Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013

Originally posted by uesvaje

This has been posted on past threads on ATS on RV and/or ESP, but seems sparse and not consistently posted.

Jessica Utts is an academic statistician from UC Davis who in her conclusion thinks Remote Viewing and ESP has merits.

This is a well known white paper on the topic by her

anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/air2.html

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FOR PSYCHIC FUNCTIONING

Professor Jessica Utts...

It is recommended that future experiments focus on understanding how this phenomenon works, and on how to make it as useful as possible. There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer proof, since there is little more to be offered to anyone who does not accept the current collection of data.

That about sums it all up...

Utts worked with Hyman to assess the government work. Hyman disagrees with Utts. He found fault with the subjective nature on which the conclusions are based. He also disagreed with Utts on her statistical methods.

Notice that the paper is a white paper, not a journal article. Utts was chosen by the government to do part of the work because she was a believer. Hyman was chosen because he was not a believer.

Although Utts and Hyman disagreed about the project, both agreed that there were faults with the testing. One of the main faults was a single judge using subjective measures. It turns out that the single judge was the PI, or principal investigator. That person would have an interest in seeing success. The name of the PI was Ed May.

The report by Utts and Hyman concluded that RV was of little value and thus the program was terminated. So to use Utts' comments as supportive is pointing at one of the "axe men" and saying that they show it works.

Utts also had some important issues to point out about RV: One in particular strikes me and that is that training and practice do not improve results. Another was that doing it blind did not improve results.

So this is the person that the RV crowd points to. It is the person that says practice is worthless and blinding is of no use.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
the girls will stop EVA !!!!

Good to know!

The unpublished paper by Utts is her opinion. That is all.

She did publish in a a journal in which she lists problems with RV even though she is a believer. Her statements in that published article conflict with the opinions of people like Brown and his Farsight group.

Here is Ms. Utts Home Page @ UC Irvine. On it you will find her e-mail and other contact information.

I have taken the liberty of doing so including a link to this thread. Feel free to contact her, she welcomes everyone especially the small-brained, thick-skulled primates!

Out of curiosity, is there anything by Utts that has come after she was on the team that reported the uselessness of RV? After the Utts-Hyman report the RV by the government was disbanded. That was a while ago - over a decade ago.

Originally posted by AlchemicalMonocular
Here is Ms. Utts Home Page @ UC Irvine. On it you will find her e-mail and other contact information.

I have taken the liberty of doing so including a link to this thread.

Feel free to contact her, she welcomes everyone especially the small-brained, thick-skulled primates!

edit on 12-6-2012 by AlchemicalMonocular because: (no reason given)

Well lets try this again HOW do we test you shows us some real proof, reading what you have said above I take it she gets lots of email from the RV crowd

Originally posted by AlchemicalMonocular
For those who are Project Camelot fans, Dr. Courtney Brown will be on a LiveStream broadcast with Kerry "Ms. Ja-Ja-Jaguar" Cassidy 13June Wed 2012.

Dr. Brown - Camelot

UPDATE!

Just a thought for those who would prefer not to pay the $7 for the LiveStream webcast, Project Camelot typically offers these for free downloads/viewing a few days after the live stream!

Again nothing is offered in support of RV other than an older comment by a single believer in psi and RV. That person Utts has made statements in publications which disagree with statements by Brown and others.

Since the white paper by Utts was old, are there any new publications by Utts that support RV or is this another issue that has fallen by the wayside for a researcher?

reply to post by stereologist


Again still pure lazyness on your part (you refused to run any experiments with it)

you know science runs experiments testing claims... so far you quote bureaucratic non-people not experiments you have ran

Still not proof of creds

I call fraud on you part... mindless hate with no training (usually called trolling)


Lets us begin then proving the possibility of the existence the basic mechanics I feel CRV is based on -
So far all your statements are no scientific basis-

we will skip the point that we both agree on Dames and this prediction



Do you challenge?

the existence of the human nervous system

HNS- wiki

Cells
The nervous system contains two main categories or types of cells: neurons and glial cells.

Do you deny that these structures carry input into the human brain for processing?

Brain

The brain is the center of the nervous system in all vertebrate and most invertebrate animals—only a few invertebrates such as sponges, jellyfish, adult sea squirts and starfish do not have one, even if diffuse neural tissue is present. It is located in the head, usually close to the primary sensory organs for such senses as vision, hearing, balance, taste, and smell. The brain of a vertebrate is the most complex organ of its body. In a typical human the cerebral cortex (the largest part) is estimated to contain 15–33 billion neurons,[1] each connected by synapses to several thousand other neurons. These neurons communicate with one another by means of long protoplasmic fibers called axons, which carry trains of signal pulses called action potentials to distant parts of the brain or body targeting specific recipient cells.

Now unless you dispute this, we have an information processing center.

do you deny the existence of
subconcious

In everyday speech and popular writing, however, the term is very commonly encountered as a layperson's replacement for the unconscious mind, which in Freud's opinion is a repository for socially unacceptable ideas, wishes or desires, traumatic memories, and painful emotions put out of mind by the mechanism of psychological repression.

Background programs running on the human brain

At this point CRV training divides the human consciousness into four parts
with conscious at the top and Subconscious at the bottom

so far any disputes...

Now the human brain processes information correct?

Disabilities have proven that different parts of the human brain normally process certain material. Correct?

The exception appears to be in childhood. The human brain can reroute successfully around damaged areas sometimes.

Dispute?

So far are we in agreement.

Humans have a nervous system, a brain, and the information is processed?

Mods this will be a two maybe three parter.

The S-man wanted proof of Remote viewing and I am walking him through the basic sciences required to make a leap in laymans understanding...

We both agree that Dames and the meteor strike is based on a man with a shotty record...

reply to post by stereologist




Nervous system, human brain, which process information

Now we roll to the next part

we go to the science of creation

Big Bang

Extrapolation of the expansion of the Universe backwards in time using general relativity yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past.[11] This singularity signals the breakdown of general relativity. How closely we can extrapolate towards the singularity is debated—certainly no closer than the end of the Planck epoch. This singularity is sometimes called "the Big Bang",[12] but the term can also refer to the early hot, dense phase itself,[13][notes 1] which can be considered the "birth" of our Universe. Based on measurements of the expansion using Type Ia supernovae, measurements of temperature fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background, and measurements of the correlation function of galaxies, the Universe has a calculated age of 13.75 ± 0.11 billion years.[15] The agreement of these three independent measurements strongly supports the ΛCDM model that describes in detail the contents of the Universe.

went BOOM

agreed?

(for the religious- God spoke or Tiamat dance whatever, not key to this discussion)

I have the first question

Which substrate did the universe come into existence over?

(for the Christians it is God and most other religions)

This is a key point of our little argument.

What are we humans made of?
Atoms and atomic fields
form elements
form molecules
form complex proteins
Form cells
form organs
organs form systems
systems form us

any disagreement so far?

now we go to some thing that might get above your head...
let us know we will throw you a life raft




now to electronics
Inductor

An inductor (also choke, coil or reactor) is a passive two-terminal electrical component that stores energy in its magnetic field. For comparison, a capacitor stores energy in an electric field, and a resistor does not store energy but rather dissipates energy as heat.

Transformer

A transformer is a device that transfers electrical energy from one circuit to another through inductively coupled conductors—the transformer's coils. A varying current in the first or primary winding creates a varying magnetic flux in the transformer's core and thus a varying magnetic field through the secondary winding. This varying magnetic field induces a varying electromotive force (EMF), or "voltage", in the secondary winding. This effect is called inductive coupling.

I could go on and on and on....
I wanted to point out that the em based devices exist (I do not want you claiming they do not)

do you deny these devices exist?
Do you deny transistors, pnp-npn junctions?
Do you deny circuits? (including integrated circuits)

Now I have to add this

Nanotechnology

Nanotechnology (sometimes shortened to "nanotech") is the study of manipulating matter on an atomic and molecular scale.

Do you deny Nano tech?


Universe exist over something (your science faith)
electromagnetic manipulation tools
theory exist for manipulation of atoms

still more to go... to be continued

reply to post by ripcontrol


Nervous system, human brain, which process information
Universe exist over something (your science faith)
electromagnetic manipulation tools
theory exist for manipulation of atoms

now lets us get to the very nature of your arguments with CRV
from this point forward please show respect

Let these set in the back of your mind and get to your major malfunction

What is time?

We can argue all our combined lifespans on this point so I am going with this

Entropy

Thermodynamic entropy is a non-conserved state function that is of great importance in the sciences of physics and chemistry.[4][5] Historically, the concept of entropy evolved in order to explain why some processes (permitted by conservation laws) occur spontaneously while their time reversals (also permitted by conservation laws) do not; systems tend to progress in the direction of increasing entropy.[6][7] For isolated systems, entropy never decreases.[5] This fact has several important consequences in science: first, it prohibits "perpetual motion" machines; and second, it implies the arrow of entropy has the same direction as the arrow of time. Increases in entropy correspond to irreversible changes in a system, because some energy is expended as waste heat, limiting the amount of work a system can do.[4][8][8][9][10][11]

Do you accept this as the closest definition of time we have? Entropy as the main function of time

Either way it does not matter for our conversation.

Earlier we discussed the big bang

Coming into existence over a preexisting substrate...

This means that the natural progression of time is not a universal constant. It also means you can possibly step out side of it?

can the human brain conceive outside of time?

We have a whole neural system that is how many miles long if unrolled?

next we go to

Telecommunication

Basic elements
A basic telecommunication system consists of three primary units that are always present in some form:

A transmitter that takes information and converts it to a signal.
A transmission medium, also called the "physical channel" that carries the signal. An example of this is the "free space channel".
A receiver that takes the signal from the channel and converts it back into usable information.

So far NOTHING precludes PSI warfare- Nothing

Please post the physical evidence that said abilities are impossible

Since you have no science ability or creds

please include not the article that came from watchtower but a peer reviewed article listing and outlining anything I have said is impossible or anything is impossible...

Just so you know your science faith is against you.

Quantum Entanglement

According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, their shared state is indefinite until measured.[6] Quantum entanglement is a form of quantum superposition. When a measurement is made and it causes one member of such a pair to take on a definite value (e.g., clockwise spin), the other member of this entangled pair will at any subsequent time[7] be found to have taken the appropriately correlated value (e.g., counterclockwise spin). Thus, there is a correlation between the results of measurements performed on entangled pairs, and this correlation is observed even though the entangled pair may have been separated by arbitrarily large distances.[8]

This behavior is consistent with quantum mechanical theory and has been demonstrated experimentally, and it is accepted by the physics community. However there is some debate[9] about a possible underlying mechanism that enables this correlation to occur even when the separation distance is large. The difference in opinion derives from espousal of various interpretations of quantum mechanics.

If I remember earlier you did accept the Big Bang right?

Means all our atoms where once connected...

Of note, underlying mechanisms causes differences of opinion.

reply to post by ripcontrol


Sorry but your using science like bible thumpers use god ok we cant prove god exists/doesn't exist but there are a few things that point to god as a creation of man.

You are trying to use scientific theories in the same way to say you cant prove x so y might be true well how about this question the RV guys seem to avoid!

HOW do we test you, to shows us some real proof.

There's Army peer reviewed research proving ESP abilities studied biochemically.

Do you really want me to post it or are you going to dismiss just as quickly as with Jessica Utts?

reply to post by ripcontrol


Nothing you posted has anything whatsoever to do with RV.

Asking if there is a HMS and all of the other issues does not in any way support RV.

Asking me to perform any sort of test is also immaterial.

This is nothing more than continued efforts to muddy the waters and to avoid the big issue which is to produce support for RV.

reply to post by ripcontrol


Now there is continued spamming of the thread with unrelated material about electrical components and the big bang theory and whatever.

The issue is avoiding evidence for RV.

reply to post by ripcontrol

So far NOTHING precludes PSI warfare- Nothing

Please post the physical evidence that said abilities are impossible

Since you have no science ability or creds

please include not the article that came from watchtower but a peer reviewed article listing and outlining anything I have said is impossible or anything is impossible...

Just so you know your science faith is against you.

Weird. You write a reply posting to yourself and you say "you" meaning ripcontrol has "no science ability or creds."

Thanks for telling us about your self.

You told yourself nothing supports psi or rv. Some people claim rv is not psi.

Your argument to yourself is to prove a universal negative. LOL.

You still provide nothing in support of RV even when you reply to yourself.

reply to post by uesvaje


If you have something other than Utts please provide it. I did not dismiss Utts as much as point out that Utts' white paper is old, not corroborated by Hyman, and did not appear to be followed up other research. Utts also pointed out failures with the methods used in RV experiments including the use of a single judge. I simply provided context for the evidence provided, just as if Hyman had been provided I would have provided Utts' position.

Originally posted by stereologist
snip
Weird. You write a reply posting to yourself and you say "you" meaning ripcontrol has "no science ability or creds."

Thanks for telling us about your self.

You told yourself nothing supports psi or rv. Some people claim rv is not psi.

Your argument to yourself is to prove a universal negative. LOL.

You still provide nothing in support of RV even when you reply to yourself.

This post of yours exposes your dishonest methods of debate.

This do you know what it looks like? Pseudoscepticism.

It's obvious he's continuing his multi part post. In the first he did directly reply to you, stereologist.