Telepathy Has Been 'Scientifically Proven' to be Real... Again

reply to post by samaka


Again, you miss the point. Science isn't about speculating what "makes sense" and then calling it a day. You present a hypothesis and then try and fail it by objectively testing it with independent third parties replicating your results to objectively validate the authenticity. If it succeeds then you at least have a platform for developing a scientific theory. But saying it just "makes sense" that brains receives because it transmits (zero supporting objective evidence) therefore they have psychic powers (zero supporting objective evidence) just... doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by samaka

 

Again, you miss the point. Science isn't about speculating what "makes sense" and then calling it a day. You present a hypothesis and then try and fail it by objectively testing it. If it succeeds then you at least have a platform for developing a scientific theory. But saying it just "makes sense" that brains receives because it transmits (zero supporting objective evidence) therefore they have psychic powers (zero supporting objective evidence) just... doesn't make sense.

I get your point... When I said "it makes sense" I was expressing my opinion on the subject. There's statistical evidence on the psy phenomenon, there's even peer reviewed studies on the subject with data that supports the esp theory. Have you been following the thread?

Why do you keep calling it psychic power, like it's some supernatural power that only some are born with?

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by samaka

 

Again, you miss the point. Science isn't about speculating what "makes sense" and then calling it a day. You present a hypothesis and then try and fail it by objectively testing it. If it succeeds then you at least have a platform for developing a scientific theory. But saying it just "makes sense" that brains receives because it transmits (zero supporting objective evidence) therefore they have psychic powers (zero supporting objective evidence) just... doesn't make sense.

I get your point... When I said "it makes sense" I was expressing my opinion on the subject. There's statistical evidence on the psy phenomenon, there's even peer reviewed studies on the subject with data that supports the esp theory. Have you been following the thread?

Why do you keep calling it psychic power, like it's some supernatural power that only some are born with?

I believe there definitely could be something to this. I'm sure a lot of us are aware of various scientific studies which show nothing but that doesn't mean it's all impossible.
There are so many stories of twins showing strange psychic links and people who just know when a loved one has passed away.
I've seen a bit on remote viewing and classified military projects and there is certainly a lot of spooky weirdness there.

I'm sure almost everyone has experienced this. You're out in public and you look at someone, instantly they look right at you like they knew you were there and looking at them, like a subconscious reflex almost. This happened just the other day to me, one of my neighbours, a hot girl was bending over doing some gardening, I rode past on my bike and was looking at her. She couldn't have seen me or heard me, but she stood up turned around and looked right at me like she knew I was there.

reply to post by samaka


Peer-reviewed does not automatically mean good science, nor does publication in a journal automatically mean good science. All of the so-called "peer reviewed" papers on parapsychology are in fringe, multi-discipline journals (always a bad sign). To date, not a single experiment in parapsychology has independently and objectively delivered unambiguous and statistically significant results under controlled conditions using rigorous methodology. All we have is "could be, might be, seems like". This is far, far, far from conclusive and goes a long way to explaining why no supposedly conclusive results have been published in credible journals. There's always something amiss, be it flaws in the methodology, tiny sample sizes, conflicts of interest and so on. There is no grand conspiracy, it is simply a case of insufficient and unconvincing data. Could psychic powers be real? Who knows, I think it's highly unlikely but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who wouldn't change their mind if compelling evidence was presented, no matter how BlueMule likes to ironically paint opposing voices as closed minded

reply to post by samaka


Peer-reviewed does not automatically mean good science, nor does publication in a journal automatically mean good science. All of the so-called "peer reviewed" papers on parapsychology are in fringe, multi-discipline journals (always a bad sign). To date, not a single experiment in parapsychology has independently and objectively delivered unambiguous and statistically significant results under controlled conditions using rigorous methodology. All we have is "could be, might be, seems like". This is far, far, far from conclusive and goes a long way to explaining why no supposedly conclusive results have been published in credible journals. There's always something amiss, be it flaws in the methodology, tiny sample sizes, conflicts of interest and so on. There is no grand conspiracy, it is simply a case of insufficient and unconvincing data. Could psychic powers be real? Who knows, I think it's highly unlikely but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who wouldn't change their mind if compelling evidence was presented, no matter how BlueMule likes to ironically paint opposing voices as closed minded

Originally posted by JimTSpock

She couldn't have seen me or heard me, but she stood up turned around and looked right at me like she knew I was there.

Yeah the sense of being stared at, and knowing who is calling before you answer the phone... is how a lot of people experience psi.

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by samaka

 

Peer-reviewed does not automatically mean good science, nor does publication in a journal automatically mean good science. All of the so-called "peer reviewed" papers on parapsychology are in fringe, multi-discipline journals (always a bad sign). To date, not a single experiment in parapsychology has independently and objectively delivered unambiguous and statistically significant results under controlled conditions using rigorous methodology. All we have is "could be, might be, seems like". This is far, far, far from conclusive and goes a long way to explaining why no supposedly conclusive results have been published in credible journals. There's always something amiss, be it flaws in the methodology, tiny sample sizes, conflicts of interest and so on. There is no grand conspiracy, it is simply a case of insufficient and unconvincing data. Could psychic powers be real? Who knows, I think it's highly unlikely but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who wouldn't change their mind if compelling evidence was presented, no matter how BlueMule likes to ironically paint opposing voices as closed minded

My intentions here is to bring awareness that there are scientific studies that are testing this theory and show favor for esp. This is a phenomenon that is not common and very difficult to replicate and control, we are on the brinks of discovering ways of how to measure esp and I presented 2 videos on this, you have to understand this phenomenon goes deeper than matter... You think it's unlikely because you have no real experience with this phenomenon. The hypothesis I presented has been tested and shows support in esp, see page 3.

The data seems unconvincing because people pawn it off as "coincidence" but in reality they show no sincere evidence that is a coincidence. Ah the scientific dogma..

reply to post by BlueMule


I've been reading a bit lately about psychic links between two people and there are a lot of accounts where two people believe strongly they have some kind of psychic link. It can be very sudden and distressing for them and they try anything to try to break the link as it is unwanted.
Are they nuts? Do they both have delusional disorder? What is going on I don't know but if you experience it it seems very strange and overwhelming apparently. Certainly the human mind is still a great mystery.

Originally posted by samaka

My intentions here is to bring awareness that there are scientific studies that are testing this theory and show favor for esp. This is a phenomenon that is not common and very difficult to replicate and control, we are on the brinks of discovering ways of how to measure esp and I presented 2 videos on this, you have to understand this phenomenon goes deeper than matter... You think it's unlikely because you have no real experience with this phenomenon. The hypothesis I presented has been tested and shows support in esp, see page 3.

Then you misunderstand the rigour of science. One man's opinion does not constitute solid evidence. When a phenomenon is supposedly "very difficult to replicate and control" that is usually because something is very much amiss. In light of this admission how can you possibly present anything as solid evidence when, in your own words, it is "very difficult to replicate and control"? That pretty much by definition makes it unscientific.

The data seems unconvincing because people pawn it off as "coincidence" but in reality they show no sincere evidence that is a coincidence. Ah the scientific dogma..

This is why there is validation from multiple independent labs to ensure that results are certainly not "coincidence". No scientist on the planet would dismiss irrefutable evidence as "coincidence". This has absolutely nothing to do with "dogma" and everything to do with insufficient evidence. You have already formed an opinion about how scientific research is conducted when in fact you have only demonstrated how little you know. You are quick to dismiss a methodology you do not understand and to label an entire demographic of people as "dogmatic" when I'd wager you've never spoken to a single scientist in your life. "Deny ignorance", as this site's motto says. Notice how all these accusations of dogma are coming from the believer's camp, not anyone else's.

You cannot try and claim you have scientific evidence to support your beliefs on the one hand but on the other dismiss scientific method as "dogma". You pick one: you either just come out and say you believe in magic or your beliefs live and die under the scrutiny of the proper application of scientific method. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

How do you explain land to a fish?

Originally posted by alienreality
Telepathy is not some far fetched idea as stated by our resident microcosm worshipers..

The brain is always transmitting energy at the low Hz scale and also very low powered, but it is there.. Who can tune in? not very many actually, but I have experienced it before, so I know it's possible, It lasted for several days and then faded away, which is a long story I won't go into here..

The Brain has nothing to do with it. Our Hearts are the Key. Science has found out that our Hearts receive the most info that the body does not see, hear or smell from up to Ten feet away. This is done by Telepathy. That is the first huge proof that it does exist besides most people already knowing it does in the back of their minds.

This explains love at first sight. Its not sight at all. Its two hearts talking to one another, saying Yummy come get ya some!

You ever just walk up and meet someone and sense that they are really bad or evil with no other reason to explain it?

You ever meet someone who you are drawn to for no reason because you just sense that they are a truly wonderful person at heart?

It all has to do with LOVE!

That is why most people who are heartbroken take quite awhile to find another mate even though they might be doing everything right like normal. Their hearts are broadcasting, Hey im far from ready yet.

This post is dead serious. Our hearts jump in activity micro seconds before our brain activity starts too from an outside influence.

An experiment conducted by a group of Russian scientists on the transfer of telepathic energy proved that the nature of this energy is not within the boundaries of common science. In this experiment, a mother rabbit was separated from her babies and connected to an electronic instrument (EEG) to monitor her brain wave activity. The babies were taken aboard a submarine in the North Atlantic thousands of miles away from their mother and executed one at a time in deep water. Precisely at the time each baby was executed, the mother's brainwave activity registered extreme agitation. Because normal radio waves are unable to travel through water from the deep ocean, the conclusion from this experiment was that this telepathic transfer of energy was not by means of electromagnetic radiation or "typical" radio waves. What is more important, this experiment also proved that telepathy is very real, even among species that are less evolved than humans.

www.wingmakers.co.nz...


Disgusting but probably very true as our governments are just this SICK. Hopefully all involved in this horrific act are burning in hell as we speak.

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
How do you explain land to a fish?

Irrefutably demonstrating it's existence would be a good starting point.

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge

Originally posted by alienreality
Telepathy is not some far fetched idea as stated by our resident microcosm worshipers..

The brain is always transmitting energy at the low Hz scale and also very low powered, but it is there.. Who can tune in? not very many actually, but I have experienced it before, so I know it's possible, It lasted for several days and then faded away, which is a long story I won't go into here..

The Brain has nothing to do with it. Our Hearts are the Key.

Well the heart certainly has something to do with it.

Electrophysiological Evidence of Intuition: Part 1. The Surprising Role of the Heart

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study aims to contribute to a scientific understanding of intuition, a process by which information normally outside the range of conscious awareness is perceived by the psychophysiological systems. The first objective, presented in two empirical papers (Part 1 and Part 2), was to replicate and extend the results of previous experiments demonstrating that the body can respond to an emotionally arousing stimulus seconds before it is actually experienced. The second objective, to be presented in a third paper (Part 3), is to develop a theory that explains how the body receives and processes information involved in intuitive perception.

Design: The study used a counterbalanced crossover design, in which 30 calm and 15 emotionally arousing pictures were presented to 26 participants under two experimental conditions: a baseline condition of normal psychophysiologic function and a condition of physiological coherence. Primary measures included: skin conductance; the electroencephalogram (EEG), from which cortical event-related potentials and heartbeat- evoked potentials were derived; and the electrocardiogram (ECG), from which cardiac decelerations / accelerations were derived. These measures were used to investigate where and when in the brain and body intuitive information is processed.

Results: The study’s results are presented in two parts. The main findings in relation to the heart’s role in intuitive perception presented here are: (1) surprisingly, the heart appears to receive and respond to intuitive information; (2) a significantly greater heart rate deceleration occurred prior to future emotional stimuli compared to calm stimuli; (3) there were significant gender differences in the processing of prestimulus information. Part 2 will present results indicating where in the brain intuitive information is processed and data showing that prestimulus information from the heart is communicated to the brain. It also presents evidence that females are more attuned to intuitive information from the heart.

Conclusions: Overall, we have independently replicated and extended previous research documenting prestimulus responses. It appears that the heart is involved in the processing and decoding of intuitive information. Once the prestimulus information is received in the psychophysiologic systems, it appears to be processed in the same way as conventional sensory input. This study presents compelling evidence that the body’s perceptual apparatus is continuously scanning the future. To account for the results presented in Parts 1 and 2, Part 3 will develop a theory based on holographic principles explaining how intuitive perception accesses a field of energy into which information about future events is spectrally enfolded.

Originally posted by JimTSpock
reply to post by BlueMule

 

I've been reading a bit lately about psychic links between two people and there are a lot of accounts where two people believe strongly they have some kind of psychic link. It can be very sudden and distressing for them and they try anything to try to break the link as it is unwanted.
Are they nuts? Do they both have delusional disorder? What is going on I don't know but if you experience it it seems very strange and overwhelming apparently. Certainly the human mind is still a great mystery.

Hard to say. People link to other people every day. It's nothing to be scared of. But that's just me.

This has been proven time and again; it seems that a lot of people like to cherry pick what they will regard as "truth."

Look into the black ops military industrial lodge complexes. They've hijacked most of the really cool research about telepathy, psychokinesis, remote viewing and more. They move into a place like Princeton University and their Engineering Anomalies Lab, shut down all "official" research; take the data and experimental protocols and move them into the CIA, Army, and black ops groups. Then on to subcontracting groups. They keep a few dudes out there who are "former remote viewers" -- i.e. David Morehouse, Lyn Buchanan, et al. And those folks set up "remote viewing training" companies that serve as recruitment fronts. If someone comes across their radar who has real psychic ability, they will attempt recruitment. This happened to me when I had a full-time psychic counseling practice for about a decade and also ventured into Princeton's engineering lab to find out more info on their experiments and mind over matter research. That was enough to put me on their "radar" and a "former remote viewer' aggressively tried to recruit me at that point.

But it's really much more peaceful for the public to still view this stuff as the components of fiction, the stuff of fantasy, and so on. I'm not sure why. I mean, it's not really a surprise at this point. But active repression of the REAL stuff is constant in the media, within mainstream "scientific" circles, and so on. It's so predictable and boring. They really need to get a new gimmick.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by BlueMule

 

Telepathy as far as fantasy writers are involved, is not real. There are many ways to know what people are thinking.

If youve ever watched tv shows with characters like dr house or sherlock holmes, that is as far as precognition goes. Its all advanced logic which leads to predictive models that replicate reality.

It really is that easy.

But let me say that if you chasing your tail looking for magic keeps you alive long enough for me to create a world you should have hope in... have fun.

Naruto, you are going to think I'm a quack. I've read minds spontaneously in the past. None after I turned 18 though. It seriously feels as if something comes undone within you when it happens. And for me, I could never do it when I want.

It's not just body language or super logical analyzing skills.

I know this because I've done it over the phone by accident, and that person was in TX and I was in GA. There is literally a mental block that comes undone in the mind somehow.

reply to post by Mizzijr


Often people decieve themselves about the order or outcome of events, there is alot of evidence to back that up.

When people give these pithy stories of personal revelation they never seem to see how little content their stories have.

i read minds all the time, the more you know someone the more you can do it, because its based on evidence and reasoning.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Mizzijr

 

Often people decieve themselves about the order or outcome of events, there is alot of evidence to back that up.

When people give these pithy stories of personal revelation they never seem to see how little content their stories have.

i read minds all the time, the more you know someone the more you can do it, because its based on evidence and reasoning.

edit on 5-1-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)

Yeah, I get your reasoning. I'm not saying, by any means that there is a lot of content in what I said. In fact if I put all of the moments together it would probably be about 15 secs worth of actual telepathy or mind reading on different occasions.

And indeed your last statement, the dependence on how much you know a person is true. However, this is not what I am talking about. Call it schizophrenia or whatever you like except coincidence, but I heard voices inside my head, and not just any voice but their voice along with their exact words.

Don't mean to be pithy either. People will believe whatever they choose. These are simply my experiences that nobody can change, for it has already happened.