Online is untrustworthy. You need to purchase scientific journals - do you know how to do this?

You're actually mistaken about the experiment you mentioned. The man was locked in the room and monitored 24/7. The whole ordeal was even filmed and aired on national television! The man succesfully retrieved the numbers and he claimed to do so through astral projection. Yes, we don't know whether or not he used astral projection, but if not, how did he get the numbers? Give me one feasable answer. Man, locked in room for entirety of night, watched over by scientists, in the morning, able to recite the 6-digit number. How do you propose he did this without the use of astral projection? If you're that picky with evidence you'll never believe anything whether it's true or not. No hard feelings but I feel very strongly about this because I know what I experienced and I am by no measure irrational or deluded as I will indeed admit, many here are.

Inside job! You just never know anything can happen.

None of us were there to experience the whole experiment! So, we only have to go by what was written down and, recorded by these people.

Then that will be your response when someone does the test that jj has set then ? how can your response to what happens if a video of that test is produced be any different than this one ? if this is the case and we all need to be there to see the event then it sems like we wil be going round in circles forever . video after video being produced and skeptic after skeptic saying well i wasnt there so it isnt conclusive . or it must have been a inside job .

I saw the footage. They were scientists out to denounce it, not prove it. Inside job.. And what possible motivation would they have for an 'inside job' Hahaha, this is getting ridiculous...

Any chance you can find a link to this or to the write up of it ?

blessings ss79 x x x x

The only thing that is getting ridiculous is you're flamboyant attitude.
I was only stating anything in a situtation such as that could be possible! The whole thing could have just been set up for all you know.

For you're sake, I will see if I can find this video and, then judge for myself! Until then I have nothing more to add.

My flambouyancy is a result of complete and utter frustration. Not towards you in particular. It's just that given all the evidence I've seen I find all this hard to fathom...

see next post for correct link

I think ths may be it tom

blessings SS79 xx

http://www.near-death.com/tart.html

I cant find any video evidence of this but the write ups there .

edited to add the link silly me lol

So how come you skeptics don't try astral travel/projection yourselves?
And then, if it doesn't work, be skeptic, it works for many people. And theres lot of evidence that points to it being possible.

Thank you very much SS79! I will have a look at it later when I have more time.

Actually I'm what you'd call a skeptic as well. I've had many lucid dreams before and always attributed it to simply having more control over my subconscious than some people do. (I have a significantly above average IQ, so i figured perhaps that came with the territory.) I cannot, however, be 100% skeptical and just dismiss everything i hear anymore. This is because I was REALLY able to tell the future two times in my life. I can't explain it, nor am I able to control it, but let me give you the examples that forced me to realize that i should listen with a bit of an open mind to peoples stories.

Keep in mind there are witnesses other than myself in both cases (although they may not even seem to be big enough occurrences that one might ask for extra proof.)

1- I was about 13 years old and maybe about once or twice a month (ALWAYS on a Friday or Saturday ONLY) we would go to a family friends house. I wake up one morning (obviously after having some sort of dream that i don't remember anymore. I walk right up to my mom and ask, "mom are we going to "so and so's" house tonight?" she looks at me and says "it's a Tuesday today. we only go there on Fridays and Saturdays" later on that day while she was at work she got a call from the lady saying that they had just picked up a new dog and wanted us to go over so that we could see him.
Like i said, i really don't know how to explain it, but this was more than just me saying oh deja vu or something like that, because my mom and my sister were both there and heard me ask the question a few hours before any of us could have known that this random Tuesday would be any different than any other day.

I'll save typing up the second story for now and if anyone is interested in hearing it, feel free to let me know and i'll add it in another post. This way if no one is interested i don't have to bore you all with the details.

What i'm really trying to say is that i definitely believe in science over most things because of it's logicality and objectiveness. There will always be a little side area devoted to thinking there's a possibility for some of these things and i can't just dismiss them because i didn't see them happen. On a forum, though, lets all admit that it mainly has to do with how much you trust the person you're talking to. Perhaps you've talked to them many times and do believe them after a while.

One other point i want to make. Have you guys ever watched any tv shows or movies lately where people have abilities (and/or powers) and no one around them believes them. We sit there and start yelling at the tv like "what the hell... just believe him..." maybe we should put ourselves in that state of mind and give people the benefit of the doubt. i mean in this case if the person isnt making money, getting ad clicks, etc. from it he is either telling the truth, or further propagating his paranoid delusions onto others. I suppose the choice is yours.

I believe there was something similar to this posted earlier.

Anyway, I had a lucid dream / what appeared to be out of body experience last night. Hard to explain it was like a mix between the two. I was having a dream I was dying or leaving my body (hard to tell what was happening). Next thing I know I'm hearing a bunch of strange noises than the noises stop & I'm out of my body (except I'm not in my room). At this point though the dream became very real. I tried speaking but could not at first. Eventually, I could but I don't recall if it was verbal or telepathic.

After I could speak I went to the person in front of me and asked if they know my girlfriend & if he could help me find her (she passed away about 2 months ago). I also asked his name but wouldn't tell me or said something like whatever you want it to be. He took me through this corridor to the outside, meanwhile passing some demonic looking people. When we got out he pointed up to the sky & said something to the effect of "she's in that plane of existence". I asked if she ever comes here & he said sometimes. I don't recall everything word for word I was never good at quoting.

After this the experience became like a dream again & no longer seemed real, than shortly after I woke up.

Kind of curious what some of you make of this.

You know, I'd always like to think that there is something more to dreams than what science can tell us. There has been a lot of research, though, that explains quite a bit. I think the majority of the time, dreams, whether they are lucid or not are mostly wishful thinking (however weird that may be) on a subconscious level. I do think that some people are much more in-tune with their subconscious brain than others which can lead to much more profound feelings of experience.
For example: My father recently told me how he's never had a dream that he can remember in his entire life. I guess I take more of my Mom's side of the family because I have incredibly vivid dreams almost every night. If i had to guess, I would say that I remember at least 45% of what I dream.
I think, Metacom, more likely than not this is your brains way of dealing with the obviously emotionally scarring incident of losing a loved one. I also think that regardless of what you believe it seems to have made you feel better overall about the situation. Perhaps you were able to see into another plane of existence and were told that she is well. This would be even more of a reason to take comfort out of the experience.
Keep me posted on any more similar dreams that you may have.
Perhaps there will be a pattern that we can examine further.
I also want to stress that I'm sorry for your loss, and anything you might want to talk about is entirely up to you. I know people have limits and I can fully respect that.

Good Dreaming!

Actually, that's the thing. I am the same as you with dreaming. I recall about half of my dreams. However, when I awake I realize they are just dreams. & accept that they felt as nothing more than a dream. But once a few years ago I had a lucid dream about my dead grandmom (this was about 8 years after her death) and maybe one other time. Now since my girlfriend passed I've had 3 (2 with her & the one I mentioned prior). Usually they are only lucid for a small fraction of the dream. Occasionally, they also resulted in some physical aspect outside of the dream. However, this is all dreams and not related to the topic.

I only mentioned the one because of the feeling of out of body. It was if I was temporarily removed from my body to show me something during the dream, which like I said at that particular point, before I even new what this guy was going to say it was very clear & I could swear I was no longer dreaming. Actually, come to think of it at that particular point I acknowledged that everything prior was a dream (during the incident).

Not to mention aside from all of this I am a severe skeptic, & usually want to rationalize everything & explain everything away. There have just been some things that have happened lately & previously that I simply cannot just explain away.

As for the lucid dreaming; overall, there are other factors that convince me that it's not wishful thinking.

Tom - SS79 was kind enough to give me a link to where this doctor did 11 Out-Of-Bodies-Experiences on another thread here in UM: Metaphysics. So far 5 for 5 according to the Doc is in his own words : UNSATISFACTORY ... It reads (skimming) that all 11 were basically a BUST.

I read the link about and it too has the same patients .... Miss Z and so on ..... So if would like the other link I'll be happy to provide it to you.....

Basically put --> There is no credible research to validate Astra Projection other than "Hear-Say / Personal Subjective Experpience". So the probablity of it being exagerated Lucide Dreams is 98+% .... The other 2+/- % likely something else at play and not Astrap Projection.

An author's description of the out-of-body experiences that led him to write his first book.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6zHbeMhuRA

The only experience that this man had that I found questionable was his ability to feel carpet under his feet. Can anyone explain this? Was it a hallucination?

Carpet really isn't that strange, if you stop to actually think about it. -

I have a common dream theme - since I was kid of flying like superman. (Only can fly, nothing else.) I can tell you what it feels like to leave the ground and so on. I can tell you I cannot fly at great hights, I have to stay at levels where I do not 'pass out' due to thin air, because that almost happened a few times. But none the less, these were all dreams, 100% pure fictional dreams.

So feeling a carpet. I would suggest that's not as 'strange' as one would think. How many times do you walk on carpet barefoot? I'm barefoot right now. I've felt plenty of carpets in my 53 yrs of life. It would not be hard to 'feel/sense' this in a dream. Nor for me would it be hard to do so with outside grass, that's a great sensation in the summer time! Water, beachs waves, sand, cement, gravel and so on. Our minds have a lot of physical sensations to draw from for our dreams ... This seriously is no biggie if you stop to think about it.

Then why is it such a big deal not to feel a door or a doorknob?

I've read reports and not just the recent one that was given to me --- where those who think they are A/P'ing feel certain things and not others. For some reason it seems common that floor tend <-- note tend, to be 'solid' where as walls and doors tend not to be.

My thinking on this is because in most cases, not all - floors lead to the ground, if they are one level homes. Wall's and doors on the other hand are known to have other sides to them. So I can see how and why this would play out in their dreams.....

The man didn't think that he was A/P'ing; he thought that he was up to go P'ing. If it were anything but an out-of-body experience, he would have been able to open the door, be it physically or hallucinatory. This new theory of yours is remarkable: The surface of walkways relative to the dreamer is solid, but all adjacent surfaces are penetrable, which is not characteristic of any world other than the astral. How many dreams have you had in the past that follow this line of reasoning?

I think that by "wishful thinking" I really meant more or less just having something on your mind, and more importantly something in the back of your mind. When things like this happen it's quite a task to not think about them actively, let along making sure your subconsciousness has been cleared. I agree with you totally on the skeptic thing, I am exactly the same and usually i can explain everything. Your mind can be a very powerful thing and i truly believe that like in the Matrix when our science gets to a certain point we will be able to be totally tricked into thinking reality is something that it truly in not. (Unless that has happened already!!) After all everything we experience is because of tiny electrical pulses in our brains. (At least on the physical level.)
I do think that it is very interesting, though, that this particular dream stands out more than the others, especially since you've had other ones about the same thing. Perhaps there is something more to it...

HI metacom.

I can totally understand what you are saying here in that soemthing just struck you that it was more then a dream . this is where my questons started regarding OBE . Now i can understand when people are aware of obe, and then have a dream like this they could be putting this down to obe, due to what they previously know if it. However i had an experience when i was around 16 having never read or heard anything regarding OBE or astral prjection.

I had been having lucid dreams since being a child and could always remeber the most of my dreams, especially flying dreams and falling dreams and to me thats all they were . but this one was different, I'll cut it short so not to bore you. but the gist was this. i found myself hovering over a roundablut not far from where i live it was dark and there was no traffic. The odd thing was at the time that i found myself there it was like soemthing clicked in my head that this shouldnt be happening . I remember looking down at my bare feet and the thought that came to mind was "I have to get back to my body" ? which was a realy odd thought for me to have during a flying dream usually i would just enjoy them but this one felt completely different . as soon I had the thougth that I had to get back to my body . I found myself face to face with clock that was situated not far from the roundabout . the clock face said 5 .05 am instantly on seeing this my next thought in the dream /obe whatever, was omg i have to get back, i have to get up for college. To be honest at this point i was afraid i had died . at that point i felt a sudden, what i can only describe as a thrust in my stomach and i awake in my bed .

What i felt when i woke up was that something very odd had happened and I wasn't sure what . I decided to get out of bed and go to get a drink of water from the bathroom, on coming back I decided to get back in bed and see how much time i had left for sleep before i went to college . the clock said 5.09. now remember the big clock in my experience said 5.05. so taking into consideration the time it took me to get the water and get back to the bedroom its pretty uncanny that both times were almost identical. after realizing this i just couldnt get back to sleep . it was as though i knew something weird had happened and i had to try to rationalise it . to this day i still dont know if it was OBE / remote viewing or what. but it was just one of those eperiences that i couldn't ignore. Too many things semed odd .

1 the roundabout was empty ive never been to that roundabout at night always in the day time when its busy. why were there no cars if it was a dream surely my subconcious would put their what i usually see there ? instead of how it would look at night time with no cars in sight.

2 why instead of thinkng upon finding myself above that roundabout did i not think oh im having another flying dream . why" ive got to get back to my body" . for me this is an odd thought for someone who had never heard of Ap or OBE prior to this experience.

3 the clock was around about the same time as when i woke in bed and saw the clock in my room give or take a few minutes for my bathroom break .

These things are just to much for me to put t down to a lucid dream . it sparked my interest and a year later i found a book on obe's in the library and it came the closest to describing what had happened . maybe it wasn't an OBE but it was certainly something more than just dreaming. what ? well thats the question

I can honestly say this experience was the start of a long journey for me and wether anyone believes it or not doesnt matter to me anymore . I know what happened , i know how i felt during it . and i know how many times i've tried to make sense of it and couldn't.

I dont know wether yours was a dream or an experience, all i can say is that you know how you felt and the thoughts you had during it . and only you can really come to any conclusion. People can gve you their opinions but your the one who experienced it and well if it brought you comfort then i would accept it as that . whatever it was it sounds like it served its purpose for you . May you have many more

blessings SS79 X X

ST. Q - I have to be honest here, I hardly think this is remarkable sir. I merely think of it as a collection of factual observations and information. It's not rocket science or anything else.

So I am not even sure how to respond to this.

I know people like me that have very good control of my dreams and how to keep them in the realm of reality, like the flight and knowing I cannot go above a certain level w/out passing out due to lack of oxygen. So to see the floor as "Do not go there" (It goes only into the ground.) Makes this very logical and rational. Knowing that walls and doors do "go some where" from another room to outside - again not a big surprise.

So I guess I'll ask --- Where exactly do you see this as a "Remarkable" theory? <-- Honestly asking....

I have never heard of or read about this theory before. However, you have presented an explanation for why and how it exists. It amazes me that you were able to come up with it so quickly, as if you had experienced it for yourself. Have you read or heard about it before?

Ghosts and OOBErs have a lot in common. One of the most common is their modes of transportation; that is, suddenly appearing and disappearing, floating, hovering, or gliding, and the least common, walking. In most cases, the ghost is seen at or near floor or ground level. It is implied that the ghost has some knowledge of where its vision is in respect to the floor, and the same could be said for the OOBEr. I am curious as to whether or not you are coming up with excuses for the way that other people's lucid dreams should work and not actually your own. If you do not walk through walls in your dreams, how can anyone take you seriously when you present theories such as this?

I think the problem is many skeptics, of which I also include myself, go beyond the point of skepticism & into a point of pure denial despite evidence. I agree that there is a chance that the evidence is not 100%. But than how can it be. Here we are dealing with things in the paranormal / spiritual & not physical. Therefore, you're and any skeptic is right that there is no proving 100% because any evidence given lacks the physical. Therefore, any skeptic will most likely never be 100% sold until they have an experience themselves (and sometimes still be that way after an experience).

What I believe from listening to your arguments & reading the same evidence as you (an assumption) you are either playing devils advocate or simply refuse to accept that the evidence does present a very strong possibility (note the word possibility). Every day I argue with myself over this because I personally believe in the paranormal but also accept that my mind is very powerful & can play tricks on me. Even though, I've had my own experiences which I will swear did happen & cannot 100% be explained.

Further, there are just too many examples that show some level of evidence of life beyond the physical to simply write off as being absolute in not existing, such as OBE, NDE, Ouija, & the other documentations of encounters. Are some of them BS I would argue w/o a doubt. However, examples primarily from the 3 mentioned in the mass amounts and remarkably similar but not too similar results with things happening that cannot be explained & now with many scientists backing up the lack of explanation does provide at the least a strong level of evidence of something more.

In short, I'm trying to figure if your playing devils advocate or simply being so skeptical that you blatantly refuse any evidence presented to you because it is, as we know now completely impossible to provide 100% factual physical evidence.

There are many kinds of skeptics.
You have to analyse every words they say and you will know what i mean.

Actually you are wrong on all accounts of me .... which is fine - for you simply no nothin about me.

This is a curious situation. Jerry is open to remote viewing,, but not astral projection. Inkblot is open to astral projection, but not remote viewing.

And I am unconvinced that they are necessarily different.

I don't know how that's going to work out.

Ziggy, two things.

On doing research on the web - I have some friends who are scientists and engineers, and they download papers from the web all the time. In the old days, they used libraries. Times change.

Yes, there are unreliable websites. Libraries have fiction and fantasy sections, too. (And before you make the obvious rejoinder, people do read comic books and pronounce themselves superheroes...)

I've read estimates that about half the articles in peer-reviewed science journals (which nowadays are available both on the web and in print) contain material errors. There are systemic reasons for this (peer review is ineffective at catching errors, there are certain known methodological limitations of frequentist statistical tests generally, and there is a tendency at some journals to give the author the benefit of the doubt when referees split).

On another subject, I have some problems with the "6 digit random number" target. It is not a random number, but a pseudorandom number. That is a technical term, not a value judgement. It means that the number is chosen deterministically by an algorithm, in order to simulate some attributes of an ideal random sequence of numbers.

In a very common kind of pseudo-random number algorithm, if you give someone two consecutive values generated by the algorithm, then anyone can tell you the entire sequence.

Cheat-proofing is very difficult. Even harder is detecting and preventing honest leaks of information. It is a demonstrable fact, not a pep-talk slogan, that you know more than you know you know. Not only are people unaware of many things that they themselves know, but may also underestimate what other people (and animals) know or can figure out by natural means.

Our cognitive capabilities evolved to solve problems that come up, not to explain to us how the capabilities managed to solve the problems.

Experiments of this kind, then, are much more difficult to analyze than they may at first appear. The results are suggestive, but not dispositive of the issues involved.

Until leaks are ruled out as utterly implausible, Jerry hit it on the head: the experiments show that the subject knew the number. That justifies an inquiry into how the subject knew the number, and your hypothesis is a candidate explanation, but does not justify the conclusion that your hypothesis is correct.

Science is tough, Ziggy.

OK You got me there. It was simply an observation.

While I agree that there is a possibility that is a BS website, & that the human mind does have the ability to know things that is unlikely for us to know. I don't see how, "I went into my office down the hall, opened a table of random numbers at random, threw a coin onto the table as a means of random entry into the page, and copied off the first five digits immediately above where the coin landed" is anything less than random. Statistics does tell us that theoretically virtually anything is possible to some extent on a level of odds. However, once the odds pass a certain threshold they become so great that the outcome is taken as absolute. For instance a paternity test will always some some level of possibility that the man taking the test is the father it is never 100% absolute. Just as there is an obscenely low chance you'll be the big winner in a lotto although most likely you will not & you might as well assume you wont, and so on.

This kind of goes to what I claimed in my last post, which is that because it is as we know impossible to present a solid physical evidence on this matter the severe skeptics will always point to the .0006 chance the evidence given could be a coincidence or some other factor to disprove. (that # was an example).

I know you were addressing Ziggy but I had to quote because the post reminded me of my obnoxious statistics class.

I wonder what the odds are that people have traveled through walls or closed doors in their dreams (et al, REM sleep, lucid dream, vivid dream, daydream)?

I bet it's pretty high. For me, it has never happened. I experienced passing through a door during an OBE, but it wasn't because I intentionally wanted to pass through it. It was something that just happened, as if my subconscious mind did it all the time, and I was along for the ride.

Passing through a closed door is an eerie experience, but it's nothing compared to the sudden realization that you're about to smash into it at say, 8 mph. Other than closed doors, most OBErs find themselves passing through ceilings, roofs, and windows. Unless they are experienced, very few OBErs visually see themselves passing through walls.

During my first OBE, I found myself positioned in such way that I had to have been knee-deep in solid earth, if I had knees at all. I suspect that we'll have a phantom illusion of a body long after we're dead, so pretending that we don't actually have a body during OBEs is extremely difficult.

Lol. Pity the poor teacher who has to give the lousy first statistics class .

As you note, I wasn't comenting on you. I was commenting on some things Ziggy posted, in concert with part of the "methods" sections in things posted by spritual soul79. But, since you asked:



Published tables are adequate for some purposes and not for others. Algorithmic pseudorandom numbers are adequate for some pruposes and not for others. Both kinds of sources vary in quality.

You really need to see the whole design to determine the adequacy of an element of the design. Can I have a "duh?"

For example, one of the experiments posted had an algorithmic target number and a startling success on the fourth trial. Well, if the subject got feedback on her first three misses, she may well know the fourth number (whether she knows how she knows or not).

There is simply no point in going to the trouble of introducing a "random" element unless there is no way for anybody to guess reliably.

Cool stuff.
Dunno what you're on about though?

Ok, I see what could be a problem in the reading for either you or I, what I got out of that article was not that she missed 3 times than got it the third night, but that she did not leave her body the first 3 nights and guessed right the first time on the first opportunity to do so. So when I get the time I'll go back & read it again.

I understand what you are saying with the number patterns, but as soon as tossing a coin & pulling the number from that position comes into play that takes away a large percentage of pattern from Dr. Tart and in so making it a highly random number.

Outside of that, yes I would have to agree that pattern could be a factor resulting a higher success rate but still so not a high success rate. Also, if you are correct in your interpretation of the article, that does significantly increase the odds of success. Even still, they are not good odds.

Thats also what i got when i read it . the way i interpreted it was that she had been unable to get OBE at all and was dissapointed with it . and on another occasion she had not been able to get high enough because the numers were laid down .
As i said i didnt offer it up as proof just one study that has been done and by someone who tells it like it is rather than flowering it up . what one makes of it is up to them but i found it interesting.
SS79 xx

Ok, if the number was lying around for three days in the lab, then I don't even care how it was generated. Labs leak, just like other workplaces do.

I thought I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. If I erred in doing so, then that just makes things worse, so far as I can see.



I disagree. So, maybe that's as far as you and I can go without having Tart available for cross examination.

What he describes is adequate by American standards for choosing jury veniremen from a list of eligibles. That is, it's about minimal. I wouldn't recommend using it for commercial cryptography purposes, for instance.

I have not yet gone back to read the whole article; however, I did skim through on this particular spot. The article reads that each night he chose different numbers. I do know that he didn't give the exact account of each night probably to help the reading to not be so redundant.

Here is the unedited quote:

"Each laboratory night, after the subject was lying in bed, the physiological recordings were running satisfactorily, and she was ready to go to sleep, I went into my office down the hall, opened a table of random numbers at random, threw a coin onto the table as a means of random entry into the page, and copied off the first five digits immediately above where the coin landed.

These were copied with a black marking pen, in figures approximately two inches high, onto a small piece of paper. Thus they were quite discrete visually. This five-digit random number constituted the parapsychological target for the evening. I then slipped it into an opaque folder, entered the subject's room, and slipped the piece of paper onto the shelf without at any time exposing it to the subject. This now provided a target which would be clearly visible to anyone whose eyes were located approximately six and a half feet off the floor or higher, but was otherwise not visible to the subject. The subject was instructed to sleep well, to try and have an out-of-body experience, and if she did so to try to wake up immediately afterwards and tell me about it, so I could note on the polygraph records when it had occurred. She was also told that if she floated high enough to read the five-digit number she should memorize it and wake up immediately afterwards to tell me what it was. My conversation with Miss Z after I had prepared the target was, of course, minimal and could not have given her any clue as to the target number".

I'll agree the experiment is not fool proof. The Dr. himself makes the same claim, but than many experiments are not as it is extremely difficult to make them so.

Thanks for putting the quoted passage about methods in the thread.

Let me be clear that I am not arguing fatal flaws for this experimental series. I rated it as providing reasonable grounds for further investigation. (I think I did so in this thread, but with all the parallel threads, and some posts getting pulled, etc... well, if I lost track of what's where at this point, then please bear with me).



Right. and we can be stronger than that. As Richard Feynman (physics Nobelist, very well respected elite scientist) flatly stated, there is no such thing as a perfect experiment.

So what is the point of critiquing experimental design if you know you will find some flaw? Obviously, to identify the flaws so the next experiment will be better.

The reported method for choosing the target number doesn't cut it when guessing the target number is the only evidentiary basis for anybody other than the subject believing that anything at all happened.

That a coin appears at all in this role is a red flag. That anybody on the experimental team knew the target before the subject irreversibly recorded her observation is a red flag.



is a red flag with gold trim - why is the principal investigator, who knows the target, having any conversation with the subject? (Really, what was he thinking?) And the rest of that sentence,



simply has no place in the methods section of a professional scientific report. It is on its face a conclusion, and not a recitation of fact.

I am sure that sounds harsh, but if this was an experiment to show that aspirin relieves headaches, I would have the same remarks. These are bad signs. It is also unhelpful that the experimenter seems unaware that they are bad signs.

Not fatal, but bad. They are also remediable, so I would be very interested if someone were to replicate the experiment with these flaws corrected.

I cannot disagree. He definitely should not have had any communication with the test subject. I also think they should have more tests regardless if the flaws exist or not to increase / decrease the odds of success. I personally think the random number generation should be done by various people. That is 5 or six different people each pick 1 number to create a larger number this will avoid any single person predictable pattern. Or a random computer or other machine generated number. To me solid proof would be 3 or more tests each with the numbers generated by different means & as mentioned, absolutely no communication with the subject.

Hey, Metacom, I like the way you think .

The research is going to happen. That was very good news lately when they managed to elicit the displacement sensation of OBE "on demand". The initial reaction was that it was comfort to the sceptics, oh look, it's all an illusion, etc.

But it puts the phenomenon into the lab, and makes the subject matter fundable.

Of course, nobody knows what they will find... but they won't find anything until they look. And now they will look.

We live in exciting times.

SS79 ***

Yea, the only real reason I would suggest such extreme conditions for the experiment is that it leaves the skeptics virtually no room to argue. However, as I'm coming to learn in regards to such matters is that many will continue to find flaws and argue against even when reason & results say otherwise. Unfortunately, until such extreme testing is done or I experience myself I will do the same. I'm always back & forth on this & similar arguments.

Also, maybe I missed something. Do you know of plans to further this experiment? If so do you have any resources? I'd like to keep up on it.

Now that things have calmed down and Ive had a chance to read through the six experiments I can comment.

I agree with you Eightbits that these experiments were flawed. Though I will disagree and say that they are fatal.

The first things that grabbed me was the tone of the whole article. It seems to me that this gentleman had his mind made up about OBEs and was experimenting to prove his belief. When I read it the disappointment after each test subject failed to give solid evidence is obvious in his words. Seriously, Im not being biased here and just saying that. My girlfriend also said the same thing. It seemed to her that he knew what results he wanted before hand. Also he had some interesting results in other areas that he failed to follow up on. Its like he failed to explore off shoots of his experiments that seemed intriguing.

Again I agree with you that there are several flaws and no real results. Really there was one solid hit when Miss Z stated the correct number. Out of all the experiments that were ran a simple lucky guess could easily be the answer here. Also I do not see her knowing that the card was lying down and not propped up as being anything special. She saw him place the card. This just kills it right there. Could she see his movements and guess that it was lying down? I could believe so.

I won't go on but there are many things left out that would be so helpful to know. Other witnesses? Exact setups for all experiments? Exact quotes from the participants? How were the answers given and could body language be read to help guide answers? I see a lot of room for problems to come in to these experiments. Im not saying anyone was purposely trying to play tricks and prove something. No, I mean more along the lines of subconscious cues that guide the participant in certain directions.

I just see these experiments as being fatally flawed and something that would not really inspire further research into anything but his interesting off shoot results that he did not explore.

Something that bothers me though is the description of APing as being very vivid and real. Then why are the results and answers so muddled? Should walking into a room, looking around and then going to another room to report what you saw while APing be as clear as any one walking into a room and doing the same while awake? I get confused when you have people claiming solid, clear cut visions and then others saying things look different etc etc. I have to do some more digging into these aspects. Perhaps someone could help me out here?

Lastly we have Jjs AP experiment. While I agree the blind fold can be beaten by those that know what they are doing or those that get lucky and have it slip, we could get around that. What about slipping a pillowcase over their head after blind folding them? Mind you this would take a big of trust on the part of the APer but shouldn't be too harsh? Leading them around just blind folded takes some trust so this will not be to much of a stretch. This way there are two things standing in the way of their vision. Where one may slip the other surely will not. Also we could have the APer plug their ears. In my mind we would want their senses as numb as possible. Perhaps we could add another target in the form of a random book, turned to a random page and have the first few words on the page be the target?

Though even with all this we have to attempt the test just for AP and not telepathy, remote viewing, clairvoyance or anything else. With that said let us look at a few things. First can someone remote view into the same room they are in? Has anyone ever done this at such a short distance? I know there are RVers that can do the across the town, state, country or world thing but can they do it so close? Is there a proximity limit? This would have to be explored. Perhaps testing the APer for RVing first and see if its possible while they are awake? The same could apply for Clairvoyance. See if anything they have ever seen while APing has come to pass later on. Also you could have them AP into the future test and see what they come up with then. That would show clairvoyance or not Im thinking.

For telepathy we would just need some random people to make the changes in the room while not knowing what the test is about. Perhaps having a good deal of people in the room so the AP test candidate can not telepathically lock on to any single person? Also make an attempt to have none of the people in the room broadcast any thoughts. I do not know if this would be enough though.

But really we could start with placing a hood along with the blind fold on the person. This eliminates one big possibility and any interesting results could then inspire future more precise and targeted testing.

Kevin A.

I gotta try this again, the first time I did it I was actually very young and there was this beije gargoyle looking thing waiting for me, despite all its efforts for me not to be scared I screamed like a little boy (which I was) and woke up ( and then threw up ). Then I started reading some stuff about astral projection and succeeded after about a month trying every night, but I got excited once I saw my body laying on the bed and "came back". Since then I haven't been able to do it again but I'm gonna try this method.

Can someone tell me if an astral guide is a person who has already mastered astral projection or if they are beings of the astral plane (or whatever it's called).

Okkkkk...so while its still fresh in my mind.
Yesterday
I set my alarm for 4am and went to sleep easily. However I awoke at about 8am, and was confused as...my alarm didn't go off. Its a really good alarm, and always goes off..I'm sure thats obvious, I need to get up for work/college etc. and so does my mum, its gotta work, and it always does.
I looked at it, it had the little red dot which meant it was set, and I do remember turning it on. I checked what time it was set for, set for, 4am like I did...yet it hadn't gone off.
This is a REALLY loud alarm as well, so you know...however..nothing.
Anyway, I was disappointed...as this was my FIRST time that I was going to attempt to astral travel by using Ziggy's technique, very first post, on page 1.
But anyway, I went back to sleep and was in and out of sleep every 2-3 hours. At about 3pm I woke up and thought I'd try to, without it being 4am...
I got up, and I went to the bathroom, splashed water over my face, dried my face...and headed back to bed.
I then got relaxed and cleared my mind...
So I decided to try to visualise that I was standing in the corner...
Now...a major question is this...this is for..anyone who knows, can astral travel or for Ziggy..Does it matter how I visualise myself in another place?
Can I visualise myself standing so I see myself in my mind in 3rd person, or does it have to be 1st person looking around?
Ok, so I find it difficult to visualise that I am standing in the corner of my room..I've tried both 3rd person and 1st person visualisation..
So then I tried something which I found easier, and that was seeing myself outside of my door, sitting cross legged and knocking repeatedly on my door.
This was easier, and I felt myself still in bed, but really tried to visualise that I was out there knocking.
I started to get sleepy, and I was every so often saying stuff in my mind "When I fall asleep, I'm going to leave my body and astral travel".
However, I started to fog up, and feel really good, but lose the visualisation.
Now the greatest part, is that I decided to change it, and visualise that my conciousness was trying to leave my body. So I was visualising how it felt on my body, and then myself floating up above me.
The feelings when I did this, are really hard to describe!
It was sort of a light feeling, and a..buzzing feeling...like I was warm and fuzzy. Sorry, its hard to describe. It felt so much, like something was trying to leave through my body...and I was really relaxed....and it was such an overwhelming feeling!
But sadly I just couldn't fall asleep..this feeling was really overwhelming, but I wasn't that tired anymore.
Of course, I'm going to keep trying, and definitely at 4am...just the alarm!
So I shall try, but try visualising my sort of soul trying to leave...because it had this really strong effect on my body.

If Ziggy would please read this...I'd be very thankful for any...info, analysis of any sort lol and perhaps the answer to my question that is in bold above..

peace,

Actually, I found a link to a news video of Tart explaining the test to a reporter. Unfortunately, I don't recall the link. I just googled out of body & 1 of the links took me to it. It was a very casual test, not quite the way it is explained in the article. Although he expected more serious inquiry & for scientists to come rushing to do more scientific experiments, they never did. He admitted in the video that he was shocked she knew the number, but it was not a detailed enough experiment to prove anything.

Hey there,

Visualisation is a skill which, believe it or not, improves the more you do it. I used to be a terrible visualiser. With regard to your question about 1st/3rd person, to be honest I don't think it particularly matters unless you have a preference. It's a shame your alarm didn't go off, you should certainly attempt the technique again.

Every single time I do the four in the morning technique, I get success. This is because:
- Your body is extremely relaxed and at the lowest point of metabolism.
- There's a psychological factor. You have gotten up for a reason: to astral project. It makes it that much easier.
- It is much easier to drift off to sleep with astral projection strong in your mind, rather than at the time you go to bed when it's easy for your mind to wander.

The buzzing 'vibes' you felt are typical sensations felt before exiting the body. Before actually leaving, they intensify. It's an amazing experience. Keep trying and good luck!

Hi, Kevin and Metacom (Hi to you, too, Ziggy, sorry to thread around you... and SS79, I sense you floating around here somewhere...)

Scientific progress generally is slow and incremental. There are a few exceptions that make headlines (e.g. the worldwide full-court press to head off pandemic avian flu), but even as wealthy an enterprise as Big Science can only support a few "front burner" projects at a time.

The experiments we have been discussing have contributed their bit to keeping the general subject simmering away on the back burner, however. There actually is a literature among anaesthesiologists, for instance, documenting their patients' OBE's.

The recent psychological experiment I mentioned is the tip of an iceberg. There has long been an interest in OBE reports among psychologists, if only because it is theoretically important to know how proprioception works (and practical, too). OBE reports - regardless of what is really going on - are dramatically exceptional instances of proprioceptive (mal?)function.

Papers do not often get published in Science, as the "on demand" experiments were, unless there is already an audience for them in the scientific community. Tart did his part to cultivate that interest, and such is what most scientific careers boil down to. Few players make the big scores, most simply move the ball downfield. There is honor enough in that.

Maybe sometime, probably in some other thread, we can have a discussion of "bias" in science. Few scientists are disinterested observers. Many work on what they do because they feel that they have special insight or competence in that particular thing. Almost all have material interests, like career advancement, that turn on "getting results."

There are precautions that can be taken to prevent bias from contaminating outcomes. These are professional craft practices and habits of thought. It is much more realiable, I think, to acknowledge and manage bias than to fantasize that it doesn't exist. Scientists are not big on fantasy, at least not during working hours.

As to the protocols that inspire this thread, I think that the Tart schema (a single target, placed so that the subject cannot see it except from a perspective which she cannot physically achieve) is inherently more reliable than a blindfold. The execution was flawed, but flawed in ways that can be fixed.

I also take Jerry at his word that he wishes individuals to try some challenging task "in the privacy of their own home." Many homes have a deck of playing cards onsite, which can reasonably reliably yield an unambiguous 2% target. That is certainly good enough for "screening" purposes, and screening is really all that Jerry's propoal is ever going to provide anyway.

The other day, I took a deck of cards, and found that I could easily place an unknown card face up somewhere in my real-life bedroom where I could not see it unless I were above my bed. I managed this (including achieving assurance that the card was face up) without seeing it, and knowing that I had not seen it. (Again, for screening purposes, that is good enough).

I also managed the placement without interfering in any way with my usual preparation for sleep, naps, or whatever, except for the few seconds it took to place the card. Once it was in place, I needed to take no further precaution whatsoever to avoid seeing the card. And nothing about the card being there could disturb my rest. (For example, I would not need a few day's practice to get used to having a playing card in the room, lol.)

And, of course, I needed nobody else's cooperation.

So, there you have it. A notoriously elaborate element whch is unreliable and obtrusive is replaced with a simple, reliable, single step. With all respect, the substitution is a no-brainer. And anyone who wishes to do the screening can start today, right now.

Here is my technique i have done throughout my whole life, before i can remember...
My dad taught me this technique very early because he knew it worked for him and if he got me to succeed earlier as possible, my life would be full of leaps and bounds crossing between dimensions. Boy, what a life it has been so far!!
I have come to the conclusion that whatever you do over there in the limitless space of creation, deliberately tries to manifest itself on this lower plane called the Physical Plane or Earth Plane. Everything ABLE over there, is ABLE here! It just takes much more time, and much more effort (for superhuman abilities, so to speak), mind power, dedication and will power. Say if you mastered and understood levitation on the Astral, you can "feel" your way around to getting the laws of physics to react to your thoughts here in the Physical. Its really limitless...

Here are my techniques:

1) I clear my body systems completely a week beforehand by going on "The Sacret Heart Diet". Its a week-long, weight losing, body clearing diet that will give you ample %'s of success. Try it out, look on Google.
I then to Lucid Dream Flying - As you are preparing for sleep (at your normal time of rest), you perform a deep meditation for about 10-25 minutes IMMEDIATELY before sleep. However, instead of the normal, thoughtless meditation, you concentrate intently on the feeling of flying. You imagine the sensation of flying…you imagine how high you would fly, where you would fly, and most importantly, you VISUALIZE yourself flying. This, performed before bed, will, once you fall asleep, will place you in a state of lucid dreaming, where you will be flying in your dream, but you will often be completely aware you are dreaming. This exercise is VERY important, as most of our psychic abilities are much more active as we dream than during our consciousness. This exercise allows us to merge our conscious with our dreamworld, greatly strengthening our psychic abilities.
>>Mental Reinforcement Chanting - In this exercise, you simply repeat the following, out loud, to yourself: “I can fly…I can fly…watch me fly…watch me fly…fly so high…fly so high.” And then you repeat over and over. The reason for this is that, although most people WANT to fly, deep down, a part of them believes that they can’t. This exercise helps to eliminate the skeptical part of their brain, and also serves as a form of mind over matter.



2) I lie down after staying up for 24hrs straight. Over-tired mindset of being aware will guarantee sucesss. I think about being out of my body in some paradise wonderland for about 10mins. I repeat these thoughts over and over, and eventually my body clock ticks into overdrive. Sleep rushes to my head and then these seriously strong vibrations manifest inside of me. Before i know it, wham-oh, in a big snap im out of my body and in the place i thought about being in. As long as im am able to think conciously and know that i am out of my body, i can do whatever i wish!! Its really really fun!

3) I downloaded and bought Brainwave Generator from bwgen.com and download some A.P. Presets and try them out. Personally, the "Schuman Resonance" and "you want Astral, you got Astral" presets work the best for me. This program really works when you try. It keeps you conciously aware, but puts your body to sleep. Its then flawless in about 20mins, youre out!

I hope that helps. I will also give a Tutorial on how to fly in the physical, which i have mastered.