.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
-However it is that the ability works, it seems to burn out and actually work negatively after being used too much. I've seen this trend in every experiment I've done, I've heard the same trend described in others I've talked about this with, and the same trend is described in most books I've read on the subject.
Do you think this could be why we sometimes talk about beginners' luck in gambling? Someone does well for a certain period of time and then starts losing? Maybe your example is a statistical version of the same thing?
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:
Well, I'm afraid that I don't believe this.

I would never expect you to. I know you a bit too well for that.
Quote:
Now, if a supposed psychic can manage 15 on one try, but can't do it in the next half dozen (with as much break as you like) then they ain't psychic.

Well, in my experience, given enough of a break in between, the results are repeatable - to an extent.
(Part of the reason for the downturn is that such things don't seem to work well when the person doing it gets bored of it. Once the excitement/novelty wears off, so does the anomaly. -- And though I've never experienced this particular aspect first hand, it is said that expecting a negative result from the experiment has the same effect: i.e. inexplicably bad results.)

deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
-However it is that the ability works, it seems to burn out and actually work negatively after being used too much. I've seen this trend in every experiment I've done, I've heard the same trend described in others I've talked about this with, and the same trend is described in most books I've read on the subject.
Do you think this could be why we sometimes talk about beginners' luck in gambling? Someone does well for a certain period of time and then starts losing? Maybe your example is a statistical version of the same thing?

Hm, yes, perhaps beginner's 'luck', is a manifestation of the same effect. I don't have any evidence at all for or against that theory though.
I will say though, that from what I've seen, read about, and heard about, enthusiasm is essential - and beginners often have lots of enthusiasm.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
I will say though, that from what I've seen, read about, and heard about, enthusiasm is essential - and beginners often have lots of enthusiasm.
Well put. Enthusiasm for anything carries an amazing power with it, including its negative version, i.e. someone who is in a destructive mode.

I have two sisters who are identical twins. I wonder whether Bikerman could explain how he would scientifically answer for the fact that even when they were living separate lives for a long while more than a thousand miles apart, with very few phone calls at the time, that they get to take up smoking exactly at the same time? And since I am from the same family I don't get to take up smoking at all? I don't see this as psychic, but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically. This is but one example of many aspects of their behaviour and mannerisms.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
I will say though, that from what I've seen, read about, and heard about, enthusiasm is essential - and beginners often have lots of enthusiasm.
Well put. Enthusiasm for anything carries an amazing power with it, including its negative version, i.e. someone who is in a destructive mode.

I have two sisters who are identical twins. I wonder whether Bikerman could explain how he would scientifically answer for the fact that even when they were living separate lives for a long while more than a thousand miles apart, with very few phone calls at the time, that they get to take up smoking exactly at the same time? And since I am from the same family I don't get to take up smoking at all? I don't see this as psychic, but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically. This is but one example of many aspects of their behaviour and mannerisms.

Well, for a start I would want a definition of 'at the same time'. The fact that they smoke and you don't - well that doesn't really need any explanation. I smoke and my sisters don't - so what?
saratdear
Bikerman wrote:

Well, for a start I would want a definition of 'at the same time'. The fact that they smoke and you don't - well that doesn't really need any explanation. I smoke and my sisters don't - so what?

I think what he is trying to say is that the sisters smoking at the same time could be because of them being identical twins, and not just siblings.
Bikerman
saratdear wrote:
Bikerman wrote:

Well, for a start I would want a definition of 'at the same time'. The fact that they smoke and you don't - well that doesn't really need any explanation. I smoke and my sisters don't - so what?

I think what he is trying to say is that the sisters smoking at the same time could be because of them being identical twins, and not just siblings.

I know what he is trying to say. I want to know what 'at the same time' means. If it means within a minute of each other then that is different to within a year, or within a decade.
There are certain times of one's life in which it is more likely one will do certain things - like taking up smoking. Statistically most smokers start between 15 and 18. If 'the same time' means 'somewhere between 15 and 18' then there is nothing to explain that is not already explained. If, on the other hand, it means 'at 12:00pm on <date supplied>' then that is likely to require a different explanation, if indeed one is possible.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you on that point...
I don't think there is anything that cannot be explained scientifically.
There are certainly things that science has yet to explain (this topic mentions several), but I don't take that to mean that science can never explain them.

*sigh* It's hard being both a rationalist and a mystic.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you on that point...
I don't think there is anything that cannot be explained scientifically.
There are certainly things that science has yet to explain (this topic mentions several), but I don't take that to mean that science can never explain them.

*sigh* It's hard being both a rationalist and a mystic.
Right, and I'd rather be a mystic any day. Twisted Evil Then again, science very rarely looks at the invisible. So the chances of every proving the existence of that which is invisible has to be very remote?
watersoul
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you on that point...
I don't think there is anything that cannot be explained scientifically.
There are certainly things that science has yet to explain (this topic mentions several), but I don't take that to mean that science can never explain them.

*sigh* It's hard being both a rationalist and a mystic.
Right, and I'd rather be a mystic any day. Twisted Evil Then again, science very rarely looks at the invisible. So the chances of every proving the existence of that which is invisible has to be very remote?


Perhaps, but science has done well at detecting the electromagnetic spectrum for example, most of which is invisible to the naked eye.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you on that point...
I don't think there is anything that cannot be explained scientifically.
There are certainly things that science has yet to explain (this topic mentions several), but I don't take that to mean that science can never explain them.

*sigh* It's hard being both a rationalist and a mystic.
Right, and I'd rather be a mystic any day. Twisted Evil Then again, science very rarely looks at the invisible. So the chances of every proving the existence of that which is invisible has to be very remote?

Science looks at the invisible routinely (unless you count molecules and atoms as 'visible'.
There is a difference between invisible and imaginary. Science has no touble with invisibility but it doesn't deal with imaginary entities/forces/phenomena.
LittleBlackKitten
There are things of the spirit science can't detect either; there is no machine that can effectively encounter, read, and display happiness, sadness, anger, thought, conscience, or a mix there of. There are machines that can display the BRAIN in these states, but not the effect THEMSELVES. Who is to say psychic ability is akin to these, in between a feeling and a state of mind? There can be NO sensing these as there is no sensing the others.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Right, and I'd rather be a mystic any day. Twisted Evil

My point is that it doesn't (shouldn't) have to be a dichotomy between the mystic and the rational.
Instead of normal/paranormal, you have known/unknown... and all it takes to move a thing from unknown to known is to discover how and why it works.
Quote:
Then again, science very rarely looks at the invisible. So the chances of every proving the existence of that which is invisible has to be very remote?

There is quite the reluctance from the scientific community to be involved with "imaginary entities/forces/phenomena".

There are a few, however, who do actually look into it, and I applaud them for it.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
There are a few, however, who do actually look into it, and I applaud them for it.
Count me in. I like people who are open to all possibilities. For example medical doctors who qualify as naturopaths. I also like those possibilities to be tested as well. But sometimes tests can have their limitations and become the end instead of the means. Humans also have their limitations and the human factor could also come up with faulty tools, or tools that miss out. I think it is simply impossible for us to know everything.
Afaceinthematrix
Bikerman wrote:
Like most human memory/experience the problem is that we always tend to disregard the 'non hits' - how many times do you think about a twin when they DON'T ring, for example.


Exactly! I used to work at the same location as my girlfriend. We were the two atheists *gasp* there. People would always try to convert us. I remember one person giving us some emotional story about him driving down the highway one night and "something told him he should slow down" and so he decided to slow down. A few seconds later he blew a tire and was able to safely get off the road. Had he been speeding, like he was, he probably would have spun out of control and died. He credits God to saving his life by telling him to slow down.

My girlfriend's response was a sarcastic, "Wow! You must be so special that God wishes to save your life while he screws millions of other people every year!"

I then responded more calmly by saying something along the lines (I can't remember the exact quotes so I'll paraphrase) of: People of faith die all the time in all sorts of accidents for all sorts of unfair reasons. The mere fact that you got lucky was that since so many people die, chance dictates that some people will escape death. You were the lucky one. You can't honestly argue that God saved you when someone was probably dying a similar death that day. Some people will make it out alive. Furthermore, you could have, in the back of your mind, heard something hit the tire which then freaked you out and caused you to slow down. That's a practical explanation. However, you most likely just got lucky.

I was arguing with someone else recently who said some nonsense about all humans being connected psychologically or something which is why when you're at a stop light and you look at the person next to you, they often look back. I responded with, "You're only remembering the times they look back. I look at the people all the time and they often don't look back. So now this is just a coincidence when you look at the same time."


--------------------


So now that I've stated that, I'll go back to the OP (that was on topic - it was necessary to say what I'm about to say). I don't believe that anyone has psychic abilities. It's nice that you can save someone's life. However, what about all the lives you haven't been able to save (such as ones you didn't know about.... maybe you should have told some random stranger at a mall one day to wait another five minutes before driving home so that they drunk driver that's about to kill him will not be in that location)? I would have to see serious scientific studies before ever believing in psychic abilities.

Ocalhoun: People often write tests in a pattern type of way. Perhaps you're good at guessing patterns. Random chance would get about 25%, but teachers often write tests such that there's some sort of pattern in the correct answer...

If you ever take a math test that's multiple choice and have no idea on an answer, but the choices are: 3, -3, 1/3, 10 then I'd choose 3. My reasoning? 10 is a throwaway answer. It's probably either 3 or -3 because they're hoping you'll screw up on a negative sign. I'll go with 3 because 1/3 is just the correct answer flipped over. This may not always work but if you have no idea on an answer, why not choose 3? That's what I'd do...
deanhills
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
However, what about all the lives you haven't been able to save (such as ones you didn't know about.... maybe you should have told some random stranger at a mall one day to wait another five minutes before driving home so that they drunk driver that's about to kill him will not be in that location)?
There are some psychic people who have been able to tune into the possibility of such an event, but of course because they don't know the random stranger or how to contact that random stranger, they won't know how to contact him/her to warn them.

I don't have any special psychic abilities but I do believe in the power of suggestion, such as through prayer. I also believe that there is a part of ourselves in our subconscious that can link us with the subconscious of others when we are focused on it.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
I think it is simply impossible for us to know everything.

Perhaps... It does seem that every question that's answered leads to more questions... and that may go on indefinitely.
But, I don't think that there is any particular thing that is fundamentally unknowable.

Afaceinthematrix wrote:

Ocalhoun: People often write tests in a pattern type of way. Perhaps you're good at guessing patterns. Random chance would get about 25%, but teachers often write tests such that there's some sort of pattern in the correct answer...

The only pattern I'm aware of is over-randomizing.
On a human-written test, the person writing it will (usually) go overboard trying to make the pattern random, and not choose the same answer twice in a row often enough.
So, if the answer to #5 is (b), then there should be a 25% chance that the next answer is also (b), but on a human-written test, that probability is usually lower than 25%, around 18%... So, when in doubt, it's best to choose an answer different than the previous one.
(Machine-written tests don't have this effect, which is caused by the person writing it choosing a pattern that looks more random, but actually is less, because it's not 'streaky' enough.)
Using that pattern I could get a little boost in the score, but not an extra 25%... And I don't think I have an idiot-savant ability to guess the patterns teachers use... (In any case, the ability works the same on human-written tests, and tests where a computer (truly randomly*) decides which letter will represent the correct answer.)

That doesn't account for a 25% gain in guessing though.


*Okay, the computer isn't truly random either... But if I can predict the output of a computer's random number generator based only on past outputs, (without realizing it!) that seems far more incredible than psychic powers.
Quote:

If you ever take a math test that's multiple choice and have no idea on an answer, but the choices are: 3, -3, 1/3, 10 then I'd choose 3. My reasoning? 10 is a throwaway answer. It's probably either 3 or -3 because they're hoping you'll screw up on a negative sign. I'll go with 3 because 1/3 is just the correct answer flipped over. This may not always work but if you have no idea on an answer, why not choose 3? That's what I'd do...

Oh, I'm well aware of the tricks like this (another reason I'm a good test-taker). It's also generally true that the longest answer will be the correct one, and on a question where the answers are:
(a) 1,3,4,6
(b) 1,2,4,7
(c) 2,3,5,6
(d) 3,4,8,9
You can tell the answer is (a) without even looking at the question, because it's the one where all four options are also in the other answers, while the other answers all include options that are nowhere else to be found.

But, on the type of test I was talking about, I'm not looking at:
(a) Lincoln
(b) Taft
(c) Jefferson
(d) Ford
I'm only looking at:
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
But when I try, I can feel:
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
(a)(b)(c)(d)
The way it works is I run my finger across the answer sheet, and the correct answer actually feels slightly different than the others... kind of like my arm tenses up a little when it's over the correct one. It isn't right every time, partly because it's a very subtle feeling, and easy to imagine feeling it when it's not there... But if I follow it, I get a result much better than statistics would predict.
jeffryjon
I've experienced many 'psychic' experiences, though the most memorable was when I moved to a place called Carlisle in 1977 at the age of 12 and the school curriculum was very noticeably different from the previous 2 schools I'd attended (my Dad moved around a lot up to secondary school age with chasing the money trail). A week or so after joining the school, there was a geography exam in which I knew I'd do badly - this was guaranteed to lead to a thrashing when the result was known at home. I went to sleep 2 nights before and 'dreamt' myself sat at the desk reading the questions and writing the answers. Figuring I had nothing to lose, I read up on only the questions in the dream and came out with an extremely high mark. The questions were exactly as dreamt and perhaps if I'd had more faith in the dream I'd have done even better. That said, it was enough to draw suspicions from the teacher marking the paper and my parents were contacted by the lower school headmaster who tried to accuse me of cheating. Ironically this turned out to be the one time where my father's tendency for violence worked in my favour as the lower school headteacher decided to drop the accusation. I was moved straight from the bottom set to the top set because of the mark and fell quickly a few weeks later to the bottom set remaining there for the rest of the term.

Though I'd already learned it was better not to talk about such things, especially since I couldn't perform to demand and was guaranteed to 'regret the day I'd ever been born, if I ever lied again' (by the age of 6 knowing exactly what this meant), this particular event was life-defining as it served as my first proof that it was possible to see the future. Looking back, the potential for extremes of corporal punishment probably played a large part in developing a 2nd (or refined) set of senses and I did get the fun of freaking him out from time to time talking about his childhood once I was big enough to handle myself - he's convinced to this day my grandmother must have told me far more than she did. Once I started drinking alcohol regularly the abilities seemed to almost disappear, not to redevelop until a few months before I first came to India in 1995.

I believe that these types of abilities are latent/partially developed in most people and possible for all, and it's a subject I've spent a lot of time researching through personal experiments. My findings (with a batch size of 1 - me) is these senses work best when we're totally at ease, running on auto-pilot or when we're at the extreme other end of the spectrum - in all cases the thinking process seems to be out of the equation. Depending on who I've talked it over with, these things are described as either just 'known' or 'felt', though to me these are inadequate descriptions. I suspect that difficulties of scientific lab type experiments are caused by the subject(s) being unable to be sufficiently at ease to leave the thinking brain dormant enough to stop it interfering.
deanhills
jeffryjon wrote:
My findings (with a batch size of 1 - me) is these senses work best when we're totally at ease, running on auto-pilot [...]

Agreed. When we are not thinking at all. As I have found many times that when I am super relaxed, such as on automatic pilot when I am walking, something would show itself to me without me being aware of it, and as soon as I try and grab it with my conscious mind, it disappears. Like a dream of sorts.
Bikerman
I don't buy this at all. It is easy to design an experiment where the subject is relaxed. One simple and often used protocol is to allow the subject to take their own time - a whole day or more if they want to - and to perform the feat when they are comfortable. This setup has been used in quite a few of the studies in the literature - and still no confirmation.
The excuse that a subject cannot perform whilst knowing that they are being tested is the oldest excuse for charlatans that there is. It is simply an attempt to shut-down the debate by saying that no matter how you test you will find nothing.
I would be much more impressed if supporters of psychic abilities could suggest some test themselves and allow proper oversight of their test.
deanhills
Bikerman, but we are not talking about performing? We are talking about insights, instincts, the stuff that occurs naturally to a person when he/she is in a relaxed state, and when there is no awareness or focus on anything specific, this insight just comes from nowhere. These insights usually come when there is no pressure. So tests probably will always create an environment of pressure. Unless it is a highly gifted psychic. In my own case insights only really come to me when I am unaware of myself or of others and not focused on finding solutions. It has quite often come to me when I am in the process of doing something mechanically and automatic such as walking or listening to music, or being driven in a car, or even sometimes when I am driving.
Bikerman
[reply removed]

EDIT - I'm partly responsible for both side=tracking this thread and also contravening the spirit, if not the letter, of the TOS for this particular forum. I apologise for this - I genuinely forgot that I was in the faith forum when replying.
Clearly since the OP is about psychic abilities it is inappropriate for me to question whether they exist or not in this particular forum. I have therefore deleted my reply above and would suggest (and ONLY suggest, since I do not wish or plan to moderate here - Max is boss here) that this side-track be discontinued and discussion return to psychic abilities themselves.
jeffryjon
LittleBlackKitten wrote:
Does anyone have any psychic abilites that have come to save someone's life?

One such incident of mine was where a friend in another city (different weather systems, we did not have cable or internet) called me up and told me she was going to go shopping at the usual mall and was excited because half her grocery list was on sale so she could buy a present for her 2 year old son for once since her cash was so tight, and I suddenly got a sense of urgency and panic, and saw in my mind a vision of a steel roof and its gurters collapsing, and I recognized her grocery store right away from when I'd been there to visit a few years back, and I urged her not to go. She thought I was insane but agreed to go the next day instead since traffic was nuts and it was a holiday anyway so she could bring her son and let him pick something out...

That afternoon, her city got a sudden and unexpected blizzard which developed within an HOUR, and the roof had collapsed right at the time she would have been there after picking her son up from daycare and dropping him off to daddy...

The weight of the snow along with sudden freezing of rainfall from the day before combined with structural rot and poor maintenance collapsed the roof...


My mother told me that when she was a small child she was visiting her recently passed aunt's grave. On leaving the graveyard her Aunt clearly and firmly spoke to her when she reached the exit gate and told her to wait right there. A few seconds later a car came speeding around the corner and lost control - she would have been in the road at the time. I've often wondered whether the voice WAS her aunt or took the form of her Aunt so she'd pay attention. Anyway, lucky for me she did or no me would have occurred. we could say the voice appearing as her Aunt's saved my life too.

I've often wondered whether these things should be considered abilities or phenomena, as although I have often played a part in the process, (for example when seeking a solution) it doesn't always come straight away like with walking across a room etc. Many times the solution (even a physical one) often just appears within a few hours or days and only the circumstances of the appearance drew my attention to any connection. Perhaps my intense 'want' for a solution and then letting go of the want is something similar to what religion calls a prayer.
deanhills
jeffryjon wrote:
Perhaps my intense 'want' for a solution and then letting go of the want is something similar to what religion calls a prayer.
Agreed. There is something of the rational in it as well. Psychic to me is something that cannot be explained rationally. I.e. someone getting flashes of someone who is going to die in a motor car accident. Or someone getting flashes of someone dying and then recognizing it on the news after the person has died.
toasterintheoven
this is definitely one of those "how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go" subjects, in the end, I think it's good to advise one against obsessing over such things because a bullet to the head is still a bullet to the head which will more than likely lead to death
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Psychic to me is something that cannot be explained rationally. I.e. someone getting flashes of someone who is going to die in a motor car accident. Or someone getting flashes of someone dying and then recognizing it on the news after the person has died.

Simple. Everything is connected, both in time and in space.
If the universe is one big whole, all interconnected, then it shouldn't be surprising that one part of it may be aware of another part of it through these connections.
I don't know what physical mechanism is behind it (though I have my theories), but that's a rational explanation. (Given a few assumptions.)
Just because something can't be rationally explained now, doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

(Or there's the darker idea that your flashes of someone dying caused that person to die. Twisted Evil
That's one problem about it; you can never be certain of cause and effect... Do the test answers cause me to choose a certain letter, or does my choice of letter change the test answer? Does a card being the ace of spades cause me to choose it, or does my act of choosing cause that card to be the ace of spades? Does my will affect the roll of the dice, or do the dice affect my will? It can be unclear sometimes.)
jeffryjon
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Psychic to me is something that cannot be explained rationally. I.e. someone getting flashes of someone who is going to die in a motor car accident. Or someone getting flashes of someone dying and then recognizing it on the news after the person has died.

Simple. Everything is connected, both in time and in space.
If the universe is one big whole, all interconnected, then it shouldn't be surprising that one part of it may be aware of another part of it through these connections.
I don't know what physical mechanism is behind it (though I have my theories), but that's a rational explanation. (Given a few assumptions.)
Just because something can't be rationally explained now, doesn't mean you shouldn't try.

(Or there's the darker idea that your flashes of someone dying caused that person to die. Twisted Evil
That's one problem about it; you can never be certain of cause and effect... Do the test answers cause me to choose a certain letter, or does my choice of letter change the test answer? Does a card being the ace of spades cause me to choose it, or does my act of choosing cause that card to be the ace of spades? Does my will affect the roll of the dice, or do the dice affect my will? It can be unclear sometimes.)


I could certainly see a 'guilt' related problem if someone wishes another harmed or dead and then something happens to that person within a short time of let's say 2 or 3 days but what caused the harm is anybody's guess (for me at least). I've certainly used techniques on taxi drivers to keep them alert here in India as they often overwork on pretty dangerous roads. We get a lot of cases of long distance drivers falling asleep at the wheel here.

With cards and dice, I could certainly see a use for the ability regardless of whether you're causing it or just picking up on what will occur. The movie 'Next' was pretty good at enacting some of the possibilities and areas of concern.

My ex partner and I used to regularly debate as to who had a thought first - even when there was some timelag of a few seconds between me thinking something and dwelling on the thought until she spoke about it. All light-hearted of course but still impossible to prove the mechanism to another who's not open to the idea of telepathy - this even when on some occasions I wrote a word or drew a quick sketch beforehand.

I started some personal experiments, when I realised how many of us have a song going around in our heads and then someone nearby starts singing it. When I first noticed the occurrence I thought it could be just that the song's getting aired on the radio a lot, so I experimented with playing much older songs repeatedly until it found its way into my mind and sure enough when standing in line or sitting casually at least one of the people nearby would start to sing, hum or whistle it. Cause and effect (in this case) seemed likely. The question is more relevant and deserves answers with simultaneous thoughts in different people - it would be nice to have some verifiable experimentation in this case as some things could be predictable which could seriously skew any results if we tried to set up a test of the phenomena.
deanhills
@Ocalhoun. I agree with you that everything is connected. There is probably nothing rocket science about that either. As you said. It is very simple.
ocalhoun wrote:
Just because something can't be rationally explained now, doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
In the right company, I would probably give it a good try! But not on this Board.
truespeed
jeffryjon wrote:
experimented with playing much older songs repeatedly until it found its way into my mind and sure enough when standing in line or sitting casually at least one of the people nearby would start to sing, hum or whistle it.


Probably you had without knowing been humming/whistling the song,the person next to you picks up on it and does the same,no psychic connection,just you humming the song out loud to those around you without realizing.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
@Ocalhoun. I agree with you that everything is connected. There is probably nothing rocket science about that either. As you said. It is very simple.
ocalhoun wrote:
Just because something can't be rationally explained now, doesn't mean you shouldn't try.
In the right company, I would probably give it a good try! But not on this Board.

I presume you don't want ideas shot down...
I can understand that, but I also know that having knowledgeable people around to shoot down ideas prevents you from wasting time on bad ones if you listen to them.
(Though you also need a positive atmosphere to generate ideas... The best way, I think, is to generate many ideas without looking in-depth in any of them in a positive atmosphere, then taking those ideas to the negative area, where the false ones will be easily weeded out, leaving the valuable ones to be considered in-depth.)
jeffryjon
truespeed wrote:
jeffryjon wrote:
experimented with playing much older songs repeatedly until it found its way into my mind and sure enough when standing in line or sitting casually at least one of the people nearby would start to sing, hum or whistle it.


Probably you had without knowing been humming/whistling the song,the person next to you picks up on it and does the same,no psychic connection,just you humming the song out loud to those around you without realizing.


Truespeed, the fact that I was experimenting at that time would mean..........oh well, the word 'probably' in you response 'probably means you've already decided. Wishing you a Happy and fulfilling 2011
truespeed
jeffryjon wrote:


Truespeed, the fact that I was experimenting at that time would mean..........oh well, the word 'probably' in you response 'probably means you've already decided. Wishing you a Happy and fulfilling 2011


If it was an experiment that showed that a song in your head could be transferred somehow to those around you,and it your opinion was a successful experiment,then this experiment should be repeatable under test and verifiable conditions.
jeffryjon
truespeed wrote:
jeffryjon wrote:


Truespeed, the fact that I was experimenting at that time would mean..........oh well, the word 'probably' in you response 'probably means you've already decided. Wishing you a Happy and fulfilling 2011


If it was an experiment that showed that a song in your head could be transferred somehow to those around you,and it your opinion was a successful experiment,then this experiment should be repeatable under test and verifiable conditions.


Good point. Though as pointed out in a previous post, the auto-pilot mind seems (in my case at least) to be a necessary factor. The experimentation I quoted was carried out under mild curiosity and just happened. Perhaps the best way to find out would be to try it out for yourself on several occasions with an attitude of mild curiosity over a period of a month or so and see what occurs. Not to set the criteria for you, but I chose songs which were well known in their time but no longer regularly played. After the first few experiments, the majority of them were seasonal songs used 'out of season' to try and further eliminate the chances that the songs were having annual revival sessions. I suspect of course, someone would need the faith to make sincere effort because in my experience:

a) you'd have to play a song on repeat until it auto-plays in your head for there to be any chance of success.

b) you'd have to experiment in crowded places where people are just hanging around with minds on auto-pilot (bus stops in quieter streets, long journeys on public transport - sitting in laundrettes etc)

Indicators with other experiments are that the transmitted signal has to far exceed whatever is going on in the receiver's mind and this involves several factors.

a) the transmitter has to have the mind free of all other factors which is why I shared the song in your head example. Any of us who've experienced that know that the song just dominates until we're alerted to something deemed important enough to warrant our attention.

b) the receiver had to be in a similarly non-attentive state - better still if they were mind-drifting with no specific point of focus. This would be hard to verify in a fixed experiment, but I noticed that the ones who responded appeared to be in that zone where they'd lost track of where they were and what the purpose of being there was - almost like a boredom-induced trance.

c) quantifying results would be difficult as a means of proving effectiveness. One positive in a small crowd would have to be regarded as a full success. Just singing, humming, whistling a line of a song can often bring someone into awareness of their surroundings and out of mind-drift, stopping the song progressing.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
I presume you don't want ideas shot down...
That is a wrong presumption. Have you thought about it that there are many more people on this Board who require rational evidence-based arguments about spiritual issues that cannot be explained, than those who don't? In fact they are in the vast majority. Most of these people are not open to ideas for which there is no evidence. So the likelihood of a discussion like that creating a meaningful debate is not that great. The discussion will revolve around the need for evidence and a rational explanation and won't progress much further from there. A meaningful discussion would be if there were others who had studied that subject and had experiences they could share etc.

If there were a majority of people like that on the Board, then I would not mind my idea being shot down, as those people would be on the same wavelength and in my opinion qualified to do that. I would also be in a position to learn from that. But when I know that the majority of people are skeptical about the topic I was thinking about, it would be a bit pointless to put it forward. It would be much better to go to a Forum elsewhere on the Web and put my idea forward where it has a greater chance of being understood, and if shot down, there would be a meaningful knowledge base known to all in that discussion to test it in a constructive manner.
LOLatU
Please respond if anyone has encountered these types of coincedenses.

I have never really been into fairytales or like much fictional movies (I prefer reality ones).

Its been i would say about 2 or so years no ( i guess) that I come across coincedenses.

For example my wife would ask me a question of some kind (usually in the choosing of something) and i would happened to guess what she was thinking (not a guessing game) ,I discarded it as when you are in a relationship is expected that you finish each others sentences, that you think alike etc..... but this for me went on to frequently and a bit ackward.
Or if i would be talking to someone or if i think of something (within a small time frame ), that thought that came to me comes out in real life.
Example: it can be a word phrase that is hardly used.

Other case that i had: Today marks the 1 year since the devastating earthquake in Haiti. I tell you that day of the earthquake my wife's boss calls her late that night (Jan.12) and says have you seen the news ? We were like no(I don't watch much news nor TV) . and of course once we put the news we saw the report on the devastation, but to me it went a bit further because around the same time that the earthquake hit (in the 4-5 pm/Jan 12 ) i was browsing Haiti/Haitian images (for no reason at all at that time) i'm not haitian, no haitian families nothing was going on that lead to search the images.
Another incident: In July/2010 a friend of ours lost her one and only son to a unfortunate tragic drowning in Vermont (afar from where I live) . On the next day of us finding out of the accident and of around the time of the accident , i couldn't help to notice that i had been specifically looking at pictures of him at around of the same time that the tragedy is ocuring , I never told the mother or the father of the ocurrance that I had out of respect to them, a loving family. I continue to come across constant unusual incidents. I have thought of writing all of them dowm , but for me that would be too much work. Could someone please advise if they have encountered the same situations. Thank you.
ocalhoun
LOLatU wrote:
around the same time that the earthquake hit (in the 4-5 pm/Jan 12 ) i was browsing Haiti/Haitian images (for no reason at all at that time)

[...]

i couldn't help to notice that i had been specifically looking at pictures of him at around of the same time that the tragedy is ocuring ,


Shocked
Don't look at pictures of me please!
jeffryjon
LOLatU wrote:
Please respond if anyone has encountered these types of coincedenses.

Its been i would say about 2 or so years no ( i guess) that I come across coincedenses.

For example my wife would ask me a question of some kind (usually in the choosing of something) and i would happened to guess what she was thinking (not a guessing game) ,I discarded it as when you are in a relationship is expected that you finish each others sentences, that you think alike etc..... but this for me went on to frequently and a bit ackward.
Or if i would be talking to someone or if i think of something (within a small time frame ), that thought that came to me comes out in real life.
Example: it can be a word phrase that is hardly used.


This is much more common than seems to be given regard. I do find it quite amazing that humans have conned themselves into believing psychic-ness is a special gift. Some aspects of course, but a strong decisive thought kicks out more current. We can even measure it through machines. I find those with more internal chatter don't pick up so much and this even with myself when there's loads of preoccupied thinking going on. I believe in the quiet state, this is what SHOULD normally be happening with all of us. Everything's about the level of quietness, relaxation, when we're not particularly thinking about anything which leaves our receivers open to hear. I used to compare the process like playing a radio - in a quiet room we can hear the music easily - start doing some construction work with drills and jack-hammers and the radio might as well not be there. When we're thinking (inner talk) it's harder to hear a whisper or someone else trying to speak to us - even on a physical level. The same is true in the psychic. Man and wife often have very little to discuss - we know all there is to know about each other - and provided there's no large disagreements going to stimulate 'inner chat' most of the conversations we have are pretty relaxed and mundane. This leaves the thought recognition part of us open and ready. The wife has a thought (active) and the husband's perceptors recognizes the thought - or vice versa.

LOLatU wrote:
Other case that i had: Today marks the 1 year since the devastating earthquake in Haiti. I tell you that day of the earthquake my wife's boss calls her late that night (Jan.12) and says have you seen the news ? We were like no(I don't watch much news nor TV) . and of course once we put the news we saw the report on the devastation, but to me it went a bit further because around the same time that the earthquake hit (in the 4-5 pm/Jan 12 ) i was browsing Haiti/Haitian images (for no reason at all at that time) i'm not haitian, no haitian families nothing was going on that lead to search the images.
Another incident: In July/2010 a friend of ours lost her one and only son to a unfortunate tragic drowning in Vermont (afar from where I live) . On the next day of us finding out of the accident and of around the time of the accident , i couldn't help to notice that i had been specifically looking at pictures of him at around of the same time that the tragedy is ocuring , I never told the mother or the father of the ocurrance that I had out of respect to them, a loving family. I continue to come across constant unusual incidents. I have thought of writing all of them dowm , but for me that would be too much work. Could someone please advise if they have encountered the same situations. Thank you.


I've also had many similar experiences. Imagine the strength of thought when someone's in danger. You just happening to be simultaneously at ease at the time would suggest to me that you were open at the time. in the case of a mass event whilst casually surfing around, why not be drawn to an interest of any particular subject. In the same or a similar subject and in the case of your friend, having a photo in the house means you already have an established openness with that person - why else would you keep the photo? As just one personal example, I had a dream about an uncle for the first time in years and that night he died. He'd kind of drifted from the family and we didn't have much contact. Some people find their dogs get excited when a close family member begins the journey home. People have reported that in some cases the dog leaves the house to go and wait at the garden gate. I watched a documentary about this many years back. The phenomena was tested by varying the homecoming time and sure enough, the dog's behaviour was synchronized with the new timings.
deanhills
I was thinking of this thread today when I had to find a bus in a Bus Station, and before I knew it was standing in front of it, by instinct, rather than rationally checking for name or number boards, and asking people. I just had "a feeling". I also was not purposefully walking to the bus, with "searching for the bus" in my head. This is of course not an example of being psychic. Just instinct, and so I wonder whether our rational mind is sometimes in the way of our instincts, and if when we are searching for something, our instincts could be more helpful than our rational mind?
Wingoboy
Anyone with "psychic abilities", good news! The James Randi Educational Foundation will give one million dollars to anyone who can prove they have psychic abilities. Since 1996, when the Foundation started, there have been no true psychics yet.
deanhills
Interesting Guidelines.
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-faq.html
Including:
Quote:
If you are submitting a claim that works off a previous assumption, you have to present evidence proving the assumption correct first. For example, a claim of exorcism must have prior proof of the existence of demons, unless the existence of demons would be self-evident during the exorcism. If someone’s head spins ‘round the wrong direction during an exorcism, it is safe to say that demons (or some other entities) are responsible. Projectile vomiting, however, is nasty and probably explainable.

Some claims are, unfortunately, untestable. For example, claiming that you are able to make someone feel happy by talking to them is untestable, because it is impossible to objectively gauge someone’s level of happiness, especially if they have been told that after talking to you they should feel happy.

If your claim is untestable, there is nothing that can be done to alter that status unless you find a new claim or negotiate a protocol in which the results are self-evident and objectively testable.
Dialogist
So where do we draw the line?

Wikipedia defines "psychic" as such:

Wikipedia wrote:

It can denote an ability of the mind to influence the world physically and to the telekinetic powers allegedly professed by those such as Uri Geller.


I have the telekinetic ability to move my hands with my mind. I could communicate something with my mind to paper or sound, something of a scathing or abusive nature, possibility racially, politically or religiously offensive that could move a man to kick my ass. These are physical actions being influenced by metaphysical or non corporeal forces.

So let's look at the metaphysical side too:

wikipedia wrote:

psychic (pronounced /ˈsaɪkɪk/; from the Greek ψυχικός psychikos—"of the mind, mental", also called sensitive[1]) is a person who professes an ability to perceive information hidden from the normal senses through extrasensory perception (ESP), or is said by others to have such abilities.


The "normal (5) senses" are as follows:

Sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch

To the best of my knowledge (perception), these senses can only be scientifically tested via confirmation testimony. ie: What color is that? It is blue. Who is that? That is Mozart. What is that? It is ice cream. etc. There's not really any hard evidence other than reliance upon ad populum observation. Take the color Black for example. That's not a color. It is protons not attacking the retina. So the 5 normal senses are subject to individual confirmation anyway being that all depend on cognitive interpretation. Dyslexia for example. I would perceive all of these areas to be subject to perception. That makes them metaphysical anyway. And all physic. However, we need a sixth sense for this to be remarkable don't we? I can't think why, personally but how about the senses of temperature, kinesthetic sense, pain, direction, balance and acceleration? Are those doable and accessible to everyone? Are those classified as "normal senses"? Because they should be, but they are not in the standard 5. And the evasiveness of what constitutes "physic ability" according to the authority of who defines science vs pseudoscience seems to be a nice little earner judging by the post above me. Let's just leave the science recognizing "pain" at all being a pseudoscience itself for a minute and look at some more: I can walk into a room full of family after being away for years and feel the love instantly. I can similarly walk into a local pub full of drunks and experience the animosity, before anyone has even uttered the classic line, "you ain't from around these here parts is ya boy?" I mean I experienced deja vu yesterday and when I refer to that phenomena, you know exactly what I'm referring to because you've experienced it too and can confirm it, just as you could if I said, Barack Obama is black. So where's my Million dollars?

If Darwin is correct, then we evolved from species that can experience electrical and magnetic fields, and detect water pressure and currents. I usually look to the birds circling low and hovering to determine that a storm is imminent. I don't know what my girlfriend's cat keeps clocking in the corner of the ceiling but unfortunately I can't ask it. Which leads me nicely to:

deanhills wrote:

For example, a claim of exorcism must have prior proof of the existence of demons, unless the existence of demons would be self-evident during the exorcism.


This actually proves a God according the Problem of Natural Evil (which has been used for years in ironic attempts to create a evil God to disprove a Good one). So I guess if you can point towards a "natural evil" (a fawn being caught in a forest fire is often used). Then there's your demons. I don't subscribe to polytheism but if we're subsidizing pseudoscience to the tune of 1 Million dollars, you're going to need to be a lot more specific. I mean, lay out those guidelines a LOT clearer. We're not mind readers, for God's sake. However, if there's a person in your captive, and there's just you and he in a room, and there's your loaded gun on the table between you, and his eyes shift towards the gun and then quickly look away again, we are all mind readers. Similarly, if a large angry man paces towards you, fists clenched, staring at you like he wants to beat the life out of you, again, we are all mind readers. You either run (like a physic would) or begin picking up your bloody teeth while randi.org tells you that you couldn't have foresaw that ass whooping.
deanhills
[quote="Dialogist"]
deanhills wrote:

For example, a claim of exorcism must have prior proof of the existence of demons, unless the existence of demons would be self-evident during the exorcism.
Just to qualify. I quoted this from James Randi's Website - FAQs. There are not my own words (refer my posting).

Dialogist wrote:
I don't subscribe to polytheism but if we're subsidizing pseudoscience to the tune of 1 Million dollars, you're going to need to be a lot more specific. I mean, lay out those guidelines a LOT clearer. We're not mind readers, for God's sake. However, if there's a person in your captive, and there's just you and he in a room, and there's your loaded gun on the table between you, and his eyes shift towards the gun and then quickly look away again, we are all mind readers. Similarly, if a large angry man paces towards you, fists clenched, staring at you like he wants to beat the life out of you, again, we are all mind readers. You either run (like a physic would) or begin picking up your bloody teeth while randi.org tells you that you couldn't have foresaw that ass whooping.
Agreed. The guidelines are not clear at all. I wonder however whether that is deliberate. The guy does not really want to part with his million dollars? Smile
Dialogist
While my instinctive Pavlovian drool was spooling at the opportunity of earning a million dollars for bending a criteria, my conditioned ESP cold-read that a man with a "donate here" button on his "dot org" domained website doesn't exactly have a million dollars to part with.
deanhills
Dialogist wrote:
While my instinctive Pavlovian drool was spooling at the opportunity of earning a million dollars for bending a criteria, my conditioned ESP cold-read that a man with a "donate here" button on his "dot org" domained website doesn't exactly have a million dollars to part with.
Laughing I did not notice the donate button, but my instincts were that there was something bogus about the million dollar challenge.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
Dialogist wrote:
While my instinctive Pavlovian drool was spooling at the opportunity of earning a million dollars for bending a criteria, my conditioned ESP cold-read that a man with a "donate here" button on his "dot org" domained website doesn't exactly have a million dollars to part with.
Laughing I did not notice the donate button, but my instincts were that there was something bogus about the million dollar challenge.

There is nothing bogus about it. Randi has the million dollars independantly held and notorised by Goldman-Sachs. I hardly think that Randi would provide a forged certificate and I know for sure that Goldman-Sachs would have him in court in record time if he tried.
http://www.randi.org/challenge/goldmansachs.pdf
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html
Dialogist
Bikerman wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Dialogist wrote:
While my instinctive Pavlovian drool was spooling at the opportunity of earning a million dollars for bending a criteria, my conditioned ESP cold-read that a man with a "donate here" button on his "dot org" domained website doesn't exactly have a million dollars to part with.
Laughing I did not notice the donate button, but my instincts were that there was something bogus about the million dollar challenge.

There is nothing bogus about it. Randi has the million dollars independantly held and notorised by Goldman-Sachs. I hardly think that Randi would provide a forged certificate and I know for sure that Goldman-Sachs would have him in court in record time if he tried.
http://www.randi.org/challenge/goldmansachs.pdf
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html


lol, the company that bankrupted Greece? Yeah, they are to be trusted all right. I wonder if they offer a prize for that paranormal event where Bush won the votes in Florida for his first election or even got a second term at all. Oh that's right, they did offer a prize. Barack Obama knows all about these lobbyist cash for peers prizes. It is a shame that the starving millions remotely teleport money to their Food Bubble bank account daily. That's blood money right there.
Bikerman
So you think that they have consented to issue a bogus certificate to Randi, falsely claiming that he has 1 million dollars on deposit? Not credible.
The Goldman-Sachs operating in Greece, whilst being sneaky and something I prersonally abhor, was perfectly legal.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
So you think that they have consented to issue a bogus certificate to Randi, falsely claiming that he has 1 million dollars on deposit? Not credible.
I won't speak for Dialogist, but if one reads the Million Dollar FAQs, then I get a distinct impression that this guy is making it almost impossible for anyone to succeed. I do not dispute that there is a 1 million dollars on deposit. If one owns millions, almost any good lawyer/finance consultant can work it so that there is a 1 million dollar on deposit, perhaps not necessarily in cash, but it is probably there. But if one reads the FAQs very carefully, it would seem that he comes from a very argumentative position where he can only be right, and that it is just utterly impossible that anyone will ever be able to succeed. Those who tried did not stand much of a chance, and when they did, he raised his conditions just to make sure they would never succeed.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
So you think that they have consented to issue a bogus certificate to Randi, falsely claiming that he has 1 million dollars on deposit? Not credible.
I won't speak for Dialogist, but if one reads the Million Dollar FAQs, then I get a distinct impression that this guy is making it almost impossible for anyone to succeed. I do not dispute that there is a 1 million dollars on deposit. If one owns millions, almost any good lawyer/finance consultant can work it so that there is a 1 million dollar on deposit, perhaps not necessarily in cash, but it is probably there. But if one reads the FAQs very carefully, it would seem that he comes from a very argumentative position where he can only be right, and that it is just utterly impossible that anyone will ever be able to succeed. Those who tried did not stand much of a chance, and when they did, he raised his conditions just to make sure they would never succeed.

What exactly is unreasonable? Of COURSE he wants things to be rigorous - that is how science works. The whole idea is to make it difficult - that is how you sort out the liars and cheats.
What do you find unreasonable about the requirements?
Dialogist
Bikerman wrote:
So you think that they have consented to issue a bogus certificate to Randi, falsely claiming that he has 1 million dollars on deposit? Not credible.
The Goldman-Sachs operating in Greece, whilst being sneaky and something I prersonally abhor, was perfectly legal.


I didn't state that it was false, I said I used my extra sensory powers of perception to ascertain that a man with a donation button wasn't exactly Rockafella. I probably wouldn't have won this remotely viewed fake money is the only irony. I agree with you about Goldman-Sachs. And I think it is good if they are providing any money to science, pseudo or not. If they are sincerely and genuinely rewarding the study of pseudoscience, then I think that is admirable. But like deanhills said, it's sort of a "I bet you can't fly without a device" kind of a challenge.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
What exactly is unreasonable? Of COURSE he wants things to be rigorous - that is how science works. The whole idea is to make it difficult - that is how you sort out the liars and cheats.
What do you find unreasonable about the requirements?
Right, but then why is there any discussion necessary, as there seems to have been when one reads the FAQs. If it were you instead of him, I would have imagined you would have articulated your set of criteria very carefully, and you would have written them down in very clear and unambiguous English. And if someone applied, you would have rejected the application outright quoting whatever criteria the application did not meet. I get the notion that this guy is using the Million Dollar Challenge to shoot down those who try to apply rather than reject them because of this or that criteria. His position is not an honest one (such as yours would have been) i.e. "prove me wrong", his position is more like "I am right, and everyone who has a different position to mine can only be wrong, I have to unmask them and one way of doing this is is to lure them into my 'unmasking den' with a million dollar carrot".
domz
oh, i didn't know psychic abilities is some form of faith.
LittleBlackKitten
It is because one has to believe in it's existence, because of lack of solid proof. If it cannot be reasonably proven, it is by faith alone.
Bikerman
deanhills wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
What exactly is unreasonable? Of COURSE he wants things to be rigorous - that is how science works. The whole idea is to make it difficult - that is how you sort out the liars and cheats.
What do you find unreasonable about the requirements?
Right, but then why is there any discussion necessary, as there seems to have been when one reads the FAQs. If it were you instead of him, I would have imagined you would have articulated your set of criteria very carefully, and you would have written them down in very clear and unambiguous English. And if someone applied, you would have rejected the application outright quoting whatever criteria the application did not meet. I get the notion that this guy is using the Million Dollar Challenge to shoot down those who try to apply rather than reject them because of this or that criteria. His position is not an honest one (such as yours would have been) i.e. "prove me wrong", his position is more like "I am right, and everyone who has a different position to mine can only be wrong, I have to unmask them and one way of doing this is is to lure them into my 'unmasking den' with a million dollar carrot".
That is entirely wrong. The conditions are set out in advance and are perfectly reasonable. Of course he wishes to debunk them - they are dishonest or deluded or both.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
That is entirely wrong. The conditions are set out in advance and are perfectly reasonable. Of course he wishes to debunk them - they are dishonest or deluded or both.
If the conditions were perfectly reasonable there would be no need for the guy to argue to the extent he is doing in his FAQs. We would see a list of Conditions, in very clear and unambiguous English and nothing more than that. Yet he seems to be needing to argue a lot. Sounds like the proverbial lady who protests too much.
Bikerman
Have you ever seen a test? Have you any idea how they are conducted?
Several have been conducted in the full glare of the media. His 2002 challenge to homoeopaths was recorded and documented by the Horizon BBC Science program.
There was nothing dodgy about the conditions - the only thing dodgy were the homoeopaths.
ocalhoun
Afraid he's right about that one (mostly).
To have a proper test that conclusively proves it, the conditions must be strict.

That doesn't mean that any condition is reasonable though. There could be some unreasonable ones there as well.
Which conditions do you think are unreasonable?


Heck, I aught to try for the prize... I've done a few things myself that beat statistics nicely.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
Heck, I aught to try for the prize... I've done a few things myself that beat statistics nicely.
You should! It would be an interesting experience, and a great test to see how genuinely open he is to the possibility of being proven wrong. I just get this feeling that when you put in your suggestion, that there will be millions of questions coming back at you to up the ante. Then when you have mastered those, there will be more questions coming, etc. etc. He may be right in overall, but I get the feeling he is using this as a platform to tackle those who think they have the abilities that they have. I'd have been more impressed if he had just stated his conditions succinctly and clearly. Then stepped back with no comment at all.
Bikerman
a) Of course he is using this as a platform to call out the charlatans, con-merchants and sad deluded types. He has been quite clear about it. More power to his elbow.
b) Whether it impresses you or not is unlikely to be a consideration.
c) Speculating about what you think he might do is completely unnecessary since the application process is well documented and has been observed on many occasions.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
since the application process is well documented and has been observed on many occasions.
Exactly my point as well. His Website says it all. All one has to do is read the section on FAQs.
dan751
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
but there is something invisible here at work that cannot be explained scientifically.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you on that point...
I don't think there is anything that cannot be explained scientifically.
There are certainly things that science has yet to explain (this topic mentions several), but I don't take that to mean that science can never explain them.

*sigh* It's hard being both a rationalist and a mystic.


I agree with deanhills on this this. Science has yet explain the origin and nature of consciousness. It has yet to explain what happens to our consciousness when we die. It has yet to explain what truly happens when an object gets sucked into a black hole.
I doubt it can explain how a friend of mine was sitting on the couch watching TV then suddenly knew his wife was cheating on him. He had no leads and she denied it for a year, the truth came out eventually proving he was right the whole time. (psychic experience)
Can science explain how my PS3 controller which sat beside me while I was alone in the house disappears and wound up on the pantry shelf 3 days later?
Can it explain how the salt made its way into the fridge when my girlfriend and I both walked away from it leaving it on the counter?
Or how about 2 cigarettes appearing on a shelf when we had none left? We leave our smokes in the pack.

I believe there are things at work beyond what we see and know.

And I do believe in psychics.
My sister felt the same headache my mother once had when my mother walked into the room. She said she's had these experiences (not just headaches) since birth, not exclusive to my mother. In other words, she can feel the pain of others. (Empathic ability)
My girlfriend has told me things about my workmates that I never told her that are true, and she's never met them. ( ability) My girlfriend also can feel the pain of others. One time, I had an irritation in my throat, I put her finger on the area of irritation, and immediately she got the same sensations in HER throat. It bothered her for about an hour or so, which is how long it continued to last in me. (Empathic ability)
I've been told I call things out and wind up true. (Clairvoyance ability)
I can feel all sorts of tingles in my hand if I hover them over someone, and they feel the tingles where my hands are above. (Clairsentience ability)
How can science explain that?
Bikerman
dan751 wrote:
I agree with deanhills on this this. Science has yet explain the origin and nature of consciousness. It has yet to explain what happens to our consciousness when we die. It has yet to explain what truly happens when an object gets sucked into a black hole.
I doubt it can explain how a friend of mine was sitting on the couch watching TV then suddenly knew his wife was cheating on him. He had no leads and she denied it for a year, the truth came out eventually proving he was right the whole time. (psychic experience)
Can science explain how my PS3 controller which sat beside me while I was alone in the house disappears and wound up on the pantry shelf 3 days later?
Can it explain how the salt made its way into the fridge when my girlfriend and I both walked away from it leaving it on the counter?
Or how about 2 cigarettes appearing on a shelf when we had none left? We leave our smokes in the pack.
Sorry Dan but non of this is evidence - just anecdote.
Quote:
My sister felt the same headache my mother once had when my mother walked into the room. She said she's had these experiences (not just headaches) since birth, not exclusive to my mother. In other words, she can feel the pain of others. (Empathic ability)
In that case why doesn't she toddle along to see James Randi? I presume she wouldn't turn away a million dollars? All she has to do is reproduce this 'empathic ability' and she will become quite wealthy very quickly. The same applies to you - if you really CAN demonstrate clairvoyance or 'clairsentience' then give Randi a call. He will propose an initial test to make sure you are not wasting his time. If you pass this, you will be given a proper scientific test under controlled conditions. Demonstrate your 'ability' and you will get $1 million.
Science can explain these abilities very well - they don't exist. There have been tens of thousands of tests of people who claim these abilities. A very few provided interesting results, but when properly analysed they always tend to be down to experimental shortcomings - either with the design of the experiment or the analysis of the results.

PS - the origin of consciousness is work in progress, but progress IS being made. Science CAN explain what happens to an object sucked into a black hole and it can explain what happens to consciousness when you die - it dies as well.

PPS - if you don't trust Randi, then do a bit of clairvoyance on the stock/shares market and cut out the middleman. It is strange, don't you think, that these 'abilities' are never specific enough or reliable enough to enable ONE SINGLE clairvoyant to become incredibly wealthy by playing the markets...?
dan751
@Bikeran:
//Off Topic: Does the science community believes that dark energy exists? \\

Psychic abilities aren't based on evidence and neither is their proof. Based on experience. As you just proved my point. Psychic abilities (in my opinion) are not something that should be used for personal gain (in any shape of the term), that includes getting $1 000 000, or cutting the middleman out of stocks. All I can tell you is I know what I've seen and experienced for myself.
Many people who believe they're psychic believe that such abilities are God-given, and science can't actually explain God (can it?), rather the evidence of a God?
I know that if science can't explain something, they jump and say it doesn't exist. When science sends electrons and photons flying at almost the speed of light across many kilometers to an explosion for analysis, aren't they trying to figure out what the heck is going on in that molecular level?
For the scientific community to say they don't exist is jumping the gun a little, don't you think? Watching my girlfriend tell people about their lives, with whom she just met with no prior knowledge. It actually freaks them out. How does science explain that?
And if science claims that consciousness dies with the body, then how does science explain after a recent death in a family there is (lets say, a year and 3 months later) a newborn in the family who, not only looks strikingly like the person who just died (which can be explained by genetics) but also has identical personality traits and behaviors as the deceased?
The baby wasn't conceived until after the person died, thus they've never met, and therefore, no scientifically possible way for the infant to adopt the personality traits and behaviors. Let's throw a monkey wrench in there. Let's say the family of the newborn lived on the other side of Earth, and thus the family never saw person, who died, much. Again, how?

Science has already proved there is more dimensions than the three in which we exist, it has also proven they get more and more complex and bizarre the further up you go. Isn't that proof alone that there is something beyond what we can fathom?
deanhills
dan751 wrote:
@Bikeran:
//Off Topic: Does the science community believes that dark energy exists? \\
This thread reminds me of the General Chat thread on Did you trust astrology .... during which Bikerman had introduced us to the Institute of Bosmology. You should check out the Journals of the Institute, particularly the October Issue on Towards an Understanding of Consciousness Transmission. Here is a quote from the "About Us" section of the Institute of Bosmology which apparently allows scientists to explore psychic phenomena, spirituality, alien/UFO visitations and the after-life. Twisted Evil
Quote:
The Institute [of Bosmology] was set up in 2003 by world-renowned physicist Dr Terrence Roll with the specific goal of researching, teaching and publicising bosmology. Bosmology is the application of scientific principles to phenomena which are normally ignored by mainstream scientists.

Using revolutionary break-throughs in physics, psychology, phenomenology and biology, bosmology allows the scientist to explore such areas as paranormal and psychic phenomena, spirituality, alien/UFO visitations and the after-life. The Institute boasts amongst its membership some of the leading scientists of our time, and is home to the standard peer-reviewed journal for the field - The Journal of Bosmology - which can be read by members from this site, using the link on the left.

Bosmology is set to deliver major insights into the natural and spiritual world over the coming years. The combination of advanced quantum theory with para-psychology is already starting to push back the boundaries of knowledge, and as empirical and theoretical work in the field develops this can only accelerate. It is an exciting time to be a bosmologist.

You may examine the current membership by using the link on the left. Alternatively you may which to examine our press releases, or consult the Frequently Asked Questions - both available from the menu. Or you may wish to move straight to the Journals - again this is available from the menu.


Back on topic. I do believe that all people have psychic abilities. Some are just more in tune than others. And when they use their abilities their "antennae" are probably much better developed than those with similar talents who don't use their abilities. We particularly start to lose the use of those abilities when we get to the school stage and our minds get to be trained in a direction that takes us away from psychic development.
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:
A very few provided interesting results, but when properly analysed they always tend to be down to experimental shortcomings - either with the design of the experiment or the analysis of the results.

Experimental flaws can also result in false negatives; it's good to remember that.
dan751
ocalhoun wrote:
Experimental flaws can also result in false negatives; it's good to remember that.

VERY good point ocalhoun.

@deanhills:
It's very true. I believe that everyone is born with the capability to develop their inherent psychic abilities.
I also believe that progress that has been made in a past life in developing these abilities carry through into future lives. Thus, some may be born with certain abilities without even trying to develop them whereas other people have to work at them and could take some time. Also, if they're not exercised, then one is not as in tune with them as others are. The whole use it or loose it concept. Wink And yes, society is also in part to blame for brainwashing people eradicating the concept of the need for spiritual development.
deanhills
dan751 wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Experimental flaws can also result in false negatives; it's good to remember that.

VERY good point ocalhoun.
Excellent point!

dan751 wrote:
@deanhills:
It's very true. I believe that everyone is born with the capability to develop their inherent psychic abilities.
I also believe that progress that has been made in a past life in developing these abilities carry through into future lives. Thus, some may be born with certain abilities without even trying to develop them whereas other people have to work at them and could take some time. Also, if they're not exercised, then one is not as in tune with them as others are. The whole use it or loose it concept. Wink And yes, society is also in part to blame for brainwashing people eradicating the concept of the need for spiritual development.
I still can't wrap my mind completely around this making progress from one life to the other like passing one grade at school to another. I sometimes wonder whether our earthly existence is just a nightmare that does not really belong to spirit. The bad belongs to our minds, we create it through our own judgment of others as an ultimate manifestation of the survival of the fittest. Our spirit is completely perfect and innocent. The design of the human species lends itself to both beauty and ugliness and all of its opposites, contradictions and paradoxes. Think
Bikerman
Quote:
@Bikerman:
//Off Topic: Does the science community believes that dark energy exists? \\
Yes
Quote:
Psychic abilities aren't based on evidence and neither is their proof. Based on experience. As you just proved my point. Psychic abilities (in my opinion) are not something that should be used for personal gain (in any shape of the term), that includes getting $1 000 000, or cutting the middleman out of stocks. All I can tell you is I know what I've seen and experienced for myself.
No, sorry, that is demonstrably wrong. Plenty of people use their 'abilities' for pay - the TV channels are full of them. Charlatans EVERY ONE of them. By saying that psychic ability cannot be 'evidenced' you are using the same get-out that every charlatan & con-merchant in history has tried...Trust me...I can't prove it, you just have to trust me.
Sorry, no sale.
Quote:
Many people who believe they're psychic believe that such abilities are God-given, and science can't actually explain God (can it?), rather the evidence of a God?
I know that if science can't explain something, they jump and say it doesn't exist. When science sends electrons and photons flying at almost the speed of light across many kilometers to an explosion for analysis, aren't they trying to figure out what the heck is going on in that molecular level?
There is no point trying to explain something that doesn't exist. First the psychics must show that there is something to investigate. They have failed - very miserably.
Quote:
For the scientific community to say they don't exist is jumping the gun a little, don't you think? Watching my girlfriend tell people about their lives, with whom she just met with no prior knowledge. It actually freaks them out. How does science explain that?
And if science claims that consciousness dies with the body, then how does science explain after a recent death in a family there is (lets say, a year and 3 months later) a newborn in the family who, not only looks strikingly like the person who just died (which can be explained by genetics) but also has identical personality traits and behaviors as the deceased?
The baby wasn't conceived until after the person died, thus they've never met, and therefore, no scientifically possible way for the infant to adopt the personality traits and behaviors. Let's throw a monkey wrench in there. Let's say the family of the newborn lived on the other side of Earth, and thus the family never saw person, who died, much. Again, how?
Acedote and hypotheticals. Why should I try to explain that for which there is no evidence? Can you explain how a 4 ton rock suddenly appeared in my bedroom ? No? Well, that would be because IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

Your girlfriend is probably good at cold reading. You can see demonstrations at any psychic event - or watch a good magician (Penn & Teller, Darrin Brown...they can all do it). She might even believe she is psychic, but I'll bet £1000 here and now that she isn't.
Quote:
Science has already proved there is more dimensions than the three in which we exist, it has also proven they get more and more complex and bizarre the further up you go. Isn't that proof alone that there is something beyond what we can fathom?
No that is simply argument from ignorance. Science has shown that there are 4 dimensions. There may be more. We know this because experiment shows it to be the case.
Science has also shown that claims of psychic ability are groundless.
dan751
Such as dark energy exists, so too there are con-psychics. While they are gifted with psychic abilities, or cold reading or both, they use them for personal, earthly or malicious gain. They are the ones who use devices like crystal balls, tarot cards and so on, and they charge unreasonable prices to make a wealthy living (It almost seems like they signed a pact with the devil or something). Silvia Browne is prime example of this *shudders*

True psychics don't need physical aide, nor do they have lots of money stashed somewhere. They use their abilities to help improve peoples personal lives. And they usually don't just say "Trust me, you just have trust me." Usually it goes like this: Tim meets a psychic for the first time in his life, while crashing a random house party. He's never seen this person before and vice versa. The psychic asks him whats wrong. He tells her he's shy about a girl, but he doesn't tell her that he hasn't gotten over the death of his wife's death. She tells him that he first needs to let go of his late wife's memory before he can move on. Tim denies having a late wife. She won't accept his denials. Tim can't understand how the psychic knows about his late wife, nor does he want to accept it either. There's no evidence for her to know, so how does she know?

It's very typical for science to say that something doesn't exist if they have no evidence or explanation for anything beyond them. There are things that are beyond the reach of science, and because of that, science thinks they don't exist.

@Bikerman
You should try to explain that for which there is no evidence because that's what the whole thread and this discussion is basically about. I'm not expecting you to. I've always understood where you're coming from, I might add. Smile A 4 ton rock didn't appear in your bedroom because it's not rational. Wink
Cold reading, you mean like body language? or what do you mean? If body language, then how can she give details about someone she neither seen nor spoke with nor given prior information?
I don't do bets. I'm neither afraid of winning nor loosing. I not only don't have £1000 to give, nor do I want £1000. It's not a cop out either. Smile

Biblical Isaiah (Isaiah 40:22) talks about "the One who is living above the 'circle' of the earth". Point being, people back then believed that the Earth was flat, not round. I highly doubt that Isaiah did a full trip around the planet on foot. Maybe he had a space craft? Science later proved what was already known, that the Earth is round. Just like the 4th dimension couldn't be proven at one point by science, and was considered a myth (and is now realized), so too science believes that psychic abilities are equally a myth. They can't prove it, it just doesn't exist. Wink
bukaida
This is perhaps known as 6th sense which happens to everyones life. You may feel that someone is stareing at you even you are unable to locate it. It is said that the girls have more 6th sense than boys (No offence ) Very Happy .
Bikerman
dan751 wrote:
Cold reading, you mean like body language? or what do you mean? If body language, then how can she give details about someone she neither seen nor spoke with nor given prior information?
I don't do bets. I'm neither afraid of winning nor loosing. I not only don't have £1000 to give, nor do I want £1000. It's not a cop out either. Smile
Cold reading is essentially a technique used by most successful 'psychics'. It involves asking vague questions, looking for hits, assessing the person via whatever clues are available - and a host of other little tricks.
As for 'explaining what she does' - no need. There is no evidence that she does anything. First we need to see something worth investigating, then comes the tests.
Quote:
Biblical Isaiah (Isaiah 40:22) talks about "the One who is living above the 'circle' of the earth". Point being, people back then believed that the Earth was flat, not round. I highly doubt that Isaiah did a full trip around the planet on foot. Maybe he had a space craft? Science later proved what was already known, that the Earth is round. Just like the 4th dimension couldn't be proven at one point by science, and was considered a myth (and is now realized), so too science believes that psychic abilities are equally a myth. They can't prove it, it just doesn't exist. Wink
Common mistakes.
Firstly people didn't think the world was flat - common misconception. The Greeks knew the world was spheroid about 500BCE.
The bible also talks about the world having corners, being visible from the clouds, etc. Note that even your chosen quote is wrong - it portrays a 2 dimensional circle being looked down on - like a circular stage, not a sphere.
Finally, I don't know what you mean about 4th dimension. Science has known there may be more than 3 spatial dimensions for a couple of centuries and has been quite sure about the temporal 4th dimension since Einstein.
dan751
Bikerman wrote:
Common mistakes.
Firstly people didn't think the world was flat - common misconception. The Greeks knew the world was spheroid about 500BCE.
The bible also talks about the world having corners, being visible from the clouds, etc. Note that even your chosen quote is wrong - it portrays a 2 dimensional circle being looked down on - like a circular stage, not a sphere.
Finally, I don't know what you mean about 4th dimension. Science has known there may be more than 3 spatial dimensions for a couple of centuries and has been quite sure about the temporal 4th dimension since Einstein.

It honestly quite annoys me to see you try to shoot everything down in one blow without picking apart first.
Cold reading isn't a technique used by psychics, rather wannabes.
Neither is it something that can be executed when the people are in two different rooms, or even over a forum. Wink
While it may be true that Greeks probably had it figured out, evidently, not everyone did.
How is my quote wrong? Didn't people speak more in illustrations rather than educated explanations back in the day? I do know that schools weren't as commonplace for everyone as it much more is now. So, in order to for the quote to reach the understanding of all people across all generations, illustrations had to be used, it's also what languages developed from. Or do you think it was written exclusively for those with educational degrees? In which case, then yes, it would be fundamentally wrong.

And before Einstein? Was it mere speculation?
Evidence of a 4th dimension simply proves that there is more than we know. Wink
Bikerman
dan751 wrote:
Cold reading isn't a technique used by psychics, rather wannabes.
But that simply begs the question and is circular. Your 'answer' assumes that which it is supposed to establish - ie that there ARE such things as psychics. I say that there is no such thing. Can I prove it? No - you can never prove a negative. Can you prove that there isn't a 50 foot Gorilla called Charles who plays the bagpipes and whistles Dixie at the same time? No. Does that make it a reasonable belief?
Quote:
Neither is it something that can be executed when the people are in two different rooms, or even over a forum. Wink
Sorry, that is simply wrong. Cold reading can be done with people on different sides of the world. All that is needed is a channel of communication.
http://www.paranormal-encyclopedia.com/c/cold-reading/
Quote:
While it may be true that Greeks probably had it figured out, evidently, not everyone did.
Well, there are still people who think the world is flat. Does that mean they should be taken seriously?
Quote:
How is my quote wrong? Didn't people speak more in illustrations rather than educated explanations back in the day? I do know that schools weren't as commonplace for everyone as it much more is now. So, in order to for the quote to reach the understanding of all people across all generations, illustrations had to be used, it's also what languages developed from. Or do you think it was written exclusively for those with educational degrees? In which case, then yes, it would be fundamentally wrong.
It is simply wrong. The quote talks about a circle. What evidence do you have that the author actually meant to talk about a sphere and why do you think that people would have difficulty understanding a sphere? Surely all one has to do is look at an orange and say 'this is the shape of the world'. Why do you assume that the author meant something different to what he actually said? There is no evidence for that. The fact that the author talked about a circle means that is what he meant and to use this as evidence of some supernatural 'prediction' is bogus because it is wrong.
loremar
I remember one time when my friend suddenly utters the words "This jeepney will have flat tires at colon street right in front of the Colonade building". And it came true. Seems like evidence to me. I didn't think he was calculating, he just popped up those words from no where.
dan751
@Loremar: Sounds like your friend has a gift of clairvoyance.

@Bikerman: Why not call the 50 foot gorilla King Kong? A 50 foot gorilla, to any of our knowledge, doesn't exist. At least, not here on this earth. It is, however, possible, for King Kong to exist on another Earth-like planet somewhere in the vast universe. Or perhaps, in a parallel dimension, the many-worlds theory calls into play for that. Just because we can't prove it, doesn't make it simply impossible.

An example of my girlfriends psychic abilities:
A friend of mine, Donald, was visiting us for a little while, and he brought his girlfriend, Lilia, over. Without any prior information from Lilia, she asked my girlfriend very specific questions about Lilia's mother: "Does she think Lilia's mother and boyfriend are good for each other?" "How does Lilia's mother feel about her own life? and so on. Not suggestive questions, like cold reading involves. Wink
Every question was confirmed by Lilia with extreme accuracy. Only Lilia knew the answers to the questions prior, she was testing my girlfriend. How could my girlfriend give answers to questions about someone that is not in the room, knew nothing about and obviously knew nothing about? Is that what cold reading is? Doesn't seem like it to me based on that article you showed me..
Cold reading goes from general/suggestion to specific. The example I told, which I witnessed first hand, skipped suggestion and jumped right into specifics.

People who still believe the earth is flat, should be taken seriously in the manner of not disrespecting that they believe what they believe, even though that doesn't necessarily make them right.

Bikerman, please analyze this picture carefully: http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect16/full-20earth2.jpg
What does the earth look like to you in this picture? A circle or a sphere?
It looks like a circle to me, even though I know it's spherical in nature.
The Earth is round? Both a circle and a sphere are round. Perhaps the quote indicates the Earth is round in nature. Perhaps the words sphere or orb weren't in their vocabulary back in the day.
If I say: "That's quite an ass" Am I referring to the dictionary definition of "donkey", somebody's bottom, or someone who is acting like an idiot? Point being, there are many words that are used interchangeably.
Bikerman
Nonono.
Quote:
People who still believe the earth is flat, should be taken seriously in the manner of not disrespecting that they believe what they believe, even though that doesn't necessarily make them right.
Nonsense, they should be ridiculed.
'Respect' means hold in high regard, esteem, defer to. If you seriously hold an idiotic delusion in high esteem...well words fail me...Chuck 500 years of science out of the window, why not. Forget about the fact that you rely totally on it, and encourage some no-mark moron to undermine basic logic, never mind science.

The anecdotes about your girlfriend are wasted on me I'm afraid. I don't have faith, and therefore I don't take second hand stories seriously. I'm not accusing you of lying, by the way, but unless I had some way to verify it I wouldn't believe ANYONE who relates paranormal anecdotes - the world is full of them, from abductees to people who talk to the martians.

You really should drop this bible prediction nonsense. Are you seriously saying that God could be fooled into thinking a sphere was a circle? it is just WRONG.
In other parts of the bible you will see the earth described in various ways which are ALL wrong.
Bear in mind that people KNEW that the earth was spherical around 500BCE.
Quote:
from the four corners of the earth..." Isa 11:12.
A sphere doesn't have corners.
Quote:
into an exceeding high mountain, and shows him all the kingdoms of the world,.." Matthew and Luke
Impossible unless the world was flat.
Quote:
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,..." Isaiah 40:22.
'Above' makes no sense for a sphere. It only makes sense if the text means what it says - a flat disk.
Now Matthew and Luke were written 600 years or more after the Greeks....so what is the excuse? Not only can they not predict anything, they can't even write what was known correctly....
dan751
Bikerman: Sounds to me like you're getting quite upset over the matter. I won't back down from what I know and believe, and evidently, neither will you. You're getting upset over an entire thread that has nothing to do with science or facts, so why are you even in here? I'm confused by you.
Are you suggesting that I ridicule you for not believing in psychic abilities and that you should ridicule me believing in them (whilst you not)?
Know this, we SHOULD hold other people in high esteem, because they are human beings, just like you, just like me. No human is better than another. And as such everyone is entitled to their own thoughts. Thus is dawned the freedom of speech, freedom of religion and all that jazz. I'm not saying they are right, I'm saying they are entitled to their own opinion, right or wrong. That is what I mean by respect.
Forgive me for pointing this out, evidence of your arguments suggest you're a very judgmental person. Again, that's just my opinion.

I haven't asked my girlfriend to exercise her abilities to prove to you, nor have I done so myself with mine. Of your beliefs, it would be a waste of energy from her or myself.

God made the spherical Earth, and cannot be fooled. He knows the Earth inside and out. I always have known this. The Bible is very illustrative, I must point out. "From the four corners of the Earth.." In other words, perhaps, out of nowhere, or places that we don't know where are? I agree that spheres have no corners, so then what could that text have been referring to? I believe that God is the one who authored the Bible, and the writers were Divinely inspired penmen. Therefore, God knows where these "four corners" are, we don't. Do you?

I can hang a sphere from my Christmas tree by a fishing line, and spatially speaking, the star at the top is above the sphere. The earth is suspended in space, we look up to the stars, the stars are "above" us, illustratively speaking, so to God oversees the Earth and universe.
Bikerman
dan751 wrote:
Bikerman: Sounds to me like you're getting quite upset over the matter. I won't back down from what I know and believe, and evidently, neither will you. You're getting upset over an entire thread that has nothing to do with science or facts, so why are you even in here? I'm confused by you.
Upset? No not at all, though I do get slightly irritated when people call for 'respect' for the idiotic. It cheapens the whole concept. If you respect idiots then the respect you have for people worthy of it is cheapened - they may as well be just one more idiot.
Quote:
Know this, we SHOULD hold other people in high esteem, because they are human beings, just like you, just like me. No human is better than another. And as such everyone is entitled to their own thoughts. Thus is dawned the freedom of speech, freedom of religion and all that jazz. I'm not saying they are right, I'm saying they are entitled to their own opinion, right or wrong. That is what I mean by respect.
You are confused and I'll prove it.
Do you respect paedophiles? Do you respect their right to express themselves as human beings (they are made like that, after all, so they are just as good as you)?
Do you respect Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot? They were just as good as you so you must respect them.

It is a nonsense argument and it has NOTHING to do with freedom of expression.
What you SHOULD respect is people's right to believe and express what they like. That doesn't mean you should respect what they say or believe, just their right to do so.
Quote:
Forgive me for pointing this out, evidence of your arguments suggest you're a very judgmental person. Again, that's just my opinion.
Nope, I rarely judge people, only what they say.
Quote:
I haven't asked my girlfriend to exercise her abilities to prove to you, nor have I done so myself with mine. Of your beliefs, it would be a waste of energy from her or myself.
Well, I offered to set up an experiment and place a nice little wager so I think this 'waste of energy' is just a cop out I'm afraid.
Quote:
God made the spherical Earth, and cannot be fooled. He knows the Earth inside and out. I always have known this. The Bible is very illustrative, I must point out. "From the four corners of the Earth.." In other words, perhaps, out of nowhere, or places that we don't know where are? I agree that spheres have no corners, so then what could that text have been referring to? I believe that God is the one who authored the Bible, and the writers were Divinely inspired penmen. Therefore, God knows where these "four corners" are, we don't. Do you?
LOL....spherical reasoning methinks....like circular reasoning but worse. The bible is wrong, but God can't be wrong, so the bible is right and science is wrong. ROFLMAO.
Quote:
I can hang a sphere from my Christmas tree by a fishing line, and spatially speaking, the star at the top is above the sphere. The earth is suspended in space, we look up to the stars, the stars are "above" us, illustratively speaking, so to God oversees the Earth and universe.
Misconception again. On earth 'top' is decided by gravity. If you did the same in australia then top would be bottom and bottom would be top. Relative descriptions like bottom and top have no meaning when looking at the earth as a whole.
dan751
@Bikerman: You're still here? I thought I told you to take your scientific evidence from this thread, as science facts and paranormal (psychic abilities in this case) don't mix.
My girlfriend has been keeping up with the discussion. She's disappointed with your offer (among other things) and therefore, has declined. When the time is right, you'll know.
And yes, you are very judgmental. You are effectively judging people because their opinions affect their moral judgement, their character, and ultimately their actions. And honestly, using terms such as ROFLMAO, especially on a deep subject, just proves immaturity.
Again, I implore you to take your science back to the appropriate forum. I'm sure I speak for others along with myself when I say I grow tired of you constantly bashing other people's beliefs.
loremar
It's a faith forum, the devil is just trying to preach his faith.
deanhills
dan751 wrote:
Again, I implore you to take your science back to the appropriate forum. I'm sure I speak for others along with myself when I say I grow tired of you constantly bashing other people's beliefs.
Right on! Except you've just said it much better than any of us have so far.

I totally believe that we are all connected, and that some of us are more able to channel into this connection than others because they are more into the intuitive parts of themselves. If one says someone has green fingers for example, why is it that one person who tends a garden and does X, Y, Z exactly the same as the other person, have different results? A neighbour of mine would have the equivalent of a meditation session when he gets home after a day's hard work being completely focused on his garden, but in a very relaxed way. Almost as though he is in communication with all of the plants. He'd sit down in the garden, then get up and do a little bit of this, then sit down check things out and then do a little of that and the other. Being completely in sync with all of the plants. I do think plants have the ability to communicate. And so do animals.

I also believe that quite a large part of expressing art has to do with being in sync with the intuitive parts of ourselves. Where one has to turn off the thinking machinery and just completely surrender.
Bikerman
dan751 wrote:
@Bikerman: You're still here? I thought I told you to take your scientific evidence from this thread, as science facts and paranormal (psychic abilities in this case) don't mix.
I know - that is the problem.
Quote:
My girlfriend has been keeping up with the discussion. She's disappointed with your offer (among other things) and therefore, has declined. When the time is right, you'll know.
I seriously doubt it.
Quote:
And yes, you are very judgmental. You are effectively judging people because their opinions affect their moral judgement, their character, and ultimately their actions.
I notice you avoid the 'non science' questions I asked. Do you respect paedophiles? Stalin? Hitler?
Quote:
And honestly, using terms such as ROFLMAO, especially on a deep subject, just proves immaturity.
It isn't a deep subject, that's the whole point.
Quote:
Again, I implore you to take your science back to the appropriate forum. I'm sure I speak for others along with myself when I say I grow tired of you constantly bashing other people's beliefs.
I haven't quoted any science, just simple logic.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
Quote:
And honestly, using terms such as ROFLMAO, especially on a deep subject, just proves immaturity.
It isn't a deep subject, that's the whole point.
I thought that was the reason that we have the Faith forum, so that those that do look on this subject as serious can discuss it without someone shooting holes in it and mocking it to death.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
I thought that was the reason that we have the Faith forum, so that those that do look on this subject as serious can discuss it without someone shooting holes in it and mocking it to death.


I do think that this is a valid point.
Due to the restrictions of this forum, the discussion about if these abilities exist at all should probably be taken to a different thread.
Bikerman
OK....I'm not sure I agree completely, but I'll defer.

I'll just point out, before I leave, that this must therefore apply to any beliefs. So if someone pops up and starts a thread that says other offensive illogical things then you mustn't challenge the premise. If the thread says that says theism is the result of a diseased brain,* then you must accept the premise or not post.**

* Relax, I wouldn't do so, because I am constrained by my logical/scientific ethics.
**and I know this may be difficult for some to believe, but this sort of discussion (anti-science woo-woo) is equally offensive to some of us.
moobear
@Bikerman
Hello there, I am dan751's girlfriend, the one who he has been making references to throughout this thread, so to you and everyone else a friendly hello. Very Happy I had to say something as I've seen your posts and Dan and myself have been talking about them quite regularly, as it helps us grow spiritually. As Dan has mentioned, yes I have declined the 1000 pound offer even though you were skeptical I was even informed. The reason is this, you are purely a skeptic and no matter what I may say to you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in psychics will always find a loophole somehow. You will probably say you're proving me wrong, and if that's your belief then I have no reason to judge you OR your opinions. As long as your happy with your opinions, and happy with your life then I am happy for you. I just hope you'll be more positive at some point, because a little optimism never hurt anyone. Laughing


Many peace and blessings to all of you reading this thread, you have served me many hours of enjoyment and thinking.

xo
deanhills
moobear wrote:

Many peace and blessings to all of you reading this thread, you have served me many hours of enjoyment and thinking.

xo
Same to you moobear. Great honour to meet you. Blessings to you and Dan too for the major event. Very Happy

dan751
@deanhills:
Thanks a lot! We really appreciate. Smile She appreciates the greetings also. Although I could be wrong, she probably won't be a very active member, she more or less had a few words to say directly to the Bikerman. But nevertheless, I could be wrong.

So, psychic experiences anyone? Smile
deanhills
I often wonder whether psychic abilities are physically inherited. For example my brother in law and his family for generations have excelled in math. This could be connected up with the design of their brains. So perhaps that part of the brain that is connected with psychic abilities could also be something that is inherited and passed on to the next generation. Potentially all of us could be either a mathematical genius or psychic if we could find the key to stimulating those areas of the brain that affect those capabilities?
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
I often wonder whether psychic abilities are physically inherited. For example my brother in law and his family for generations have excelled in math. This could be connected up with the design of their brains. So perhaps that part of the brain that is connected with psychic abilities could also be something that is inherited and passed on to the next generation. Potentially all of us could be either a mathematical genius or psychic if we could find the key to stimulating those areas of the brain that affect those capabilities?

Probably has more to do with the way one is raised, rather than genetics.

DNA isn't the only way things are passed from parent to child, particularly in the area of mental development.
Bikerman
moobear wrote:
@Bikerman
Hello there, I am dan751's girlfriend, the one who he has been making references to throughout this thread, so to you and everyone else a friendly hello. Very Happy I had to say something as I've seen your posts and Dan and myself have been talking about them quite regularly, as it helps us grow spiritually. As Dan has mentioned, yes I have declined the 1000 pound offer even though you were skeptical I was even informed. The reason is this, you are purely a skeptic and no matter what I may say to you, or anyone else who doesn't believe in psychics will always find a loophole somehow. You will probably say you're proving me wrong, and if that's your belief then I have no reason to judge you OR your opinions. As long as your happy with your opinions, and happy with your life then I am happy for you. I just hope you'll be more positive at some point, because a little optimism never hurt anyone. Laughing


Many peace and blessings to all of you reading this thread, you have served me many hours of enjoyment and thinking.

xo

Well, since you write so nicely it would be churlish not to respond.
With regard to the charge of being a sceptic - guilty. Open-minded scepticism is, I believe, the correct way to view any claim. (That is not the same as cynicism btw). There is a shorthand way to summarise my attitude - extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

With regard to 'finding a loophole' - not guilty. In any trial the conditions are set beforehand. You either meet the conditions - in which case you win - or you don't - in which case you don't. I could not change the conditions after they were agreed and nor would I seek to do so. There are very well established tests for this sort of thing and my own opinions would have absolutely no bearing on the outcome.
Finally, with regard to being 'positive' - I'm not sure what that means. If it means believing paranormal claims without evidence then I don't really think that is 'positive' because it leaves you open to manipulation by anyone who would wish to do so. Indeed we see this all the time. Turn to any religious channel on the TV and you will see evangelists urging people to send money in order to do 'God's work'. Why an omnipotent entity would need money is never really explained.

I don't wish you any ill - indeed I am prepared to accept that you really believe you have psychic powers. I have a friend who believes he can predict future events, and we remain friends despite my disbelief of his 'abilities'.
moobear
@Bikerman

I sincerely appreciate your post. Smile It put further insight in what you were hoping to obtain in your offer, but I still remain unwilling to participate for my own personal reasons. At what I mean for you to be more positive in your life, not necessarily to change your views on life or your opinions but simply to see more of a "glass half full" approach, but i respect realists as which this is what you seem to be. I just happen to be one of the rare "if someone has one sip of water left in his glass, I would tell him/her they should be lucky to at least have a sip". Silly I know, but such is who I am.

@ Deanhills

Psychic powers in my opinion are both genetic as well as how you were raised. From my research as well as my own personal belief, we are born psychic and weather this continues later on in life depends on how your parents brought you up. If you are encouraged to have invisible friends, play make belief, etc it actually strengthens and sustains your powers. As well, you can "bring them back" so to speak later in life in some respects. Some call this simply intuition, I call it the third eye. Laughing

As for psychics powers in families, my family is a prime example. I was brought up strict Lutheran but my grandmother before she converted when she met my grandfather, used to do palm readings and tea readings with surprising accuracy. She always knows a little more than the average folk, and same with my mother. Razz

As well.. an honour to meet you as well Deanhills and thank you for your congratulations, much appreciated. Very Happy

Peace and blessings.
xo
LittleBlackKitten
I am ashamed of the lot of you. Look at yourselves; arguing like school children over what playing card is the best and why. I am gravely disrespected by the arguing and the gnashing that's going on in this topic, as if it's over in P and R, wide open for argument and pointless debate.

Chris, I am ashamed of you. You're a MODERATOR, supposed to UPHOLD the rules, not break them.

As this was my topic, please LOCK this embarrassment.
Bikerman
Huh? All I did was inject a note of realism by proposing a test....I don't think that is anything to be ashamed of...
LittleBlackKitten
I'm not going to argue about it. Please lock this thread before another argument breaks out...
Bikerman
Sorry, no can do. I don't moderate here. If I did lock the thread then I have no doubt that I would soon be accused of breaking my word...I an only suggest that you pm ocalhoun who may oblige...
dan751
LittleBlackKitten wrote:
I am ashamed of the lot of you. Look at yourselves; arguing like school children over what playing card is the best and why. I am gravely disrespected by the arguing and the gnashing that's going on in this topic.

Have you not noticed? My girlfriend has made some rather peaceful and friendly comments to this discussion.
http://www.frihost.com/forums/vp-1039715.html#1039715

I understand how you could be disappointed in the heat of the debate. However, ocalhoun, did ask Bikerman to defer from the heat of the debate as it was getting out of control and the rest of us just wanted it to go back to a normal open discussion.
If you haven't read so, please do so. Otherwise, please defer as well. We want any bashing to stop.

//MODERATOR COMMENT:
If anyone doesn't have anything to say about the original topic and topics related within, please DO NOT COMMENT.
If you have any bashing or wish to heat the discussion, then DEFER IMMEDIATELY.
dan751
What would a real psychic be like?
This is what I believe.

True psychics really don't care about this amendment or any similar laws. They're not concerned about what the governments do in that respects, because they believe there are much bigger things to worry about than the things that mainstream society/governments are. Therefore, they're not concerned about world media, popularity or wealth. Having that said, they don't advertise themselves. Neither do they use any tools such crystal balls, tarot cards, crystals or anything of the like. They don't ask payment for their services, rather, just wishes the improvement in the lives of those they interact with. Furthermore, if a skeptic does manage to seek them out, the true psychic will know whether they have personally good or bad intentions (This doesn't mean that the true psychics know what the intentions are, but at the very least, if they're positive or negative). If they have bad intentions, they'll be turned away.
moobear
I do understand that this thread was kind of out of hand. However; some of us are trying to proceed with the conversation. If you {little black kitten} don't want to see the procession of the conversation just don't look, simple as that (?) Very Happy I could be wrong as I am quite new here, so please excuse my naivety. I do not wish for any aggression. xo
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
deanhills wrote:
I often wonder whether psychic abilities are physically inherited. For example my brother in law and his family for generations have excelled in math. This could be connected up with the design of their brains. So perhaps that part of the brain that is connected with psychic abilities could also be something that is inherited and passed on to the next generation. Potentially all of us could be either a mathematical genius or psychic if we could find the key to stimulating those areas of the brain that affect those capabilities?

Probably has more to do with the way one is raised, rather than genetics.

DNA isn't the only way things are passed from parent to child, particularly in the area of mental development.
I'm not so sure I can agree. My sister is a single parent. Her husband passed away when the children were babies. His side of the family was quite genius in mathematical abilities, and I'm speaking here of really natural talent being miles ahead of any other children in the class without even being aware off it. For some or other reason that part of the family refused to have anything to do with my sister after her husband's passing. The family on my sister's side can do basic math, but it's an acquired learning. Not even close. My sister is more on the arts side of things and is a qualified teacher. She teaches languages. All three of her children turned into literally math geniuses. Just like their father and his family. There has to be something in the way the brain is constructed that is inherited. I also think being psychic can be a physical inheritance in the same way. Something to do with the temporal lobes of the brains for example to the equivalent of really extra sensitive antennae.

moobear wrote:
@ Deanhills Psychic powers in my opinion are both genetic as well as how you were raised. From my research as well as my own personal belief, we are born psychic and weather this continues later on in life depends on how your parents brought you up. If you are encouraged to have invisible friends, play make belief, etc it actually strengthens and sustains your powers. As well, you can "bring them back" so to speak later in life in some respects. Some call this simply intuition, I call it the third eye. Laughing
I completely agree with you on this one too. Mozart must have been completely in tune with his intuition. Having been able to write music directly from his head without the assistance of a piano. Very Happy
deanhills
dan751 wrote:
What would a real psychic be like?
This is what I believe.

True psychics really don't care about this amendment or any similar laws. They're not concerned about what the governments do in that respects, because they believe there are much bigger things to worry about than the things that mainstream society/governments are. Therefore, they're not concerned about world media, popularity or wealth. Having that said, they don't advertise themselves. Neither do they use any tools such crystal balls, tarot cards, crystals or anything of the like. They don't ask payment for their services, rather, just wishes the improvement in the lives of those they interact with. Furthermore, if a skeptic does manage to seek them out, the true psychic will know whether they have personally good or bad intentions (This doesn't mean that the true psychics know what the intentions are, but at the very least, if they're positive or negative). If they have bad intentions, they'll be turned away.

Do you think Mozart was psychic? He was completely into his music, did not care about Government or laws. And he could write his music without the assistance of a piano directly from his head. Particularly meaningful was when Mozart directed this Requiem from his Deathbed:

dan751
@deanhills:
Hmm.... That's a very interesting thought. Never considered it before.
He obviously had to have been quite an old soul if he was able to write symphonies at 4 years old. If that is the case, he probably had some psychic abilities, though, they most likely never would've been advertised. As to what psychics abilities he probably had, we most likely can only speculate and wonder.
deanhills
Dan, I think it is the way the brain is constructed together with DNA. This guy is higly sensitive in the artistic part of the brain and is able to source his talent without having to think about it. There is no robot stops in between. Just an incredible free flow. I'm sure there must be math guys like that too. They have the math ability, but there is also the extra sensitivity for a free flow of math capability or arithmetic capability of mentally doing complicated sums withou the assistance of a calculator. They don't have to stop and think, it just flows naturally.
Very Happy
GuidanceReader
It's the way the discussions like this seem to go, that I find it difficult to write about anything I actually find interesting in the frihost forums. Instead I find pointless, 'safe' posts to try and keep my posts up.

I hate to admit it - but I am scared of starting discussions I like to talk about, because I am scared of Bikerman - yet isn't he supposed to be a moderator? I thought the moderators were here to help encouraged discussion on the forums? To help keep them alive.

With the fact that I feel at risk of being ostracised for my personal beliefs if I discuss them, if it weren't for the great hosting that frihost offers, I wouldn't be here.
watersoul
GuidanceReader wrote:
It's the way the discussions like this seem to go, that I find it difficult to write about anything I actually find interesting in the frihost forums. Instead I find pointless, 'safe' posts to try and keep my posts up.

I hate to admit it - but I am scared of starting discussions I like to talk about, because I am scared of Bikerman - yet isn't he supposed to be a moderator? I thought the moderators were here to help encouraged discussion on the forums? To help keep them alive.

With the fact that I feel at risk of being ostracised for my personal beliefs if I discuss them, if it weren't for the great hosting that frihost offers, I wouldn't be here.

Ah, don't hold back if you have something to contribute, the Faith forum was created as a place to share belief without 'nonsense' assertions being shot your way.
I'm obviously a skeptic in everything from ghosts to gods, but I respect the right for anyone to have any faith, it's only when it's presented as fact that I ever get involved.
I'd be interested in reading your contributions even if I do not share the sentiment, and as it's the Faith forum no-one is allowed to shoot it down in the logic driven manner found at Phil & Rel.
Ankhanu
watersoul wrote:
GuidanceReader wrote:
It's the way the discussions like this seem to go, that I find it difficult to write about anything I actually find interesting in the frihost forums. Instead I find pointless, 'safe' posts to try and keep my posts up.

I hate to admit it - but I am scared of starting discussions I like to talk about, because I am scared of Bikerman - yet isn't he supposed to be a moderator? I thought the moderators were here to help encouraged discussion on the forums? To help keep them alive.

With the fact that I feel at risk of being ostracised for my personal beliefs if I discuss them, if it weren't for the great hosting that frihost offers, I wouldn't be here.

Ah, don't hold back if you have something to contribute, the Faith forum was created as a place to share belief without 'nonsense' assertions being shot your way.
I'm obviously a skeptic in everything from ghosts to gods, but I respect the right for anyone to have any faith, it's only when it's presented as fact that I ever get involved.
I'd be interested in reading your contributions even if I do not share the sentiment, and as it's the Faith forum no-one is allowed to shoot it down in the logic driven manner found at Phil & Rel.

Ditto.
Also, quite some time ago, Bikerman voluntarily agreed to step out of discussion in the Faith forum, so, he won't be weighing in Razz
deanhills
I totally understand where you are coming from GuidanceReader. I've learned over the years that if things don't work out around here, there are other Frihost Forums available where one could enjoy oneself. For example, you could start your own blog categories in the Blog Forum and may be able to build your own discussions in a relatively safer area of the Board. The Blog Section of the Board has become one of my favourite areas to post as well as comment on other members' blog posts.

As per Bondings' Official Blog quoted below, the idea of the Faith Forum was that those who preferred rigorous debate of facts would stick with the Phil&Rel forum, and they would leave the Faith Forum for people to present their personal beliefs, including religion, atheism and other spiritual topics without confrontational type debate. The OP is supposed to set the direction for the thread. If you say you believe in astral traveling, then you should be able to say so without being tackled to the ground. Someone could question you about how it works, but not shoot it down. On the opposite side of the spectrum, if you thought psychics were a farce, you could start a thread on a topic like that too, and those believing in psychics should then allow you to pursue your anti-subject similarly.

Here is how Bondings introduced the Faith Forum to us. Dan751 tried to follow that for the very short period of his return as Moderator, however most of the discussions that he started couldn't get past the point of proving whether the subject of the discussion was real:
Bondings wrote:
The second forum is the Faith forum. This forum is completely new. It is about religious discussion (including atheism). However it is restricted to the opinions/views of the first post of a topic, meaning that no heavy discussions and arguments are allowed. Of course questions, similar views and some remarks are allowed, otherwise there would be no discussion left. So if you post (in a new topic) that you are a devout Christian and believe in the bible, a reply saying that the bible is a fiction book, god doesn't exist and similar things won't be allowed. On the other hand, if someone creates a topic that states that he/she doesn't believe in god, a response that god does exist and you should pray and read the bible, is not allowed.
Source

I'm hoping we could get past that, as I stopped posting in the Faith Forum for a long while because of that reason. I'm definitely interested in subjects like lucid dreaming and want to learn more about topics that there is no scientific proof for. However in an environment that is free of condescending remarks and negative trolling. In the meanwhile I haven't given up hope that Dan751 or someone similar may turn the Faith Forum into what we had hoped it would be. For now I'm mostly lurking in both Forums and if someone like you should make a post like you've made in the thread about astral traveling, I'll definitely participate. Thanks for giving it a shot.
GuidanceReader
Thank you, these last few posts do give me a bit more confidence and I do hope that I can discuss my outlandish beliefs *wink* Laughing Laughing Wink
Related topics
flat feet = no army?
Psychic!
Can you be psychic?
ghosts are they real??
Psychic-ness
Supernatural
2012
New Forum Idea: Paranormal & Occult?
the USA executed Japanese torturers for waterboarding
Faith Schools
Symphonism. My religion-in-progress.
Thanks for setting up the faith forum
Sally Morgan TV Psychic
Astral Projection
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Faith

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.