| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/21/2008 04:56:28 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Pot, Kettle, Black?? All you have done throughout this thread is promote Randi and his million dollar publicity campaign. [...]
You haven't presented a single personal comment, merely stating that people here can get a million dollars by taking his test...devised by Randi...so no-one will ever pass it cos he sets the rules! |
1) You don't seem to have read this thread. I made many other arguments, did some math and even told a personal story. So before attacking me it would be nice of you to at least read the thread. Discussing is difficult if people don't read what others write.
2) No, Randi does not set the rules. They are agreed upon together. You can make the rules yourself if you want to. If they meet certain very basic and simple conditions they'll be accepted. Watch the video I posted before, it's really simple to earn a million dollars. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:01:08 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by karmat:
This thread is the first time I've ever heard about him.
He likes long book titles, doesn't he? |
Both are not very good arguments against him. |
Didn't realize I was arguing against him. Sorry. I was just making a couple of observations. |
Ok. Would you mind sharing your opinion then? |
I would mind greatly, but thank you for asking. |
No problem. Why are you here then? |
Mainly because I can.
Secondly, it's one of my "jobs."
But also because I like to read others' perspectives on things, whether I agree or not. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:02:05 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Pot, Kettle, Black?? All you have done throughout this thread is promote Randi and his million dollar publicity campaign. [...]
You haven't presented a single personal comment, merely stating that people here can get a million dollars by taking his test...devised by Randi...so no-one will ever pass it cos he sets the rules! |
1) You don't seem to have read this thread. I made many other arguments, did some math and even told a personal story. So before attacking me it would be nice of you to at least read the thread. Discussing is difficult if people don't read what others write.
2) No, Randi does not set the rules. They are agreed upon together. You can make the rules yourself if you want to. If they meet certain very basic and simple conditions they'll be accepted. Watch the video I posted before, it's really simple to earn a million dollars. |
Wow, promotion time again!
Have you ever done any paranormal research? Ever researched the Crop Formations in UK? Carefully researched UFO reports? No? I have. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:09:51 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by karmat:
This thread is the first time I've ever heard about him.
He likes long book titles, doesn't he? |
Both are not very good arguments against him. |
Are you his agent?? Or is it just commission based on the million dollar deal?? |
This contributes even less to the discussion. Why don't you provide some meaningful arguments? |
Pot, Kettle, Black?? All you have done throughout this thread is promote Randi and his million dollar publicity campaign. I first heard this years ago and he has made a fortune out of being a skeptic, regardless of any evidence. He is a self proclaimed expert in every field of the paranormal. If anyone asks a question or makes a statement on anything that cannot be readily proven, he is there on TV announcing it is all faked or fruadulent.
All you are doing here is using him as a foil for your so called debate on sixth sense. You haven't presented a single personal comment, merely stating that people here can get a million dollars by taking his test...devised by Randi...so no-one will ever pass it cos he sets the rules!
You can use scientific reports to back up your claims, but science doesn't know everything and can't explain the half it thinks it knows. |
That has to be one of the most immensely unintentionally ironic statements I have ever heard. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:09:59 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Well, I am glad that question has been solved. Now after 30+ years of paranormal and UFO research, I can quit it all and get back reality? Or is it reality or just your imagination?? |
And by "research" you mean what, exactly... |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:12:54 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Pot, Kettle, Black?? All you have done throughout this thread is promote Randi and his million dollar publicity campaign. [...]
You haven't presented a single personal comment, merely stating that people here can get a million dollars by taking his test...devised by Randi...so no-one will ever pass it cos he sets the rules! |
1) You don't seem to have read this thread. I made many other arguments, did some math and even told a personal story. So before attacking me it would be nice of you to at least read the thread. Discussing is difficult if people don't read what others write.
2) No, Randi does not set the rules. They are agreed upon together. You can make the rules yourself if you want to. If they meet certain very basic and simple conditions they'll be accepted. Watch the video I posted before, it's really simple to earn a million dollars. |
Wow, promotion time again!
Have you ever done any paranormal research? Ever researched the Crop Formations in UK? Carefully researched UFO reports? No? I have. |
You made a couple of assumptions about me and the challenge above although the facts were readily available to you in this thread. You claimed
- that I didn't do anything but promote Randi's challenge,
- that I didn't present a single personal comment,
- that Randi makes the rules so that nobody could ever pass.
All three were wrong. And to rescue your credibility you add a fourth wrong assumption? Impressive.
Do you know the documentary "Circlemakers"? Start here: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgfuUwM4xQQ
And please tell us about your research and your conclusions. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:30:03 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
Pot, Kettle, Black?? All you have done throughout this thread is promote Randi and his million dollar publicity campaign. [...]
You haven't presented a single personal comment, merely stating that people here can get a million dollars by taking his test...devised by Randi...so no-one will ever pass it cos he sets the rules! |
1) You don't seem to have read this thread. I made many other arguments, did some math and even told a personal story. So before attacking me it would be nice of you to at least read the thread. Discussing is difficult if people don't read what others write.
2) No, Randi does not set the rules. They are agreed upon together. You can make the rules yourself if you want to. If they meet certain very basic and simple conditions they'll be accepted. Watch the video I posted before, it's really simple to earn a million dollars. |
Wow, promotion time again!
Have you ever done any paranormal research? Ever researched the Crop Formations in UK? Carefully researched UFO reports? No? I have. |
You made a couple of assumptions about me and the challenge above although the facts were readily available to you in this thread. You claimed
- that I didn't do anything but promote Randi's challenge,
- that I didn't present a single personal comment,
- that Randi makes the rules so that nobody could ever pass.
All three were wrong. And to rescue your credibility you add a fourth wrong assumption? Impressive.
Do you know the documentary "Circlemakers"? Start here: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgfuUwM4xQQ
And please tell us about your research and your conclusions. |
I know the documentary, in fact I know most of the circlemakers. I have known them since 1993! Before you call on youtube, rather than use personal information, get the facts about the subject. As for your rather futile attempt to get me to disclose my research, it is on going and has been for 30+ years. I don't jump to conclusions, I research. I don't have preformed opinions about these subjects. If I reach a conclusion, you can read the book! |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:35:57 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
I agree with your statement:) During 1994 I began having experiences with dreams, premontions etc. I also went through of period where I was producing poems without being aware of their content or meaning. I would be working on the computer and suddenly open the Word Processor programme and write one, two or three poems straight off, then return to what I had been doing. None were edited and many were not even read until months later. This went on for over 4 years, then they stopped.
During the dreams phase, I kept a journal of them and also notes from my spirit guide. I was in contact with a friend in Canada and on more than one occasion one of my dreams would relate to later events she would mention during phone calls. |
Well, this is sufficiently vague as to not back yourself into any corners that you might have a hard time extricating yourself from. Also, we only have your personal, unverified claims as evidence. But let's set that aside . . .
How, exactly is writing bad poetry (or even good poetry) off the top of your head any sort of proof of supernatural phenomenon. What makes you think these poems were coming from any place other than your own noggin? And what evidence do you have that they did indeed have any sort of supernatural origin.
I'm just say'n... |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:37:38 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
As for your rather futile attempt to get me to disclose my research, it is on going and has been for 30+ years. I don't jump to conclusions, I research. I don't have preformed opinions about these subjects. If I reach a conclusion, you can read the book! |
So... you're the authority, because you've done all this research. But you won't tell us what it is.
Should we just use our sixth sense to know that you're not full of bull@#$%? |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:40:00 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
I know the documentary, in fact I know most of the circlemakers. I have known them since 1993! Before you call on youtube, rather than use personal information, get the facts about the subject. As for your rather futile attempt to get me to disclose my research, it is on going and has been for 30+ years. I don't jump to conclusions, I research. I don't have preformed opinions about these subjects. If I reach a conclusion, you can read the book! |
My curiosity is through the roof, I'm telling you. Maybe a sneak peek? Some preliminary results? Or maybe you could tell us about your methodology and about the questions you are trying to answer. 30 years. That must be a most interesting book. I can't wait. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 05:53:31 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SteveJ:
I know the documentary, in fact I know most of the circlemakers. I have known them since 1993! Before you call on youtube, rather than use personal information, get the facts about the subject. As for your rather futile attempt to get me to disclose my research, it is on going and has been for 30+ years. I don't jump to conclusions, I research. I don't have preformed opinions about these subjects. If I reach a conclusion, you can read the book! |
My curiosity is through the roof, I'm telling you. Maybe a sneak peek? Some preliminary results? Or maybe you could tell us about your methodology and about the questions you are trying to answer. 30 years. That must be a most interesting book. I can't wait. |
Rob Irving and Adrian Dexter were known circlemakers. Rob Irving is a photographer and artist. In 1993 he claimed he, and the Wessex Hoaxers were responsible for many of the current crop circles that year. However, even he admitted at the time that he couldn't explain who made the other formations, they were beyond his abilities? Now, he is a crop circle researcher? Has he seen the light?
Dr Levengood, as fellow countryman of yours has spent many years doing research on crop formations and the effects on crops. Check him out? Does a respected scientist risk his reputation on a whim? It goes on and on.
My methodology is to gather the initial reports then follow up with witness reports, and if possible photographic evidence. I have contacts who can verify radar responses for UFO reports, and others in different fields of the paranormal. However, I am not prepared to name them or go into more detail on an open site.
I have written many articles and appeared on national TV regarding these topics. So, after 30+ years I have a large database and numerous witness accounts but even I would not dare to make a proclamation on any of the topics in this thread, merely to say that only a fool would dismiss these stories as imagination. There is a lot we do not know or even comprehend yet. It pays to keep an open mind. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 06:08:16 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by SteveJ:
. . . and others in different fields of the paranormal. However, I am not prepared to name them or go into more detail on an open site. |
"in different fields of the paranormal" = credulous quacks. You can certainly legitimately investigate so-called "paranormal" phenomenon and do it in a verifiable and credible manner. Many people do this. (Note that none of these people have ever found evidence that something outside the realm of science is occurring.) But people who identify themselves as paranormal researchers are almost assuredly either self-deluded quacks or con artists.
Originally posted by SteveJ:
I have written many articles and appeared on national TV regarding these topics. So, after 30+ years I have a large database and numerous witness accounts. . . |
You know, right, that eyewitness accounts have been shown over and over again to be the least reliable form of evidence?
Originally posted by SteveJ:
. . . but even I would not dare to make a proclamation on any of the topics in this thread, merely to say that only a fool would dismiss these stories as imagination. There is a lot we do not know or even comprehend yet. It pays to keep an open mind. |
They are not necessarily being dismissed as imagination, but similarly, only the willfully ignorant and doggedly credulous would leap to the conclusion that whatever is going on it is - against all credible evidence - something "paranormal." |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 07:13:49 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
So why don't they go for the million? It's a lot of money.
One single person would suffice to prove that something paranormal exists. One person. It doesn't happen.
And maybe your ability is uncontrollable and unpredictable because it simply doesn't exist and it's all just random coincidences that you attribute to something in hindsight. |
Somewhere I read Randi's contract with respect to the demonstration. If you demo something that is paranormal, you have to prove it couldn't have been done in any other manner. Boy that would be hard to prove. I didn't think he had much to worry about anyways, but with that in the contract it's safe as safe could be.
On the other hand there have been too many occasions of identical twins that seemed to communicate their predicaments over large distances. I think telepathy will one day be found to be a real phenomena. Completely explainable by physics we've not yet explored. Maybe it hides inside Heisenberg's uncertainty. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 07:16:07 PM · #114 |
Somehow this keeps coming back to "paranormal" and "supernatural". In the broad sense that it's not scientifically pinpointed and explained, I guess it is paranormal. But as for it being forever unexplainable, I don't agree.
Can anyone tell me why it's so impossible, given what science knows and still has to learn about the human brain, that we may have a vestigal sense that has been mostly lost through evolution?
I said this already but haven't seen any real answer. Why, just because coincidence MAY explain it, is that the ONLY possible explanation? |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 07:51:19 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Somewhere I read Randi's contract with respect to the demonstration. If you demo something that is paranormal, you have to prove it couldn't have been done in any other manner. Boy that would be hard to prove. I didn't think he had much to worry about anyways, but with that in the contract it's safe as safe could be. |
This is simply not true. Read my comments above and watch the video I posted which shows what a preliminary test might look like. You just have to beat the odds convincingly.
Originally posted by fir3bird:
On the other hand there have been too many occasions of identical twins that seemed to communicate their predicaments over large distances. I think telepathy will one day be found to be a real phenomena. Completely explainable by physics we've not yet explored. Maybe it hides inside Heisenberg's uncertainty. |
The phenomenon with the twins would be very easy to test and prove. It doesn't happen. I therefore have to assume it's just random coincidences, confirmation bias, etc. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 07:57:23 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Why, just because coincidence MAY explain it, is that the ONLY possible explanation? |
First: Coincidence does explain it. See my math for the plane dreams above. (Of course there may be other explanations. But how could we distinguish them? See "second" below, too...)
Second: Yes, of course there may be phenomena that science hasn't discovered yet. One could imagine thousands of such phenomena. However, I don't understand why we should choose to "believe" in a particular one that is equally likely/unlikely as all the others.
Third: If you start basing your decisions on such beliefs, you run into the problems I tried to highlight with the witch story. You just stopped the discussion there, but I guess you see the consequences it would lead to if we accepted such beliefs as valid. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 08:23:30 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Louis:
No, there is no "sixth sense". |
My sixth sense told me you were going to say that! |
And my sixth se... oh, never mind. :-P |
I have a seventh sense-- you see I was bit by a spider when I was young....I can also spin webs and climb buildings. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 08:31:40 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Louis:
No, there is no "sixth sense". |
My sixth sense told me you were going to say that! |
And my sixth se... oh, never mind. :-P |
I have a seventh sense-- you see I was bit by a spider when I was young....I can also spin webs and climb buildings. |
I had a student one time that told me that he had been bitten by a dog one time. As a result, he claimed to be able to sense when people were talking about him.
He had a few other "odd" stories, as well. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 08:36:14 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Can anyone tell me why it's so impossible, given what science knows and still has to learn about the human brain, that we may have a vestigal sense that has been mostly lost through evolution? |
Because to be "vestigial" there has to have been an actual, fully-developed and functional sense (organ) in the past, and there's no biological evidence that any such thing existed in any human precursor or any other species.
Also, since evolution generally selects for changes which enhance survivability, if it were vestigial, that would be an indication that the condition was somehow a "bad" mutation which was in the process of dying out.
The case for any sense beyond the traditional five would make more sense (pun intended) if you argued that it might be a nascent or newly-developing sense, an evolutionary development in the making, which provides a reproductive advantage to its possessor. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:08:57 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by crayon:
Dear Samuel94720 - Its a matter of perception. Just look at your reply to my initial comment above. There are so many assumptions from your part that I'm giving up trying to correct you :D |
Please do. Correct my assumptions. Tell me about your perceptions. |
umm, nah, guess not... i think this world needs as much idiots as it does with geniuses so that nature is balanced ;) |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:09:59 PM · #121 |
So how about this?
The "6th nascent human sense" of "Prediction" could manifest itself physically as a synaptic connection developed by the process of learning, providing instinctive and accurate “Predictions”.
What I mean to say is could we use Psychoeconomics and the ideas and scientific principles behind it? Maybe throw in a dash of the stuff that makes a great poker player. One that can calculate the odds on the fly and instinctively read his opponent predicting the “potential outcome” (insert disclaimer about Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle).
Humans constantly have the “need to know” for the sake of advantage. It seems as great a need as the need to eat. So we use all the tools we have developed at the macro level to gain that advantage.
Might it be that after using the tools for such a long time that all the complex and time consuming tasks are becoming engrained in the mind (which is a part of the body and “feels”) providing this "6th nascent human sense" of "Prediction"?
Message edited by author 2008-08-21 21:25:24. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:39:37 PM · #122 |
| Your description is pretty good, but it also can be fully ascribed to the trained and attentive use of the known five senses, combined with a broad base of knowledge and finely-honed and exercised analytical skills, say in the fashion of Sherlock Holmes ... |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:42:25 PM · #123 |
| Wouldn't any concept of psychic prediction or premonition require events to already exist in order to be sensed? |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:58:02 PM · #124 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Somehow this keeps coming back to "paranormal" and "supernatural". In the broad sense that it's not scientifically pinpointed and explained, I guess it is paranormal. But as for it being forever unexplainable, I don't agree.
Can anyone tell me why it's so impossible, given what science knows and still has to learn about the human brain, that we may have a vestigal sense that has been mostly lost through evolution?
I said this already but haven't seen any real answer. Why, just because coincidence MAY explain it, is that the ONLY possible explanation? |
BeeCee, senses detect something that is there. In humans, our senses can detect touch, smell, light, sound, and taste. They are measurement devices in our bodies. We have created numerous other devices that we have developed to detect other things, such as radiation and non-visible light (radio waves). Furthermore, other devices were developed to enhance our existing senses. To claim the existence of a sixth sense, the first thing you have to determine is what you are sensing. What factor in your environment are you picking up? Distant brain waves? Auras? Divine messages? Voices from beyond the grave?
But regardless of what it is that this 'sixth sense' is sensing, and whether it is something scientifically proven or not, a person should be able to consistently use this sense. If a persons sensed that their loved one was in danger and later found out that they actually were, great. But do they have this feeling everytime their loved one is in danger and only when they are in danger? If so, then you may be on to something. If not, then it is coincidence. Sam made an excellent argument with his WTC example. If everyone dreams about an aviation disaster just once in their lifetime, then there will be 10,000 people in the US alone who had a premonition of 9/11. Another 10,000 people predicted the TWA disaster, and 10,000 more predicted the Lockerbie disaster. The other 299,997,000 people simply forgot about their dreams and moved on with their lives.
To make a personal example, many times, my wife and kids will go on vacation ahead of me and I catch up later. As stupid as it sounds, everytime they fly without me, I get this feeling that something bad will happen. I always wait for the call that they arrived safe and sound and thankfully, the call has always come. However, if one day, that call never comes, it would be asinine of me to claim that I had a premonition of the disaster. With all due respect to those who lost loved ones in airline disasters, but I always shake my head in disbelief when I hear one of them say that they had a premonition of the disaster. I bet they have that 'premonition' everytime their loved one flew. I know I do. Just cause they were right that last time doesn't give them a sixth sense.
ETA text in underline.
Message edited by author 2008-08-21 22:00:00. |
|
|
|
08/21/2008 09:58:37 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Wouldn't any concept of psychic prediction or premonition require events to already exist in order to be sensed? |
Guess that depends on how quickly the developed the "6th sense" can "sense" the event. Seems the speed of light would be since it is the speed limit. So lets say I think to myself "I should let the dog out" my fiancée, who has a fully developed 6th sense :-P, would ask if I was going to let the dog out in almost real time but not before I had the thought.
Message edited by author 2008-08-21 21:59:10. |
|
