Thread: Remote Viewing sites?

http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/90/363/14...paranormal.html

Originally posted by Oneironaut
http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/90/363/14...paranormal.html

Oneironaut ---> You so totally ROCK.
I have been searching for declassified info. Thanks for the site.
Very interesting very.!!!!!

Howie

Hehe. Just doin what I can.

Oneironaut, are you aware that the long quote you posted is full of bullcrap? How is it that so many people think quoting some text makes the text inherently true, unbiased and a fully valid argument? Try to read a text critically, maybe you will will be able to draw some better conclusions next time.

Basically what you posted is exactly what is the content of EVERY OTHER paranormal book:
1) Quoting other paranormal authors and saying that what they said is true.
2) Using passive terms such as "it is estimated", "it is known", "it has been said"
3) Putting the paranormal subject into a bigger context such as CIA or other secret agencies and governments. Naming "reliable anonymous sources" as valid sources.
4) Attacking sceptics in order to make it look like it is justified to do it.
5) Plain wrong and badly interpreted quotes.
6) Not naming any contra-arguments and saying why they are wrong.
7) Not going into detail about quoted persons and institutions or other sources.
8) Focusing on the small list of material that is PRO because the list is ... small.

and so on.
Oh and yesterday I saw Santa. Let me make a thread about it.

Lol. I’d give you an A for effort…but that was pathetic.

Reading critically is, in itself, biased. And if bias is ALWAYS a sign of incredibility, as per your implications, then your entire argument is incredible. But stopping at That display of ignorance wouldn’t be any fun at all, so let’s continue:

Basically what you posted is exactly what is the content of EVERY OTHER paranormal book:
1) Quoting other paranormal authors and saying that what they said is true.[/b]

I’d love for you to point out what I said was irrefutably true. I don’t make the mistake of claiming other’s dialogue as irrefutably true. Unfortunately you seem to be doing just that. I’ve offered evidence that you’ve yet to dispel. And not doing so is only adding more strength to my argument, and failing yours. But if you can find where I’ve stated any of the above was irrefutable Truth, I’ll have a reason not to call you a moron. Good luck!

2) Using passive terms such as "it is estimated", "it is known", "it has been said” [/b]

Newton’s first law states “An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.” Wow….He used “tends to”…a passive term….TWICE. Isn’t he a great pillar of the infallible scientific community that you’re advocating? Guess he must be full of bullcrap too, eh? Not sure if this is news to you, but “Estimation” is part of the scientific process. Completely interchangeable with “Hypothesis.” Indeed most scientific conclusions are “Estimates” based on experience and experimentation. To say that using the word “Estimate” is a distinct sign of incredibility shows how little you know about…well…anything, really. >.>

3) Putting the paranormal subject into a bigger context such as CIA or other secret agencies and governments. Naming "reliable anonymous sources" as valid sources. [/b]

I didn’t put the paranormal into bigger context such as the CIA. The CIA did. Their experiments with remote viewing are well-documented and open for anyone’s eyes. A crack-smoking 12 year old with ADD can jump on any available search engine and verify that such operations existed…why can’t you?
Ah yes…but the sources are so “anonymous!” –exaggerated gasp!- Yeah..sources like CNN who have done stories over the years on governmental paranormal activities might have been anonymous like back in……wait…Never?

4) Attacking sceptics in order to make it look like it is justified to do it [/b]

I am a skeptic and I don’t attack my own kind. A skeptic is someone who doubts, but is open to contradicting evidence, and does not run from it, pretending that it does not exist just to fortify my dogmatic beliefs that there are no evidence. I believe paranormal activity is just as possible as impossible, and I’m able to weigh evidence accordingly.
A pseudo-skeptic is a person who goes around preaching that “such and such” is not possible, ignoring any and all contradictory input, no matter how credible, because he takes an ethnocentric view that whoever’s viewpoint he is advocating is infallible, and shall never be satisfactorily contradicted.

Guess which category you fall under.

5) Plain wrong and badly interpreted quotes.[/b]

Oh? Please, by all means, elaborate.

6) Not naming any contra-arguments and saying why they are wrong.[/b]

What? You mean argue Your side of the debate, also? No such luck, pal. You’re failing this one on your own.

7) Not going into detail about quoted persons and institutions or other sources [/b]

A quote is a quote, not a biography, but I guess I’ll humor you, once again:

Watch out, now…here comes another one of those Anonymous Sources!

CNN wrote:

Carter: CIA used psychic to help find missing plane
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Former President Jimmy Carter said the CIA, without his knowledge, once consulted a psychic to help locate a missing government plane in Africa. Carter told students at Emory University that the "special U.S. plane" crashed somewhere in Zaire while he was president.
According to Carter, U.S. spy satellites could find no trace of the aircraft, so the CIA consulted a psychic from California. Carter said the woman "went into a trance and gave some latitude and longitude figures. We focused our satellite cameras on that point and the plane was there."
Carter made the disclosure after two students asked if he was aware of any government evidence pointing to the existence of extraterrestrials. "I never knew of any instance where it was proven that any sort of vehicle had come from outer space to our country and either lived here or left," the former president said.
[/b]

And as we all know, CNN has been anonymous since….well…wait…Never.

Focusing on the small list of material that is PRO because the list is ... small [/b]

Small is a relative term. Anyone with half a brain knows this.
I focus on Pro because there is enough people running around acting like the PROs don’t exist.
Meanwhile, I’m still waiting for you to cite the sources of the physicists you’ve spoken to that claim “with No Passive Terms” (to put your retarded little spin on it) that paranormal activity Does Not Exist.

And all I can say to that is that I think it is going to be pretty difficult to find sufficient support for your claim without quoting archaic, outdated, and quite possibly Wrong principles, set by non-living physicists, decades ago. If you would pull your head above the crotches of those you obviously believe are the smartest people that will Ever walk the earth, you will see that Classical Physics, in it’s most fundament essence, is in danger of being trumped. New advances in quantum physics and entanglement have not only exposed properties that Defy the present laws of physics, but are showing signs of heading toward an age where Classical Physics may be completely rewritten.
I suggest you pick up some reading material and get with the times before spewing crap like you’re doing, or at Least have the details to back up your claims, as you ask so proudly of others.

Oh…and if your thread about your run-in with Santa Claus has as many verifiable facts as the thread on Quantum Entanglement that I’ll be opening up pretty-soon, then, as a reasonable, observant, open-minded skeptic, I’ll have less reason to doubt you, won't I?

Surprise…that is how skepticism works! :bravo:

Oh...and to help you get started:

http://www.biophysica.com/quantum.htm

For those who don't know what remote viewing is, here's one man's experience with it:

http://www.jonasridgeway.com/1stobe.html

Being as how we have all seen through our closed eyelides during sleep sometimes, it seems anyone can remote view once they learn how.

Originally posted by RyanParis


There is no evidence of space aliens neither, but they probably exist.

Incorrect... well, they've acknowledged that many planets would be capable of sustaining life and some planets (I believe) have very simple organisms.

Originally posted by ataraxis

*
Incorrect... well, they've acknowledged that many planets would be capable of sustaining life and some planets (I believe) have very simple organisms.

So how does that make his statement incorrect? Your assumtion?

[quote]

RyanParis wrote:
There is no evidence of space aliens neither, but they probably exist.

So how does that make his statement incorrect? Your assumtion?

I don't think you understood what I meant . I meant that there is evidence of the (possibility) of aliens on other planets and other planets sustaining life. I'm just saying you can't really compare the two and use that to support an argument (space aliens and remote viewing have no evidence, but they probably exist - one of them has some evidence to it).

Dammit, people! This section is not to determine whether this stuff actually exists - it's for people who think it does to post and discuss it with each other - not to argue about it not being real!!

Once again, I wish everyone would read the rules of this forum before posting. Let me refresh your memory:

'Beyond Dreaming' was not created for debate, but rather, it exists for members who believe in the sort of topics that fit into its scope (such as OBEs, dream precognition, astral projection, etc.) to have peaceful discussions amongst themselves. I understand many of us don't believe in the material that fits within that forum (myself included) but enough people do that we have given them their own forum to discuss it. For those who doubt and would prefer debate the truth behind such phenomenon, I would suggest using other forums (such as 'Extended Discussion'), since, quite frankly, you're not discussing anything "beyond dreaming" but rather using science and natural laws instead. [/b]

This forum is not here so that members who feel like denouncing every topic that appears in here can do so. If you want to state your beliefs (or lack thereof) on a subject then do so in a civil and considerate manner; do not continue to create needless fights. There is no reason to continue to tell every member who posts in the Beyond Dreaming forum about astral projection [for example] that it doesn't exist. This forum is for those people who believe in that stuff to discuss it peacefully and without condemnation. Remember that. [/b]

'Beyond Dreaming' was not created for debate, but rather, it exists for members who believe in the sort of topics that fit into its scope (such as OBEs, dream precognition, astral projection, etc.) to have peaceful discussions amongst themselves. I understand many of us don't believe in the material that fits within that forum (myself included) but enough people do that we have given them their own forum to discuss it. For those who doubt and would prefer debate the truth behind such phenomenon, I would suggest using other forums (such as 'Extended Discussion'), since, quite frankly, you're not discussing anything "beyond dreaming" but rather using science and natural laws instead.

This forum is not here so that members who feel like denouncing every topic that appears in here can do so. If you want to state your beliefs (or lack thereof) on a subject then do so in a civil and considerate manner; do not continue to create needless fights. There is no reason to continue to tell every member who posts in the Beyond Dreaming forum about astral projection [for example] that it doesn't exist. This forum is for those people who believe in that stuff to discuss it peacefully and without condemnation. Remember that.

[/quote]

A very good refresher burns91 Thank you.
Don't you agree that a conflicting view does promote growth? I do.
But the bad thing that happens is that people that do not believe in what is posted see it as an opportunity to try and destroy what others believe and promote what they think.
But to analyze a topic and to disagree I feel is entirely productive.

Originally posted by Howetzer

Don't you agree that a conflicting view does promote growth? I do.
But the bad thing that happens is that people that do not believe in what is posted see it as an opportunity to try and destroy what others believe and promote what they think.
But to analyze a topic and to disagree I feel is entirely productive.

Yes, I completely agree that having an opposing view of a subject can promote good, stimulating debates. HOWEVER, some people just attack other people's opinions for no good reason. There is a better way to disagree with someone than telling them they are full of shit.

Originally posted by burns91


Yes, I completely agree that having an opposing view of a subject can promote good, stimulating debates. HOWEVER, some people just attack other people's opinions for no good reason. There is a better way to disagree with someone than telling them they are full of shit.

Isn't that the truth
But some people get of on demoralizing peoples opinions.

http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/stargate1.htm

The intention of this thread was to have people post links to remote viewing sites... people did and then people just debated it. Also, ESPECIALLY in the thread like "astral projection is real (EXPLANATION INSIDE!)" or whatever, don't go and quote the rules. They are ASKING for a debate and controversy when posting that. Like, a topic entitled "how do you do psi-balls?", one shouldn't really debate in that. But in "why don't you believe in astral projection", don't go and say "omg dis forum is 4 practizing not 4 arguing bout it" when someone gives a reason. The topics I started arguing in I started arguing in BEFORE he posted the rules and the such and I only continued to post somewhat in already dead threads. Notice the guy who posted this last visited november 28th? He never even saw past the 1st other post (and it is not too hard to google "remote viewing", anyways).

Ataraxis, don't take it personally. I just don't want people to think they can't post stuff without being dragged down and ridiculed. Of course everyone is entitled their opinions - and I've really liked some of the things you've posted before. No worries.

[QUOTE=wasup;211830]

Belief faith... You have to have those to LD for the most part. Magic? where do you get that?


So don't believe in black holes, Don't believe in consciousness, other planets or at one time, that the earth was round.
Limit your imagination and you are stuck in a box.


I new a few people who felt the same way about lucid dreaming too.[/color]

You obviously do not understand. Using "belief and faith" as part of the lucid dreaming experience isn't contradicting what I'm saying. That's IN the dream, i.e., not in reality, i.e. beliefs are actually legitimate in dreams (DREAMS). You can call remote viewing whatever you want, but "psychic abilities," "magic" "powers" are all the same, despite what you may think.

And anyways, black holes and the such are ENTIRELY scientific. The earth is round, conciousness, they are all SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. Remote viewing is a theory, indeed, but based on illegitimate claims.

People who support psychic powers COMPLETELY pervert the concept of an "open-mind." I have accepted the possibility of certain theories such as Gott's time loop, Albert Einstein's time dilation, and even such esoteric theories as the multiverse. As a wise man once said, "it is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it." I've thought about remote viewing, but think about it... seeing into the future? Sounds like a fantasy out of harry potter made up by some kids who noticed that what they thought eventually came true (and by process of incorrect and irrational logic, they must have seen into the future).

I'm a very scientific person, and I wouldn't even need an explanation for remote viewing. At least some empirical evidence and several "remote viewing" tests by people other than pseudoscientists (you know, people who pervert scientific observations to fit pyschic claims), I would believe it. But to accept a concept by solely belief and faith is simply moronic.

- Alex

[QUOTE=wasup;211830]

Belief faith... You have to have those to LD for the most part. Magic? where do you get that?


So don't believe in black holes, Don't believe in consciousness, other planets or at one time, that the earth was round.
Limit your imagination and you are stuck in a box.


I new a few people who felt the same way about lucid dreaming too.[/color]

You obviously do not understand. Using "belief and faith" as part of the lucid dreaming experience isn't contradicting what I'm saying. That's IN the dream, i.e., not in reality, i.e. beliefs are actually legitimate in dreams (DREAMS). You can call remote viewing whatever you want, but "psychic abilities," "magic" "powers" are all the same, despite what you may think.

And anyways, black holes and the such are ENTIRELY scientific. The earth is round, conciousness, they are all SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. Remote viewing is a theory, indeed, but based on illegitimate claims.

People who support psychic powers COMPLETELY pervert the concept of an "open-mind." I have accepted the possibility of certain theories such as Gott's time loop, Albert Einstein's time dilation, and even such esoteric theories as the multiverse. As a wise man once said, "it is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it." I've thought about remote viewing, but think about it... seeing into the future? Sounds like a fantasy out of harry potter made up by some kids who noticed that what they thought eventually came true (and by process of incorrect and irrational logic, they must have seen into the future).

I'm a very scientific person, and I wouldn't even need an explanation for remote viewing. At least some empirical evidence and several "remote viewing" tests by people other than pseudoscientists (you know, people who pervert scientific observations to fit pyschic claims), I would believe it. But to accept a concept by solely belief and faith is simply moronic.

- Alex

being scientific doesn't mean you shun info from all sources, at 1 time all that we call science was called psuedoscience or magic. yet you claim that psychic abilities are psudo because you simply can't 'study' them in the lab like you can electricity or fire. well ppl thought that the concepts that we were all connected and that all things were energy and vibration - of which the ancients always knew- were just fanciful fiction but are now true thanks to quantum theory, mechanics, and physics as well as string theory. psi abilities of all kinds are spiritual gifts that may not be able to be measured easily with todays science but that doesn't make them make believe. you totally discount the many times that a parent will suddenly knew that their child is in danger without being anywhere near the child and able to even see said child nor the countless times that ppl have seen a loved 1 apear nbefore them at or near the time of that person's death and they get a call very shortly after to find out that person had just died. how many times has someone called you and you knew who it was before caller id annouced who it was you knew who it was and you didn't they were going to call you before hand? how many times did you think of someone and then they called you out of the blue? how many times have you finished someone else's sentence or said something someone else was thinking? if you think those are just 'coincidence' then you aren't a very scientific person after all. you can't control real life situations or the universe. you also don't see the patterns that were put there before hand, the much bigger picture. you say that see into the future is impossible, that precognition is impossible, why is that? have you checked the actual probablity of something happening? i highly doubt that. i do know that precognition is possible from much personal experience from dream precognition. most of mine involved books that i would read at some point in the future. in the dreams i would be reading a book, get to a certain page and read that page again and again many times. at some time in waking life i would read a certain book and get to a certain page and be reading it and realize that i had read that exact page in that exact book in a dream sometime ago and i have never ever read that book in my life ever before that day. it's happened many times to me. explain that, 'scientifically' to me, please. i have never imaginedb that nor any of my spiritual gifts working. i'm an empath, a latent telepath, and a healer. last year i learned reiki 1/2/3 3 is also known as master and teacher level. i'm also a light language healer, i learned about that this year and i've been doing that for decades without intent until now. i'm also a wiccan with 20+ yrs experience in actual magick, i specialize in healing and protection. i'm always learning new things.


jadaja