Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Do All People have Psychic Abilities?

psychic paranormal

  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#31    samus

samus

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,215 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 02 June 2014 - 12:59 AM

View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

So that's it? A META-study (did you read the requests at all?) that is ONLY 'published' in the 'Journal of Parapsychology' (an esteemed organisation if I ever saw one - see below) and that is not peer-reviewed... and includes - apart from unbounding enthusiasm and claims (not at all supported) that no bias was found in the experiments - these words:

Do you even read the posts on this thread? If you had, you would have noticed that I provided in my message adressed to Emma_Acid some of the best Nonlocal mind Empirical and Theoritical evidence (peer-reviewed cumulative) according to Dr Emmanuele Tressoldi at the University Di Padova, Italia.

But then you might have ignored it, it's not unheard of when presenting such materials to die-hard ''skeptics''.


Just in case: http://www.psy.unipd...etical-evidence


View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

OK, then.  But forgive my sarcasm..
  

I find it a bit sarcastic I must admit to cherry-pick a sentence in a research paper and taking it out of context. In case you have forgotten what was written before:

Our meta-analysis on the forced-choice database of studies from
1987 to 2010 and subsequent tests on possible alternative sources for
the statistical anomaly indicate that the forced-choice domain generally
produces significant psi effects above mean chance expectation.

Source: http://www.psy.unipd...ce_Storm012.pdf
From: http://www.psy.unipd...etical-evidence

View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

I repeat - the only place that paper has seen light of day is the Journal of Parapsychology, agreed?  Now, is this an accurate list of the members of the board of that organisation? (hint, yes):

Daryl J. Bem, Ph.D.
Roger Nelson, Ph.D.
John Palmer, Ph.D.
Dean Radin, Ph.D.
Jessica M. Utts, Ph.D.

You forgot people from the Board of Directors:

President: James C. Carpenter Ph.D
Vice President: Gerd H. Hovelmann, M.A
Secretery: Hoyt Edge, Ph.D

Source: http://www.parapsych..._directors.aspx

View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

Refer back to my post above and look at who I named - Geez, the only one missing is Sheldrake.  I'll be going into some detail about these pretenders later (I am off to work right now) - plus I can prove conflicts of interest, quite apart from what we shall see when I get time to go over that paper...

I am curious to see some concrete exemple indeed, as I don't find an Anti-parapsychology thread on a skeptic organisation forum that much convincing to be honest.

View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

Radin and Utts in particular are no scientists and are an embarrassment - again, I will show why, with cites and links to their very own words...

Yet Jessica Utts is a respected statistician, as her background quickly reveals. She even worked with one of your reference point, Ray Hyman:

''Collaborated with Professor Ray Hyman (University of Oregon) to prepare a report assessing the statistical evidence for psychic functioning in U.S. government sponsored research. The report was part of a review done by the American Institutes of Research (AIR) at the request of Congress and the CIA.''

Source: http://archived.para...s/j_m_utts.html

As for Dean Radin, as an non-materialistic scientist, no doubt his views are not well received in the 'skeptics' materialist ideology.


View PostChrLzs, on 01 June 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

We are certainly off to a flying start...  Just remember that you chose that one, Sam.........

You choose to emphasize on this paper and somehow forgot everything else I writted. I posted it here to demonstrate matter-of-factly that your assumption: ''such test only ALWAYS show no statistical effect whatsoever'' is an innacurate statement based on prejudice and misinformation.

A flying start, if say so, but I think it's flying low.

Edited by sam_comm, 02 June 2014 - 01:37 AM.


#32    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 02 June 2014 - 03:39 AM

Thanks for that, sam, but before I address the new stuff you have posted (you *seriously* need to widen your search on Utts...), I would like to commence looking at the paper that YOU nominated.  Let's see how this goes.  Feel free to interject with countering cites and quotes...

First up, a brief comment on 'meta'-analyses and/or 'meta'-statistics.  For those who don't know, these are studies where the results of other studies are collated, looking (hopefully in an unbiased fashion) for significant trends or evidence.  Naturally, such studies have to be done very carefully, as not only is the methodology of the 'meta-' study itself up for scrutiny, EVERY study it includes needs to be valid, in terms of methodology (and documentary proof thereof) and freedom from bias.  Plus, the way in which the studies were chosen needs to addressed in detail.

Frankly, meta analyses should raise a red flag with the reader - they really need to look carefully not at just that study, but also every study beneath it.  A small aside here - does anyone here think that all science is perfectly done and above reproach?  Of course not.  So it matters NOT whether you are looking at 'mainstream' science or fringe science like paranormalcy - if you want to be taken seriously, then you must abide by the rules and do things properly and methodically.  Your study/ies must be fully documented, beyond question in terms of subjectivity and all of the usual controls (I'll list them later) must be there to ensure there is no bias, opportunity for cheating, or just simple errors and misinterpretations.

Now, if we accept that science is not perfect, and that some folks on the fringes might desperately *want* their results to be taken seriously (especially if the existence of their organisation depends on it, eg the Journal of Parapsychology (of which Jessica Utts is a board member) or ..say .. the International Remote Viewing Association (yes, I'm serious.., and of which Jessica Utts is .., yes, you guessed it!), then it might just be possible that they would simply set up their own organisation, call itself a peer-reviewed journal, and get their results published that way, focusing of course on meta-studies that can hide the flaws two levels (or more) down...  No surely that would never happen... but call me a conspiracist - I take no-one at face value...

Anyway, my point with all that is to re-iterate - do NOT believe everything you read, no matter what side you are on, and research the claims thoroughly if you don't want to be scammed by pretenders and charlatans - some of whom, I might add genuinely believe their analyses are sound.  Dean Radin is a good example of that, and I shall, in a later post, give several examples of stuff that come direct from Dean himself... Some of it will amaze (or perhaps disgust..) you, coming from a supposed scientist.

So with that in mind, and also remembering that we asked for a NON-meta-study so as to make it easier to check the original research at it's source... but sam posted one anyway.... let's start to look at that study he gave as a state-of-the-art example of the best evidence....

Here's the link again..

META-ANALYSIS OF ESP STUDIES, 1987–2010: Assessing the Success of the Forced-Choice Design in Parapsychology,  Storm, Patrizio, Tressoldi, DiRisio

I'll leave the abstract and conclusions and a discussion about whether this can claim in any way to be peer-reviewed, until last - let's jump right into the study itself... (but first I'm having my afternoon coffee - I shall return in 20 minutes or so for the first instalment...)

The study begins with a rather interesting 'history lesson' about J.B. Rhine and K. Zener, inventor of the 'Zener Cards'.  Strangely, it leaves out a very important footnote about that....

(to be continued after I caffeinate...)




P.S. Sam (or anyone else), in future, if you wish to counter or dispute anything I say, can you please be specific and fully quote me, in context?  Thanks for debating in good faith....

All my posts about Apollo are dedicated to the memory of MID - who knew, lived and was an integral part of, Apollo.

"Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue probably will not go away soon, no matter what the CIA does or says. The belief that we are not alone in the universe is too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive to make the issue amenable to traditional scientific studies or rational explanation and evidence." - Gerald K Haines

#33    simplybill

simplybill

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 472 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Heartland of America

Posted 02 June 2014 - 03:56 AM

View Postthe.truth.is.out.there.x, on 01 June 2014 - 11:57 PM, said:

That would be cool. I'm always interested in a good paranormal story :)
I'll try to get back here tomorrow.
The two stories are interesting to me, but they could be written off as coincidence.

Every warrior is happy when his enemies flee before him, but much more blessed is the man to whom his fiercest enemies can come with confidence, knowing beforehand they will be received with love.
Richard Wurmbrand in Reaching Toward the Heights.

#34    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 02 June 2014 - 04:54 AM

OK, as I mentioned above, the study starts by referring to J.B. Rhine and K. Zener.  Rhine was responsible for many studies commencing back in the 30's, and helped Zener design his cards...

So, how did that go for them?  Well, strangely, this study doesn't comment at all on what happened..  First up, it should be noted that Rhine had to change several of his techniques, starting with one as basic as you could possibly imagine, namely his shuffling of the cards...This, along with the fact that the cards were initially printed on card stock that was thin enough that the shapes could be detected under some light conditions by those with keen eyesight, and then that the cards were held up vertically at eye level by the presenter (whose face, inc. eyes and glasses....... was visible at all times) so that those with keen observation could spot the reflection of the shape (which, on Zener cards is very large, how convenient..).

And what were the results like, after all those were 'fixed', and in subsequent, properly controlled Zener card studies?  Go on, take a wild guess.   Well, I s'pose this was the 30's and 40's, so it was a pretty naive time.. but seriously?  Now let's walk forward thru history a little and see what became of Rhine and his associates...

In 1974, Rhine presented a paper to the Journal of Parapsychology (more about them later), namely:

Rhine, J.B. (1974a). Security Versus Deception in Parapsychology. Journal of Parapsychology, 38, 99-121.

In it, Rhine righteously (ironically as it turned out) attacked those who had been busted for fraudulent science in parapsychology in 15 cases that he chose, where fraudulent results had been generated and published.  He stated:

Quote

Fortunately, the culprits have thus far been caught (at least in our ‘known’ cases) before serious damage has been done

and then..

Quote

we have been able to do quite a lot to insure that it is impossible for dishonesty to be implemented inside the well-organized psi laboratory today


Oh, really?  Sadly for Rhine, later that year he had to (and I'll concede this must have taken quite some bravery and a huge swallowing of pride) post this paper:

Rhine, J.B. (1974b). A New Case of Experimenter Unreliability. Journal of Parapsychology, 38, 215-225.

In this paper he had to admit that the man he had worked with and appointed as the director of research in his laboratory, W.J. Levy, had now been exposed by coworkers as committing fraud.  This was a preliminary report - the final report (again, by Rhine himself) was even more damning:

Rhine, J.B. (1975). Second Report on a Case of Experimenter Fraud. Journal of Parapsychology, 39, 306-325.

In this, Rhine had to admit the level of fraud by W. J. Levy was found to be so extensive that all research involving him was dismissed. Levy had been one of 'those' who somehow managed to get 'significant' results on almost every experiment...

What makes this even more shocking is that before this unfortunate, but revealing, occurrence Rhine himself argued that "only certain experimenters have the knack" for 'successfully doing' parapsychological experiments, that they should only be done "by those with the knack for obtaining significant results" - those without the 'knack' "should find something else to do" - from Rhine, J.B., & Pratt, J.G. (1957) - Parapsychology: Frontier Science of the Mind.

I'd suggest that there are some other, more apt but less kind, words for that 'knack'...

Does that sort of talk, and then the later proven cases of fraud, not raise alarm bells???  Is anyone going to suggest I'm out of line for digging a bit deeper to check on these supposedly statistically significant results in each study cited??  You'd have to be crazy if you took these people at face value...


Anyway, all that stuff about Rhine, Zener and co was strangely absent from this new study, but they thought it fit to mention him initially - perhaps as a guide to the credibility of the rest of the report? :D

Now, again, these facts do NOT, in themselves invalidate the study.  But they do show that there are charlatans and frauds in this field, and that it is obviously important to thoroughly check all the data being used in any meta-analysis..


I shall return later to continue...

All my posts about Apollo are dedicated to the memory of MID - who knew, lived and was an integral part of, Apollo.

"Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue probably will not go away soon, no matter what the CIA does or says. The belief that we are not alone in the universe is too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive to make the issue amenable to traditional scientific studies or rational explanation and evidence." - Gerald K Haines

#35    samus

samus

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,215 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 02 June 2014 - 05:52 PM

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

Frankly, meta analyses should raise a red flag with the reader - they really need to look carefully not at just that study, but also every study beneath it.  A small aside here - does anyone here think that all science is perfectly done and above reproach?  Of course not.  So it matters NOT whether you are looking at 'mainstream' science or fringe science like paranormalcy - if you want to be taken seriously, then you must abide by the rules and do things properly and methodically.  Your study/ies must be fully documented, beyond question in terms of subjectivity and all of the usual controls (I'll list them later) must be there to ensure there is no bias, opportunity for cheating, or just simple errors and misinterpretations.

That's right, but you seem to be implying here that Parapsychologists are somehow unaware of this, which couldn't be more wrong.

As parapsychologist J.E Kennedy points out in his paper: Can Parapsychology Move Beyond The Controversies Of Retrospective Analysis?

''The most convincing evidence for a meta-analysis occurs when all included experiments are well
designed with adequate power and obtain reliable effects. If some experiments are underpowered or have
flaws, or the effects are heterogeneous, observational synthesis-generated analyses are used to attempt to
compensate for the weaknesses in the original experiments.''

Source: http://jeksite.org/psi/jp13a.pdf

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

Now, if we accept that science is not perfect, and that some folks on the fringes might desperately *want* their results to be taken seriously (especially if the existence of their organisation depends on it, eg the Journal of Parapsychology (of which Jessica Utts is a board member) or ..say .. the International Remote Viewing Association (yes, I'm serious.., and of which Jessica Utts is .., yes, you guessed it!), then it might just be possible that they would simply set up their own organisation, call itself a peer-reviewed journal, and get their results published that way, focusing of course on meta-studies that can hide the flaws two levels (or more) down...  No surely that would never happen... but call me a conspiracist - I take no-one at face value...

The Parapsychological Association (PA), the main body of Parapsychology (including the Rhine Research Center and the Journal of Parapsychology) is an affiliated organisation of the American Association For The Advancement of Science (AAAS), The world largest general scientific society.

http://www.aaas.org/

So yes, despite your speculation, it does meet the criteria of scientific research and scholar inquiry. Surely you know that science is not restricted to specific points of views and ideas?

As for Professor Jessica Utts, yet again a guilt by association it would seem but is it really strange that a researcher interested in remote viewing studies will collaborate with The international Remote Viewing Association as an advisor?

What if a respected physicist collaborated on board with the International Organization For Medical Physics (IOMP)? It's perfectly normal to me.

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

Anyway, my point with all that is to re-iterate - do NOT believe everything you read, no matter what side you are on, and research the claims thoroughly if you don't want to be scammed by pretenders and charlatans - some of whom, I might add genuinely believe their analyses are sound.  Dean Radin is a good example of that, and I shall, in a later post, give several examples of stuff that come direct from Dean himself... Some of it will amaze (or perhaps disgust..) you, coming from a supposed scientist.

That should also be applied to these skeptics associations whose main goal, it appears to me, is to discredit every research that does not fit with a materialistic, physicalist type of science. They tend to throw the baby with the bathwater on everything that contradict that ideology.

I thought important to mention it, since the only reference you provided to support yor claims is a link refering to the forum of one of these associations.

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 03:39 AM, said:

So with that in mind, and also remembering that we asked for a NON-meta-study so as to make it easier to check the original research at it's source... but sam posted one anyway.... let's start to look at that study he gave as a state-of-the-art example of the best evidence....

Did you even took the time to look a the best Nonlocal mind evidence provided on Dr Emmanuele Tressolidi's website? There are various experimental evidence, studies on nonlocal interactions and theoritical contributions.

Also as stated above, I think it's important to rehiterate that there is no absolute, definite proof of psi phenomenon but there are very interesting data that suggest it might exist to some extent. You might choose to ignore or dismiss them, that's your choice but some beg to differ. ;)

Edited by sam_comm, 02 June 2014 - 06:52 PM.


#36    samus

samus

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,215 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 02 June 2014 - 07:31 PM

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

So, how did that go for them?  Well, strangely, this study doesn't comment at all on what happened..

What seems strange to me is that you took the introductory paragraph (6 lines) of the paper and forgot about the remaing 31 pages. Did you not notice that this research paper is not about J.B Rhine and that this was but a short introduction to explain how early parapsychological studies started? Seriously...


View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

First up, it should be noted that Rhine had to change several of his techniques, starting with one as basic as you could possibly imagine, namely his shuffling of the cards...This, along with the fact that the cards were initially printed on card stock that was thin enough that the shapes could be detected under some light conditions by those with keen eyesight, and then that the cards were held up vertically at eye level by the presenter (whose face, inc. eyes and glasses....... was visible at all times) so that those with keen observation could spot the reflection of the shape (which, on Zener cards is very large, how convenient..).

That's true and parapsychologists no longer use card-guessing studies due to methodogical problems (such as sensory leakage). These were the early times of parapsychology and even when Rhine redesigned the Zener cards and decided to use an automatic card shuffler, it was very difficult to prevent cheating.


View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

Anyway, all that stuff about Rhine, Zener and co was strangely absent from this new study, but they thought it fit to mention him initially - perhaps as a guide to the credibility of the rest of the report? :D

Dr. J.B Rhine is seen as the Father of modern Parapsychology, the first to have dedicated his career to psychical research and really spur the interest of academics for this field. You'll find a lot of references to J.B Rhine and his wife Dr Louisa E. Rhine, in the annals of Parapsychology.

View PostChrLzs, on 02 June 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

Now, again, these facts do NOT, in themselves invalidate the study.  But they do show that there are charlatans and frauds in this field, and that it is obviously important to thoroughly check all the data being used in any meta-analysis..

Obviously they do not and the research in not about Rhine's biography. Your analysis seems to have drifted to the point of irrelevance.

Edited by sam_comm, 02 June 2014 - 07:44 PM.


#37    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 02 June 2014 - 09:18 PM

View Postsam_comm, on 02 June 2014 - 07:31 PM, said:

What seems strange to me is that you took the introductory paragraph (6 lines) of the paper and forgot about the remaing 31 pages.
What seems very obvious to me is this DELIBERATE goading (or is it simply a complete lack of reading comprehension, or perhaps rudeness?) to not notice all the comments I made about the work "to be continued" - I'll be back when I can.

SERIOUSLY, Sam_comm, do you expect me to go through the entire thing immediately and on your time schedule?  How long did it take YOU to actually nominate a study, and now you want it done instantly - is that in the hope that I'll miss stuff?   Not going to happen, and I will proceed at my own pace.

Frankly I don't know why I bother with such rudeness, impatience and arrogance.  Maybe you have hours on end to do this and wordily avoid the actual points being made, but I don't.  And I just love your assurances that nowadays these problems have been overcome,...  Well, your 'Father of Modern Parapsychology also thought that in 1974, and look what happened.  

Quote

Did you not notice that this research paper is not about J.B Rhine and that this was but a short introduction to explain how early parapsychological studies started? Seriously...
Yes, I did notice it, and also your smarm.  But unlike you I want to address EVERYTHING in that report and I won't be leaving out parts that people like you don't want to hear.  And if the report tries to make demiGods out of people (like you also have just done with Rhine), then I think it is VERY appropriate and ontopic to show these 'Fathers' of this dreadfully flawed 'science' with the daylight shone on them.  The writers of that study clearly and deliberately left out some very important information about these early 'studies'.  By taking these people at face value you will be easily misled, and so far that is being shown very clearly by your replies.


If you wish to deny that and think it is irrelevant, then that is your biased right.  Others however are reading this (and politely remaining patient) - I'll get back to the next part of the study as soon as I can - but I have mouths to feed..  And don't think your tactics are not obvious, anything but address the flaws and admit that there are huge problems in the subjectivity and lack of controls being applied to these studies - the ones where they are applied magically, inexplicably don't show even the "extremely weak" effects.

All my posts about Apollo are dedicated to the memory of MID - who knew, lived and was an integral part of, Apollo.

"Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue probably will not go away soon, no matter what the CIA does or says. The belief that we are not alone in the universe is too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive to make the issue amenable to traditional scientific studies or rational explanation and evidence." - Gerald K Haines

#38    samus

samus

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,215 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 02 June 2014 - 10:30 PM

I provided exemple of research and studies that suggest the existence of psi phenomenon as I was asked. At the end of day, what you do or don't do with them is none my concern. We can certainly debate and exchange ideas on these subjects though your ''I am a Debunker'' kind of rethoric does not make it very interesting or even possible to do so. One can at best try to respond to your monologue, which as I pointed out is thus far irrelevant to the 31 pages of the research paper on Meta-analysis I posted here. J.B Rhine is the first first empirical investigator of psychic phenomenon. That's simple fact. The introduction of the paper doesn't elaborate on Rhine's achievements and errors because it's not the subject of the paper.

I am not here to convince and sway die-hard skeptics that psychical research is legitimate. We all know it's a lost and fruitless cause on a discussion forum. I can only offer my opinions and references. I too have other things to do. ;)

Edited by sam_comm, 02 June 2014 - 11:30 PM.


#39    Professor T

Professor T

    bardo

  • Member
  • 2,503 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • I'm not really a Professor so don't take my words as Gospel

Posted 03 June 2014 - 12:20 AM

View Postthe.truth.is.out.there.x, on 31 May 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

Many people believe that all humans have special abilities; in many religions there are people who can perform miracles, and some people claim to have developed abilities. According to scientists, there is a large portion of the human brain that is not in use. Could that section contain special abilities? Can some people tap into an energy that results in psychic powers, or a sixth sense?

Yeah, IMO all people can actively address these latent hidden talents, abilities, gifts or whatever you want to call them.. Though a lot of people create limitations that prevent accessing them, or actively take charge in creating limitations in others by denying the possibility that these extra sensory perceptions occur.. Perception belongs to the self. And IMO, the first step to discovering our capabilities isn't about belief or outright faith that they exist, but is all about understanding your self and your own perceptions.. Trusting your higher self and your own experiences leads one to conclusions that our world and everything in it is spun by unseen forces one can tap into and experience.


#40    XenoFish

XenoFish

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,331 posts
  • Joined:27 Jul 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Between here and there

  • Freedom is an illusion

Posted 03 June 2014 - 02:05 AM

Quote

Though a lot of people create limitations that prevent accessing them, or actively take charge in creating limitations in others by denying the possibility that these extra sensory perceptions occur.


Then riddle me this batman? Why hasn't a hypnotist convinced someone that their telekinetic and they moved something without touching it? If it's all about removing mental barriers then shouldn't we have audio tapes that grant psychic abilities? Learn PK while you sleep, etc.

Sometimes to kill an idea, you must change it.

#41    Professor T

Professor T

    bardo

  • Member
  • 2,503 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • I'm not really a Professor so don't take my words as Gospel

Posted 03 June 2014 - 02:32 AM

View PostXenoFish, on 03 June 2014 - 02:05 AM, said:

Then riddle me this batman? Why hasn't a hypnotist convinced someone that their telekinetic and they moved something without touching it? If it's all about removing mental barriers then shouldn't we have audio tapes that grant psychic abilities? Learn PK while you sleep, etc.
Have no idea.. Besides which, PK isn't a perception as far as my understanding of it goes. There's no riddle in this..  PK is manipulation of matter with mind, and not a Perception, which is what I was referring to.


#42    Lumpino

Lumpino

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 228 posts
  • Joined:18 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 June 2014 - 05:12 PM

View Postthe.truth.is.out.there.x, on 31 May 2014 - 03:23 PM, said:

Many people believe that all humans have special abilities; in many religions there are people who can perform miracles, and some people claim to have developed abilities. According to scientists, there is a large portion of the human brain that is not in use. Could that section contain special abilities? Can some people tap into an energy that results in psychic powers, or a sixth sense?

Everybody have abilities. But, but mostly hidden. He does not know about them.
They may wake up them through meditations. For example by Yoga.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddhi


#43    ChrLzs

ChrLzs

    Just a contributor..

  • Member
  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gold Coast (Qld, Australia)

  • I only floccinaucinihilipilificate
    when it IS worthless...

Posted 05 June 2014 - 05:15 AM

I apologise for being a bit slow getting back to this..  but I would like to point out that the first introductory section to this study pretty much made my main point.  J.B. Rhine is being called a "Father of Parapsychology" and yet spent a LOT of his time firstly correcting many really basic (dare I say "beginner") errors in his own studies.. then spent more time criticisiing many other people's studies where false/faked results were published.. and then had to admit that even after all that, he was suckered by his own chosen laboratory manager.  And not in a small way - the fakery and deceit was so ingrained that all of the research involving that person had to be dismissed.  And you wonder why I say not to trust studies UNLESS they are properly documented and reviewable?

I'd compare this sort of thing to a couple of other areas of science.  First up, how about Relativity?  It could easily be said that much of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity were also quite controversial when first proposed.  They contained much information that was counter-intuitive - and not just to Joe Average, many scientists were strongly opposed to some aspects of his theories..  But as time passed, every single prediction he made (with a couple of extremely minor exceptions) was borne out and verified by other scientists checking and re-checking and testing the predictions and observations.  These tests ranged from simple observations (eg involving Mercury and the Sun - look'emup), imagery from the Hubble Space Telescope, some of it has even crept into GPS systems..  All of it is measurable down to incredible levels of accuracy.  Given all of that, I'm pretty happy to call Einstein the "Father of Relativity" even though he himself happily admitted that he was standing on the shoulders of giants and just happened to put it all together...  Relativity is pretty much proven beyond reasonable doubt and accepted by mainstream science.  If something does 'overturn' it, it will only *refine* his theories, as they work perfectly fine for everything we have managed to test so far.

But now let's consider Psychology...  Psychology is a very different sort of 'science' - it is a study of human behavior, social interactions, mental states and feelings.  Now I'm no student of this 'science', but I'm sure that Freud and others have done some very fine work defining the science as best they can - but can you see that this is TOTALLY different to Relativity?  You cannot objectively measure feelings, social behavior, mental disabilities - indeed that is reflected by terms like Autism Disorder Spectrum - where a label can be applied across a wide range of symptoms or behaviors.  So, in psychology, subjective measurement IS largely justifiable, simply because much of it is not measurable with rulers or precise instruments...

But what about parapsychology - in particular claims of ESP, or telekinesis or precognition?  THINK about it!!!!!
Sure, the MECHANISM by which any of those might happen may be immeasurable, for reasons similar to that in psychology.  But now we are NOT talking about the internal mechanisms that might allow such abilities to exist, but the existence of the abilities themselves.  Those abilities do NOT require subjective measurement!  If they truly exist, they should be measured OBJECTIVELY.

To be very specific, and I'll come back to this as I progress through that 'study', there is NO excuse for incorporating subjective tests when simple and truly objective tests are available!  Indeed, one of the basic tenets of science is that you ALWAYS use the simplest approach /simplest tests - KISS.

The classical example of this deliberate use of subjective testing in order to skew the results (be it deliberate or otherwise), is using interpretations of pictures, as is done in Ganzfeld 'tests' - I'll have a LOT more to say about that when we finally get to Radin who is the poster boy for ridiculous experiment design.   WHY couldn't they use truly randomised numbers or patterns?  They will say it is some sort of problem where it needs to be something from the real world...  I say (and will backup) that quite apart from the later subjective interpretations of the pictures, just the fact that pictures have been chosen as a supposedly random set of data is completely and utterly flawed.  If you don't know why that is, then I will be hoping to educate you as this progresses - but while waiting for me to get to it - why not think really hard and see if you can think why a set of pictures (no matter *how* they are procured) is NOT a properly randomisable data set.

When setting up a test for psychological 'powers', there is that and much much more to think about.  (Gee, you'd think that J.B. Rhine might have at least known right from the start that the way he shuffled the cards just might have been important....)

Anyway, enough ranting..  I'll try to get onto the next section later tonight, depending on where my life goes and/or what's on telly..  :D  Don't be holding your breath, but I will be back to continue...

Edited by ChrLzs, 05 June 2014 - 05:22 AM.

All my posts about Apollo are dedicated to the memory of MID - who knew, lived and was an integral part of, Apollo.

"Like the JFK assassination conspiracy theories, the UFO issue probably will not go away soon, no matter what the CIA does or says. The belief that we are not alone in the universe is too emotionally appealing and the distrust of our government is too pervasive to make the issue amenable to traditional scientific studies or rational explanation and evidence." - Gerald K Haines

#44    enigma7

enigma7

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2014

Posted 07 June 2014 - 09:08 AM

ChrLzs, sorry I'm not really seeing how psychic "abilities" are outside the realm of psychology? It's something that takes place in the brain no different than human emotions. So that's kind of like saying we should question whether or not everyone has the ability to love since it can't be proven scientifically. Even with studies created that measures love, attraction, etc. by the chemicals released by the brain when feeling these things, you'd have to expect some of the results will show the participant was NOT experiencing those emotions at the time.  But no one would write the entire concept off as a fluke, so what's really so different about psychic abilities?

In my opinion, just like we won't fall in love or even be physically attracted to every person we meet even if the conditions are "manipulated" to encourage it, we also aren't going to have a telepathic connection with every person we meet. So those experiments were a little silly to begin with, but disproving their validity doesn't disprove that psychic abilities exist in general...

Edited by enigma7, 07 June 2014 - 09:09 AM.


#45    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,695 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 June 2014 - 10:46 AM

View Postenigma7, on 07 June 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

ChrLzs, sorry I'm not really seeing how psychic "abilities" are outside the realm of psychology?

Psychology is generally regarded as the study of mental functions as they relate to behavior.  Something like psychic abilities would be a bit more structural in definition, so it would ironically be more accurately describe by the broader term of "neuroscience".

Quote

It's something that takes place in the brain no different than human emotions.

What leads you to this conclusion?

Quote

So that's kind of like saying we should question whether or not everyone has the ability to love since it can't be proven scientifically.

Wouldn't it be more like saying we should question where the the ability to love originates from, if not the the brain?

Quote

Even with studies created that measures love, attraction, etc. by the chemicals released by the brain when feeling these things, you'd have to expect some of the results will show the participant was NOT experiencing those emotions at the time.  But no one would write the entire concept off as a fluke, so what's really so different about psychic abilities?

The lack of an undeniable phenomena.






Also tagged with psychic, paranormal

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users