Thread: Bring your arguments on psi HERE!

Yes. I do

However, I do not think its that easy as many people claim it to be. Bringing it to the masses, making it some kind of popular thing to do. It doesnt work that way, not many people really have the real abilities so many people these days claim to have. And alot of people want to use it in a way its not meant to be used, for selfish causes or to be cool for example..nah-uh

Good idea wer
I'd just like to vent some opinions and general ranting first, if nobody minds (a bit late to stop me though)

We have a variety of groups of people:

1) Those who cannot consider the idea of it being possible, as there seems to be no scientific measureable proof or even decent theory (in their opinion. eg James Randi. They have some good points, and good arguments. However they are as close minded as it gets and attack rather than objectively look at the situation.

2) Those who DO it... but they are *completely* kidding themselves (ie they dont notice the open window causing it). They are exactly the opposite of the sceptics, in the bad sense. Sceptisicm is good - but within reason. You need to be objective and honestly try to see what other possible explanations there might be. Its a good argument that incredible claims should be observed carefully. Just cos the pinwheel turned once out of 10 attempts - never mind the open window - doesnt mean you're telekinetic. Be objective.

3) Those who *really* DO it... eg. moving pens on tables. They often dont understand how, and they can't be bothered 'proving' it, because they simply get accused of cheating. However they are objective in testing it, so they are quite sure they aren't kidding themselves. As for the james randi argument, the day that guy is willing to part with his money will be a cold day in hell. And his logic is seriously flawed. More on that in a bit...

4) Those who aren't sure, but doubt it. They don't have the time, inclination, energy or motivation to try learning it themselves... Some of these might one day try it.

5) Those who spend their life chasing other psychics studying them, but never actually trying anything themselves.

6) Those who simply avoid the whole subject because its 'occult' and mysteriously dangerous. Or they dont care.

As for james randi...
He's been quoted saying 'I always have a way out'. Eg. the data recorded is OWNED by them, and can be manipulated any way they want. They tend to accuse the candidates of leaving information out, and when offered the data they refuse to view it.
If you wish to read about him, and the flaws in the competition.. http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/articles.../keen/randi.htm
In other words - even if someone could 'prove' it, Randi has no intention of giving that money away.

Regarding his logic.. this kind of conversation shows the flaw (no this isnt a quote, just an example):
Psion: Humans can move objects with their minds from a distance. I can do it.
Randi: Can you prove it to me?
Psion: Not really
Randi: Then its impossible

Where along the line did 'not able to prove' become 'impossible'. Sure, the guy above cannot prove it, and it leaves doubt. But 'impossible' ?
Now imagine this:

Psion: So can you prove its impossible then?
Randi: Um... well...
Psion: Then it must be for real!

Is this any better? no.. but it illustrates the point. Its just as bad as the first conversation. Not being able to disprove something doesnt imply it's a definite reality.

As for 'is it possible practically / theoretically'
From a practical point of view - there are people that do telekinesis, for example. And I'm not talking about only the ones that fool themselves into believing that they're moving it while the window is open and the object is incredibly light.
They occasionally attempt some theories based on their sensations and experiences.
They all seem a bit lacking of course - but they don't mind too much. All they know for themselves is that its possible, somehow.
Doing something doesn't require understanding of all the processes. Eg you dont understand the insides of your digital camera, but somehow you use it.

My personal thoughts or theories?
So glad you asked

I fall into group #3 more or less - I can move a needle or toothpick floating in a bowl of water. And I do this from a distance of 5 cm from my fingertips. I've tried a variety of experiments to find a natural environmental cause for it, and have recently run out of ideas. It's no 'fooling myself' or hallucination, as my wife has observed me doing it.
As for how it works - I'm not sure. I used self hypnosis to learn the ability. I have found a very plausible example of a theory, that does show that saying 'its not measurable and theres no possible way' is shortsighted.

As for the most plausible theory, that really ties it in for me... http://telekinesis.mine.nu/TK/f_viewtopic.php?id=930
Its not entirely 'easy' reading though
Like I said - its only a theory, but it does illustrate that there are certainly scientific ways of explaining this

[EDIT]
Just a thought - scientists see observations in quantum mechanics they cannot explain. People with psionic abilities see observations that they cannot explain. And yet scientists accept the one and not the other.. hmm..

Originally posted by Placebo

As for james randi...
He's been quoted saying 'I always have a way out'.

Yes; but:

He was quoted in the October 1981 issue of Fate magazine as allegedly saying \"I always have an out;\" however, this magazine article was written as a result of political infighting among the members of CSICOP. Observers of the ongoing debate between skeptics and their detractors believe this quote is being misapplied, and that it refers to the fact that Randi employs safeguards against cheating. The money is known to exist and is held in a Goldman, Sachs & Company account, and withholding payment would legally constitute fraud on Randi's behalf.[/b]

So, yay.

Phychic people exist hands down. I am a member of a nice LD users group were they talk about advanced lucid dreaming topics (something that is hardly ever spoken on here) and their are many people I meet trying to develop phychic powers.

I won't go into thet machanics of it or why such powers are not farfetched because placebo already grabbed that angle from me. Instead, I'll just give some personal examples.

Personally I know two people have who have that phenomina. A friend of mind who previously studied witch craft but broke the rules(using powers for personal gain) so she had a fucked up stomach for three months afterwards. She had never experienced phychic powers before but now she occasiounally dreams an event that will happen sometimes in the future.

My friend D4(rap name) is a high level male phychic, something that is hardly ever seen. Most phychics are female. He dreams the future everynight. Like most phychics who were born with their powers/gifts he really didn't see it as being phychic ability and still doesn't. He just uses the little information he gets to his advantage.

THAT BASTARD KNEW THE LAST MOVE I WAS GONNA DO IN SMACKDOWN!!!!!!!!
Cheatin ass ngga lookin into the future and shit!!!!!!!
I knew I shouldn't have helped that bastard develop his powers. It doesn't matter if I'm mentally superior if he knew every god damned move I was gonna do! I'm sorry, but I just had to vent that. He tricked me into playin for money. Oh yeah and that shit where you have a vision and from that vision you base your actions which was something that was gonna occur anyway only because you based your actions on the vision... it happens.

If any of you would like to join it's [email protected]. I'm a member of so many and only a couple cover advanced lucidity topics. I'll post some more next time I check my e-mail.

I personally plan to try to attempt to develop my phychic powers after my current experiment. I will start with the opening of my third eye and go from that point.

Bottom line: Someone post some vids already...

Everyone is psychic, male and females, no difference.

Well Wer if that is true then the only interesting point is the difference in talent and proof
and as last a good theory for science and measering tools.
In the Netherlands we have some kind of war on that.
2 famous physicists argue on that here because one also is a parapsychologist.
He showed his data to the other physicist called hooft who also won a nobel prize for his work.
And hooft just said to him that his data was valid but that they dont have a model for it
in physica yet. and that he would anc could do nothing more with his data because of that.
The other phycisist who is also a parapsycologist called bierman was angry about that.
And they both put some arguements on it ever since

Originally posted by UMJ
THAT BASTARD KNEW THE LAST MOVE I WAS GONNA DO IN SMACKDOWN!!!!!!!!
Cheatin ass ngga lookin into the future and shit!!!!!!!

Wouldnt this be a breaking of the \"powers for personal gain\" rule, that some invisible being oversees?

Originally posted by UMJ+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(UMJ)</div>

Most phychics are female.[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-wer
Everyone is psychic, male and females, no difference.

You see, if I really believed in physic powers, things like this would make me think otherwise. Who am I supposed to believe here?

I can't say I have an absolute position on the subject, although I have seen/experienced a number of things I can't explain. After considering the possibilities of conventional science and being able to draw no firm conclusions I look at the less conventional theories. In many cases I have found that, although I'm yet to see something I would call 'absolute proof', the weight of evidence is often not in the favour of the conventional.

JMO, but to say these things 'cannot be real' (e.g. James Randi) without giving proof or at least sound reasoning is as believeable as a fairground fortune teller saying 'you're going to meet a tall dark stranger and come into some money'.

That said, I like James Randi as a character. His strong personality and conviction to his position gives a lot of momentum to the discussion, which might not otherwise be there.**ducks for cover**

just for the record, a search reveals on Randi's site, he has never said "cannot be real" in regards to anything. wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Hi Kaniaz, I don't mean "cannot be real" as a direct quote from James Randi, it's just my understanding of his position.

I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time, lol

You see, if I really believed in physic powers, things like this would make me think otherwise. Who am I supposed to believe here?[/b]

You know, all of us psichics are stepping on uncharted ground. We don't really have that many studies on anything because psichic abilities haven't had many, if any, scientistic tests. Most of the information the people are talking about is coming from people that have done it before them and that information is usually manipulated by preconcieved thoughts and ideas. In short, we don't know all about the why/what/how of psi yet.

It's just a theory that you can't use it for personal gain(plus, it's only some psions that believe that) so some of them may use it for personal gain and then blame anything bad that happens on that reason, maybe.

Oh well, just throwin ideas out there.

I agree Dreamwalker007. If we'd had years of proper scientific testing and there was still no proof at all, then I might start to draw some conclusions, but it seems the best information available is from small scale, short term testing or anecdotal evidence.

Despite a number of documented small scale tests and thousands of years of anecdotal evidence, LD's were KNOWN by the scientific community as a DEFINITE fallacy; until in the early 1980s a phd student (Stephen LaBerge) managed to prove them as real. We still have a long way to go and an open mind is essential if you want to know the truth about anything.

You can look back at any discovery and you'll find some guy who says "It's DEFINTELY not true". If you had explained electricity to some scientist before it's invented - "That can't happen" - explain gravity before it's "discovered" - "no, that's wrong, it's to do with this magical magnetic stuff" I don't think physic stuff is *DEFINTELY* not true, I think it's 99.999999999999999999% not true (probability wise).

Yes, some theories that were at first doubted by almost everyone were eventually accepted, like LDing and the fact that the Earth is round. But that was because they had either scientific reasoning behind them, or visible proof (or both). Now obviously it might be hard for your average psychic to come up with scientific proof that he can move stuff with his mind, because not even the smartest brain scientists completely know how the brain works yet. But visible proof? Hey, if you claim you can do all these cool things, by all means, do them! If front of crowds of critics, skeptics, and scientists. They won't be able to refute it if it's in front of them. But nope, still not even any visible proof out there, although these powers supposedly affect the physical world! It would be a peice of cake to pass Randi's test for any real psychics out there, and just as a little bonus you get a million bucks, but nope, still nothing. Oh yeah, and you can post all you want about how you know psychics, have seen psychic powers in action, or can use them, but you could just as easily be making all of it up, so lets see some real proof here people!

um.....i hav a question. is it possible when making a PSI ball that u can put emotions into it and feelings and stuff like that to the point where it becomes sentient energy? sorry if sum1 already asked this question i didnt read that much of this thread BYE!!!!!

Originally posted by Shayne
um.....i hav a question. is it possible when making a PSI ball that u can put emotions into it and feelings and stuff like that to the point where it becomes sentient energy? sorry if sum1 already asked this question i didnt read that much of this thread BYE!!!!!

... no.

Hey, if you claim you can do all these cool things, by all means, do them![/b]

I don't claim I can do anything, I just try to keep an open mind about other people's claims.

I do claim that I have seen enough evidence to suggest the scientists don't know all the answers. I also claim that I have seen plenty of people assert objectivity when closer inspection reveals they are simply trying to prove their own hypothesis (Both skeptics and believers).

Based on these two things I feel that any absolutely skeptical viewpoint is as objective as those who unquestioningly accept every 'psychic phenomenon' presented to them.

If you claim these things are entirely untrue, by all means, prove it - I for one would love to know the truth, and I accept both exteremes as possibilities.

I'm not absolutely skeptical. Give me proper, decent evidence and that'll do fine. Still, I haven't been presented with any, except for those PsiPog videos, which they claimed "Aren't for proving it to skeptics", and AcidBasick nicely debunked each one anyway.

hmm.... maybe we should all try keeping out of the way of publicised stuff. why would it be public - to make money surely? not sure who this randi guy is, but i'm sure he has a whole heap of $ somewhere.

people that are into stuff like this keep their head down and don't get drawn into societies cack. my advice which is often offered to myself also, is to remain partly disjointed from society regarding things like this. there just aren't enough aware people around to appreciate what's been said...... just have a general overview thought of what the majority of this population of earth is like. don't get me wrong though - cos i know that there's so shit hot people out there too.

I'm not absolutely skeptical. Give me proper, decent evidence and that'll do fine.[/b]

Great, as long as we're talking evidence and not proof then I think I may be able to give some suggestions. What you make of the evidence and whether/how you try to prove it's validity (or otherwise) is up to you.

First thing that comes to mind are the numerous accounts of people knowing when certain other people phone them. For instance, 4 out of 5 times I know my Mum is calling before I pick up the phone. It rings and I know it's her. Obviously there are times when I know she wouldn't call, but the times she does call are the same times friends and other family members are just as likey to call. So far I can't find a scientific rationale for this so I have to keep all options open.

The next thing that comes to mind is soft martial arts. There are of course stories (legends) of unbelieveable Ninja feats, I'm not talking about this.

My Kung-fu teacher is able to do some impressive things with energy. I can't say 100% it's not psychological but of the possibilities I've considered psychology is not at the top of the list. He can make blindfolded students sway to his rhythm and even fall over without touching them, he can also make someone on the other side of a room turn round and look at him by willing them to. I can't explain how he does it without at least considering his explanation of Chi energy.

There is an interesting martial arts series being repeated on BBC3 at the moment called 'Mind, Body and Kick Ass Moves' which shows some similar things in some of the episodes. One of the most impressive I've seen is being able to sense thoughts of attack. They show the presenter (himself a martial artist) standing behind a master (so the master can't see him) and at any given time the presenter can attack. The master, of course, manages to defend without a problem.

My immediate thought was that the master hears a sound and has such fast reactions that it appears to be simultaneous to the attack, but when they slow the footage you can see that the master moves before the presenter, therefore (supposedly) 'proving' that he sensed the intent.

These are not proof by any means, but they do prevent me from dismissing the ideas out of hand, especially when I consider how many examples of this kind of thing there are.

You might find it interesting to seek out a master of a soft/internal style of martial arts and ask to see some demonstrations. (Although I'm sure the number of fake martial artists is comparable to the number of fake psychics, so don't be put off if the first one you find is a loon!!lol)

except for those PsiPog videos, which they claimed \"Aren't for proving it to skeptics\", and AcidBasick nicely debunked each one anyway.[/b]

That sounds interesting, can you give me a URL?

I need proper videos, or somebody to do it in front of me. Perhaps alot of decent images would do, but words just wouldn't cut it. *shrug* I know what you mean by the phone thing, but I'm sure there's an spice of science in there. When does your mom usually call? Who usually calls you? I'm sure over time anybody could build up enough information to make a decent guess at who's calling. e.g: If somebody calls me at 2 in the morning, I know it won't be my grandmother. She goes to bed early.

here's the videos. You'll have to search for AcidBasick's post debunking them though, they are around somewhere.

Sorry this has been a crappy post, I'm pretty busy doing a big fat joke on Dreamviews.

I need proper videos, or somebody to do it in front of me. Perhaps alot of decent images would do, but words just wouldn't cut it. [/b]

I agree entirely, maybe I've just been lucky enough to see some of these weird things first hand.

I'm sure there's an spice of science in there.[/b]

I'm sure too. Science governs the universe, if it's real it's science, we just haven't developed our knowledge of science far enough to explain everything yet. If whatever-kenesis and X-voyance etc. are real phenomenon someone will one day discover the science behind it, although if it's not real we could all be arguing about it for a long time!!lol

thanks for the link too, I'll check it out.

Well uhh, everyone is argueing about psi.

#1. There is no actual proof it exists.