It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by HairlessApe
I already linked you to that wiki . . .
The documentary you linked me to "The Quantum Activist", the guy identifies consciousness as non material
Thought identification refers to the empirically verified use of technology to, in some sense, read people's minds. Recent research using neuroimaging has provided some early demonstrations of the technology's potential to recognize high-order patterns in the brain. In some cases, this provides meaningful (and controversial) information to investigators. Professor of neuropsychology, Barbara Sahakian, qualifies "A lot of neuroscientists in the field are very cautious and say we can't talk about reading individuals' minds, and right now that is very true, but we're moving ahead so rapidly, it's not going to be that long before we will be able to tell whether someone's making up a story, or whether someone intended to do a crime with a certain degree of certainty."
Psychologist Marcel Just and his colleague, Tom Mitchell, have used FMRI brain scans to teach a computer to identify the various parts of the brain associated with specific thoughts.
...
To illustrate this, Just and Mitchell used their computer to predict, based on nothing but FMRI data, which of several images a volunteer was thinking about. The computer was 100% accurate, but so far the machine is only distinguishing between 10 images
In 2011, a team led by Shinji Nishimoto used only brain recordings to partially reconstruct what volunteers were seeing.
On January 31, 2012 Brian Pasley and colleagues of University of California Berkeley published their paper in PLoS Biology where in subjects internal neural processing of auditory information was decoded and reconstructed as sound on computer by gathering and analyzing electrical signals directly from subjects brains.[
Emotiv Systems, an Australian electronics company, has demonstrated a headset that can be trained to recognize a user's thought patterns for different commands
Professor of neuropsychology, Barbara Sahakian, qualifies "A lot of neuroscientists in the field are very cautious and say we can't talk about reading individuals' minds, and right now that is very true, but we're moving ahead so rapidly, it's not going to be that long before we will be able to tell whether someone's making up a story, or whether someone intended to do a crime with a certain degree of certainty."
Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by HairlessApe
No need to get so angry you have to type several words in all caps.
( en.wikipedia.org... Thought identification ) This is the link you just provided . . .
( en.wikipedia.org... Thought identification ) This is the link I provided, you can easily confirm this by clicking on posts by member in this thread to confirm it.
I linked you the very problem of trying to identify thoughts as atomic structures composed of protons and neutrons. The documentary you linked to states in no uncertain terms that consciousness is separate from the material world and acts as a quantum wave, not that it is matter acting as a quantum wave.
As to reading minds . . . . from your own source, which I originally posted . . .
Professor of neuropsychology, Barbara Sahakian, qualifies "A lot of neuroscientists in the field are very cautious and say we can't talk about reading individuals' minds, and right now that is very true, but we're moving ahead so rapidly, it's not going to be that long before we will be able to tell whether someone's making up a story, or whether someone intended to do a crime with a certain degree of certainty."
Telling whether someone is lying or not is not predict the thought it is predicting whether it will be true or not . . .
Reconstructing visual sight is not the same as thought . . .
I think the main issue here is you fail to grasp the concept of consciousness.
EDIT
Just because they use the term "thought patterns" does not mean it is "reading thoughts" it is translating electrical signals into commands. Those electrical signals are known to occur when an individual is thinking in a certain manner, like a command for a motor function for example. It is not the same as thinking of an apple.
edit on 6-7-2013 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101
Originally posted by HairlessApe
No, the problem is that despite being given the data some people will say "there is no data" because they can't accept the objective fact that they've been proven wrong. They also can't quote the link that they sent earlier because it doesn't actually exist and it's too late at this point to edit their post.
This conversation is over, I've proven you wrong. But have a nice day and be sure to keep plugging your ears and going "Lalalalala! Lalalalala! I can't hear the data!"
You're really good at replying to posts without actually answering them.edit on 6-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)
reply to post by HairlessApe
I am getting it now (the video)
It seems you are confusing the difference between reading the actual thought taking place and scanning the areas of the brain being highlighted and predicting whether a thought would be a lie or truth or apple.
You are not addressing the origin of that thought.
EDIT
Thought Identification
en.wikipedia.org...
Your explanation leaves out the problem of consciousness and comes across in an extremely condescending manner.
The UFO as 'gods' or 'demons' is still a valid line of investigation as all those things occurred withing the consciousness.
Once you can materially define and locate consciousness and predict future thought with accuracy based upon the movements of protons and electrons within the brain you can confidently pursue your claims, however until then you merely playing the fool.
Originally posted by BO XIAN
For example, how many MILLIONS of cases need to be statistically investigated in a rigorous way wherein
there are
1. clear and significant . . . consistently the same or similar . . . lasting body marks, designs, cuts, 'brands' etc.
2. babies taken at the end of the first trimester
3. hybrid offspring are shown to the victims wherein the hybrids look half like the parent and half 'alien.'
4. tangible objects are involved of a consistent type across many thousands of cases around the world.
Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by BO XIAN
If these demons you speak of are indeed spiritual in nature and only assume a humanoid appearance (as God has destroyed their bodies) it would follow that creating hybrid offspring would be a priority of theirs (because as you said, invoking the name of spiritual power (Jesus) tends to send them packing), but the question is, obviously, how is this possible??
It is akin to having sexual relations and being impregnated by a ghost, is it not?
Originally posted by Wick308
reply to post by The GUT
Through observations and certain trend patterns our societal influence is merely in conjunction with the masses.. For instance, with in the context of the cultures reality. If it is not explained then it must be an evil or dark power.
Originally posted by BO XIAN
Their hybridization program seems to be one of their HIGHEST priorities.
Originally posted by DelMarvel
Originally posted by BO XIAN
Their hybridization program seems to be one of their HIGHEST priorities.
Just to throw this out there: just looking at 1947 onward, the abduction/breeding meme hasn't been consistently reported by experiencers. There was a period of time where people were seeing a lot of Nordic aliens who supposedly claimed to be from planets in our solar system. We didn't start getting a lot of reports of smaller aliens until around the time of Betty and Barney Hill. What has been reported has changed over the years and there is unquestionably a psychological aspect to it (such as correlation with science fiction.)
And just to get back to the article GUT posted about High Strangeness. There is now and probably always has been a very diverse set of strange experiences perceived by certain people. What happens is that researchers often pick and choose those reports that support their personal theories; in fact, the people having the experience often engage in self selection. For example, if you perceive you have been abducted by little aliens you are more likely to find someone who has popularized that theory to report to. If you perceive you have seen a giant kangaroo with glowing eyes you're not going to report to the community that believes in the Greys.edit on 6-7-2013 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)
Leading a first-class team of research scientists on a disturbing odyssey into the unknown, Colm Kelleher spent hundreds of days and nights on the Skinwalker property and experienced firsthand many of its haunting mysteries. With investigative reporter George Knapp -- the only journalist allowed to witness and document the team's work -- Kelleher chronicles in superb detail the spectacular happenings the team observed personally, and the theories of modern physics behind the phenomena. Far from the coldly detached findings one might expect, their conclusions are utterly hair-raising in their implications. Opening a door to the unseen world around us, Hunt for the Skinwalker is a clarion call to expand our vision far beyond what we know.