Full Version: Telekinesis
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Metaphysics, Psychology & Psychic Phenomena > Psychic Abilities
I can move small objects with my mind but am now having trouble moving on to larger objects. Anyone have tips for me?
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 7 2006, 10:38 AM) [snapback]1260964[/snapback]
I can move small objects with my mind but am now having trouble moving on to larger objects. Anyone have tips for me?
Use your hands or arms to move the objects. Here are some reasons why:
1) It's efficient
2) It's faster
3) Requires no concentration
4) Doesn't get you ridiculed
5) It's the reason we have arms
QUOTE(angrycrustacean @ Jul 7 2006, 08:53 AM) [snapback]1260987[/snapback]
Use your hands or arms to move the objects. Here are some reasons why:
1) It's efficient
2) It's faster
3) Requires no concentration
4) Doesn't get you ridiculed
5) It's the reason we have arms
2. not always
3. yes it does require some concentration
4. who cares about being ridiculed.
5. whatever.
angrycrustacean, you forgot a part
6) It is possible
6) It is possible
QUOTE(MJB222 @ Jul 7 2006, 09:08 AM) [snapback]1261004[/snapback]
angrycrustacean, you forgot a part
6) It is possible
i do not understand why people cannot believe telekinesis is possible. It is just like moving objects with the minds energy.
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 7 2006, 11:10 AM) [snapback]1261008[/snapback]
thank you
Actually he was saying that moving your arms was possible. Not tk.
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 7 2006, 12:16 PM) [snapback]1261084[/snapback]
It is just like moving objects with the minds energy.
Well, see, generally that's regarded as the impossible part.
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 8 2006, 04:16 AM) [snapback]1261084[/snapback]
i do not understand why people cannot believe telekinesis is possible. It is just like moving objects with the minds energy.
Energy taken to move a pencil > Amount of brain's energy available to be transformed into physical force.
Then, you have to explain the transformation of the brain's energy/
I dont try telekinesis much but when i do i use this method/advise. I got it from this site but im not sure the exact thread. I hope it helps.
"You practicly have to forget about everything you know about the laws of physics and see it rather from a new perspective. Just imagine the world and yourself as nothing but energy. You being nothing more different then the spoon, sodacan, pencil, etc because you are all energy. Just realize that you yourself are a physical projection of your energy and so is the object your concentrating at. Realize that the whole purpose of the physical aspect of the object is to send your brain a message that its physical pressence is there only so you don't collide with the object or merge by accident with its energy. When you looks at the object just realize how silly the physical border is and forget that it even applies to you. Just feel and see the energy that makes up the object and the pull or push it naturually in the direction you think it should go. This will work like a charm if you keep believing that it is perfectly naturual and possible."
"You practicly have to forget about everything you know about the laws of physics and see it rather from a new perspective. Just imagine the world and yourself as nothing but energy. You being nothing more different then the spoon, sodacan, pencil, etc because you are all energy. Just realize that you yourself are a physical projection of your energy and so is the object your concentrating at. Realize that the whole purpose of the physical aspect of the object is to send your brain a message that its physical pressence is there only so you don't collide with the object or merge by accident with its energy. When you looks at the object just realize how silly the physical border is and forget that it even applies to you. Just feel and see the energy that makes up the object and the pull or push it naturually in the direction you think it should go. This will work like a charm if you keep believing that it is perfectly naturual and possible."
QUOTE(angrycrustacean @ Jul 7 2006, 03:22 PM) [snapback]1261419[/snapback]
Actually he was saying that moving your arms was possible. Not tk.
Well, see, generally that's regarded as the impossible part.
Megalomania states....
Energy taken to move a pencil > Amount of brain's energy available to be transformed into physical force.
Then, you have to explain the transformation of the brain's energy/
The brain has the inherent ability to perceive and interact with realty and can do so from both the context of particle or wave aspects, in relation to its physical structure.
Any thoughts?
QUOTE
Energy taken to move a pencil > Amount of brain's energy available to be transformed into physical force.
Then, you have to explain the transformation of the brain's energy/
The brain has the inherent ability to perceive and interact with realty and can do so from both the context of particle or wave aspects, in relation to its physical structure.
Any thoughts?
Maybe all this was a part of science at one time but has changed over the years!
I found this page on a book I found it to be quite an interesting read!
Here is the link! Paranormal Phenomena
I found this page on a book I found it to be quite an interesting read!
Here is the link! Paranormal Phenomena
Moro what you have presented does not mean this topic is not related to science it just adresses the philosophical issues related to the topic.
In relation to the feild of Parapsychology see attached....
What is the state-of-the-evidence for psi?
To be precise, when we say that "X exists," we mean that the presently available, cumulative statistical database for experiments studying X, provides strong, scientifically credible evidence for repeatable, anomalous, X-like effects.
With this in mind, ESP exists, precognition exists, telepathy exists, and PK exists. ESP is statistically robust, meaning it can be reliably demonstrated through repeated trials, but it tends to be weak when simple geometric symbols are used as targets. Photographic or video targets often produce effects many times larger, and there is some evidence that ESP on natural locations (as opposed to photos of them), and in natural contexts, may be stronger yet.
Some PK effects have also been shown to exist. When individuals focus their intention on mechanical or electronic devices that fluctuate randomly, the fluctuations change in ways that conform to their mental intention. Under control conditions, when individuals direct their attention elsewhere, the fluctuations are in accordance with chance.
Note that we are using the terms ESP, telepathy and PK in the technical sense, not in the popular sense. See What do parapsychologists study? What is the state-of-the-evidence for psi? To be precise, when we say that "X exists," we mean that the presently available, cumulative statistical database for experiments studying X, provides strong, scientifically credible evidence for repeatable, anomalous, X-like effects.
With this in mind, ESP exists, precognition exists, telepathy exists, and PK exists. ESP is statistically robust, meaning it can be reliably demonstrated through repeated trials, but it tends to be weak when simple geometric symbols are used as targets. Photographic or video targets often produce effects many times larger, and there is some evidence that ESP on natural locations (as opposed to photos of them), and in natural contexts, may be stronger yet.
Some PK effects have also been shown to exist. When individuals focus their intention on mechanical or electronic devices that fluctuate randomly, the fluctuations change in ways that conform to their mental intention. Under control conditions, when individuals direct their attention elsewhere, the fluctuations are in accordance with chance.
Note that we are using the terms ESP, telepathy and PK in the technical sense, not in the popular sense. See What do parapsychologists study?
http://www.deanradin.com/para1.html
Any thoughts?
In relation to the feild of Parapsychology see attached....
QUOTE
What is the state-of-the-evidence for psi?
To be precise, when we say that "X exists," we mean that the presently available, cumulative statistical database for experiments studying X, provides strong, scientifically credible evidence for repeatable, anomalous, X-like effects.
With this in mind, ESP exists, precognition exists, telepathy exists, and PK exists. ESP is statistically robust, meaning it can be reliably demonstrated through repeated trials, but it tends to be weak when simple geometric symbols are used as targets. Photographic or video targets often produce effects many times larger, and there is some evidence that ESP on natural locations (as opposed to photos of them), and in natural contexts, may be stronger yet.
Some PK effects have also been shown to exist. When individuals focus their intention on mechanical or electronic devices that fluctuate randomly, the fluctuations change in ways that conform to their mental intention. Under control conditions, when individuals direct their attention elsewhere, the fluctuations are in accordance with chance.
Note that we are using the terms ESP, telepathy and PK in the technical sense, not in the popular sense. See What do parapsychologists study? What is the state-of-the-evidence for psi? To be precise, when we say that "X exists," we mean that the presently available, cumulative statistical database for experiments studying X, provides strong, scientifically credible evidence for repeatable, anomalous, X-like effects.
With this in mind, ESP exists, precognition exists, telepathy exists, and PK exists. ESP is statistically robust, meaning it can be reliably demonstrated through repeated trials, but it tends to be weak when simple geometric symbols are used as targets. Photographic or video targets often produce effects many times larger, and there is some evidence that ESP on natural locations (as opposed to photos of them), and in natural contexts, may be stronger yet.
Some PK effects have also been shown to exist. When individuals focus their intention on mechanical or electronic devices that fluctuate randomly, the fluctuations change in ways that conform to their mental intention. Under control conditions, when individuals direct their attention elsewhere, the fluctuations are in accordance with chance.
Note that we are using the terms ESP, telepathy and PK in the technical sense, not in the popular sense. See What do parapsychologists study?
http://www.deanradin.com/para1.html
Any thoughts?
BEYOND QUANTUM THEORY: A REALIST PSYCHO-BIOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION OF
PHYSICAL REALITY
ABSTRACT
Stapp and others have proposed that reality involves a
fundamental life process, or creative process. It is shown how this
process description may be unified with the description that derives
from quantum physics. The methods of the quantum physicist and of
the biological sciences are seen to be two alternative approaches to
the understanding of nature, involving two distinct modes of
description which can usefully supplement each other, and neither on
its own contains the full story. The unified view explains the
major features of quantum mechanics and suggests that biological
systems may function more effectively than would be expected on the
basis of quantum mechanics alone.
http://www.roma1.infn.it/rog/group/frasca/b/bj8.html
Any thoughts?
PHYSICAL REALITY
ABSTRACT
Stapp and others have proposed that reality involves a
fundamental life process, or creative process. It is shown how this
process description may be unified with the description that derives
from quantum physics. The methods of the quantum physicist and of
the biological sciences are seen to be two alternative approaches to
the understanding of nature, involving two distinct modes of
description which can usefully supplement each other, and neither on
its own contains the full story. The unified view explains the
major features of quantum mechanics and suggests that biological
systems may function more effectively than would be expected on the
basis of quantum mechanics alone.
http://www.roma1.infn.it/rog/group/frasca/b/bj8.html
Any thoughts?
QUOTE(angrycrustacean @ Jul 7 2006, 05:53 PM) [snapback]1260987[/snapback]
Use your hands or arms to move the objects. Here are some reasons why:
1) It's efficient
2) It's faster
3) Requires no concentration
4) Doesn't get you ridiculed
5) It's the reason we have arms
haha!!!!!! not saying ur right thought but its funny anyways
I like your avatar tooth. it kinda scares me a little but its funny.
i just thought of something. If animals were smart enough wouldnt they be able to use telekinesis?
It's doubtful that intelligence plays any role in the alleged power of psychic abilities. If it did, I suspect Stephen Hawkins would not need all the machinery he does.
QUOTE
This deadening of psychic energy or the blockaqe of its unfoldment reinforces itself in the complementary process of enfoldment: the lifeless mechanical meaning applied to conscious experience imprints its riqidity on the subtext of the psyche, so that its unfoldment in consciousness becomes incompatible with creative perceptions.
David Bohm
http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1995/TGERMINE.html
Any thoughts?
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 11 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]1265981[/snapback]
i just thought of something. If animals were smart enough wouldnt they be able to use telekinesis?
actually animals are smarter than most humans, wonna know how ???
they use their brains to live their lives, they know who their enemies and who their FRIENDS are, thye dont waste time beliving in invisible creators,
THEY DONT SPEND TIME trying to move s**t with their brains ,,,
want more i will post just ask for the reason
In 1935 Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen were face with a problem in relation to a paradox paradox often referred to as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Bridge (or Paradox). What they had put together between the three of them could best be described as a thought experiments, but in relation to creating a model, which could be experimentally
testable, well this was the problem.
They contacted David Bohm who was able to convert the original thought experiment into something which was closer to being experimentally testable. Although Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen had originally worked on the thought experiment to refute the validity of Quantum Mechanics, the experimental results supported the existence of QM. This experiment has been widely replicated and in each separate test the result have been the same EPR consistently occurs and therefore Quantum Mechanics has been validated.
To be very clear the Father of Quantum Mechanics David Bohm said of Telekinesis.... "Wholeness and telekinesis are proven facts of science and
not merely anecdotal."
Now Bosanchero is seems clear that your opinion is animals are smarter than most humans, because they don’t spend time trying to move s**t with there brains.
Since David Bohm is a human I can only conclude, that in your opinion animals are smarter than him, so let me ask you a question Bosanchero, what does that say about
you??
Before you answer take a look at this....
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/consc_phys.htm
Blieve if they were smart enough of course they could.
Any thoughts?
testable, well this was the problem.
They contacted David Bohm who was able to convert the original thought experiment into something which was closer to being experimentally testable. Although Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen had originally worked on the thought experiment to refute the validity of Quantum Mechanics, the experimental results supported the existence of QM. This experiment has been widely replicated and in each separate test the result have been the same EPR consistently occurs and therefore Quantum Mechanics has been validated.
To be very clear the Father of Quantum Mechanics David Bohm said of Telekinesis.... "Wholeness and telekinesis are proven facts of science and
not merely anecdotal."
Now Bosanchero is seems clear that your opinion is animals are smarter than most humans, because they don’t spend time trying to move s**t with there brains.
Since David Bohm is a human I can only conclude, that in your opinion animals are smarter than him, so let me ask you a question Bosanchero, what does that say about
you??
Before you answer take a look at this....
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/consc_phys.htm
Blieve if they were smart enough of course they could.
Any thoughts?
first of all you can bring me 99% of world population and they can all say "we can move things with our brain" i would still say they are full of it untill they give me some HARD proof that what they are saying is true,
second of all, i just answered a question that person asked, he made a statement in which he challenges the intelligence of Animals, and i did nothing than explain my position on this
, , ,
person who wrote the question, mr.blieve seems to think that only type of intelligence is the one humans have, he seems to be ignoring the fact that animals are without a doubt capable of doing things unimaginable to human mind...
take the video(link below) for example
Video
You think Human Mind is capable of doing something remotelly similar to this ???
intelligence isnt all about technology u know
As for my "Sarcastic" remark about animals not trying to move stuff with their brains, well lets just say that you probeably didnt read any of my posts on "telekinesis" topic that was in another part of UM forum not so long ago, and yes topic name was exaclly same as this one
Third of all,
i will repeat whats previously been said on these forums, if someone comes to UM and decides to post a thread about "Kinesis" they need to understand that UM boards are FLOODING with sceptics and that we will chalenge your opinions and use every atom of or energy to prove you wrong . . . . . We have yet to see anyone bring forth any type of EVIDENCE proofing Kinesis that could be considered credible and until we do whats the point of opening topics and writing about things that exist only in heads of those that WANT to belive hehe
its somewhat like religion, but religions have their holy books,,, only thing these people here have is their word, and considering that this is "INTERNET" your word doesnt really count.
ohh regarding the link that you posted i must admit i only "Scaned it"
and will give it a better look after work,,, before i go i will say this one more time "Human way of using our brain isnt the only way to use it" we use it to think/build/create/ while animals use it to protect themselfs, fight of predators basicly for survival,
which way is better, whos to say ;
)
second of all, i just answered a question that person asked, he made a statement in which he challenges the intelligence of Animals, and i did nothing than explain my position on this
, , , person who wrote the question, mr.blieve seems to think that only type of intelligence is the one humans have, he seems to be ignoring the fact that animals are without a doubt capable of doing things unimaginable to human mind...
take the video(link below) for example
Video
You think Human Mind is capable of doing something remotelly similar to this ???
intelligence isnt all about technology u know
As for my "Sarcastic" remark about animals not trying to move stuff with their brains, well lets just say that you probeably didnt read any of my posts on "telekinesis" topic that was in another part of UM forum not so long ago, and yes topic name was exaclly same as this one
Third of all,
i will repeat whats previously been said on these forums, if someone comes to UM and decides to post a thread about "Kinesis" they need to understand that UM boards are FLOODING with sceptics and that we will chalenge your opinions and use every atom of or energy to prove you wrong . . . . . We have yet to see anyone bring forth any type of EVIDENCE proofing Kinesis that could be considered credible and until we do whats the point of opening topics and writing about things that exist only in heads of those that WANT to belive
heheits somewhat like religion, but religions have their holy books,,, only thing these people here have is their word, and considering that this is "INTERNET" your word doesnt really count.
ohh regarding the link that you posted
i must admit i only "Scaned it"and will give it a better look after work,,, before i go i will say this one more time "Human way of using our brain isnt the only way to use it" we use it to think/build/create/ while animals use it to protect themselfs, fight of predators basicly for survival,
which way is better, whos to say ;
) QUOTE
I will repeat what’s previously been said on these forums, if someone comes to UM and decides to post a thread about "Kinesis" they need to understand that UM boards are FLOODING with skeptics and that we will challenge your opinions and use every atom of or energy to prove you wrong . . . . . We have yet to see anyone bring forth any type of EVIDENCE proofing Kinesis that could be considered credible and until we do what’s the point of opening topics and writing about things that exist only in heads of those that WANT to believe he he
Skeptics have been trying to do that for thousands of years over 100s of issues and have never successfully deterred the matters and have always been proven wrong. To be honest they as wrong about psi as they have been about everything else and that has been proven already. If as you say psi is only a subjective experience and there is no evidence then why is it UM skeptics seem unable or unwilling to debunk objectively recent scientific evidence presented?
QUOTE
its somewhat like religion, but religions have their holy books,,, only thing these people here have is their word, and considering that this is "INTERNET" your word doesn’t really count.
That is an incorrect statement, those who believe do so for the most part because of the repeatability of the phenomenon they and others near them observe. There is also substantive scientific data and historical account to support the fact psi is a part of reality.
QUOTE
ohh regarding the link that you posted i must admit i only "Scaned it"
and will give it a better look after work,,, before i go i will say this one more time "Human way of using our brain isnt the only way to use it" we use it to think/build/create/ while animals use it to protect themselfs, fight of predators basicly for survival,
No problem in relation to your having time to read what I have presented to be honest it is as a whole much more than a link. As far as survival and human behavior, humans have replaced the need for survival with society which has such things as money, supermarkets and computers. As far as who to say is better try living in a forest with no tools and trying to stay alive.
Any thoughts?
QUOTE(Triad @ Jul 12 2006, 10:17 PM) [snapback]1267758[/snapback]
Skeptics have been trying to do that for thousands of years over 100s of issues and have never successfully deterred the matters and have always been proven wrong. To be honest they as wrong about psi as they have been about everything else and that has been proven already. If as you say psi is only a subjective experience and there is no evidence then why is it UM skeptics seem unable or unwilling to debunk objectively recent scientific evidence presented?
You Must Understand that it worked the other way around as well
you have any idea how many times someone has made a claim to have evidence of aliens, UFO's and such things, yet it all comes down to that little thing we call truth and at the end Many have openlly admited to FAKING and making up evidence and my friend you also need to know that skeptics are not Skeptic about everything,, some of us belive in things, just not things presented to us by 8th graders (Hope You know where i am going with this)
QUOTE(Triad @ Jul 12 2006, 10:17 PM) [snapback]1267758[/snapback]
That is an incorrect statement, those who believe do so for the most part because of the repeatability of the phenomenon they and others near them observe. There is also substantive scientific data and historical account to support the fact psi is a part of reality.
I would really enjoying looking at this data
"Proof please"QUOTE(Triad @ Jul 12 2006, 10:17 PM) [snapback]1267758[/snapback]
No problem in relation to your having time to read what I have presented to be honest it is as a whole much more than a link. As far as survival and human behavior, humans have replaced the need for survival with society which has such things as money, supermarkets and computers. As far as who to say is better try living in a forest with no tools and trying to stay alive.
Any thoughts?
Once again you are mixing up two diferent kinds of inteligence
Me going to wild and trying to survive is like you puting your dog infront of a computer and expecting him to type it just isnt going to happen, no matter how hard u try, P.S. you must understand that if a serious, Grown up man/woman came up to me and said they can move things with their mind, i would be MORE than happy to waste few minutes of my time to see this wonder,
however when i am aproached by a 13-14 year old kids who in one post say they make rain fall, in next they are moving stuff with their mind, 2 days later thay can move water,,,
ITS JUST HARD to belive them
you know i tried playing Super Mario once, and it took me longer to go through the game than it takes these kids to go from noone to I CAN MAKE RAIN FALL
so please try to understand these kids are reasons we on UM are so Hars at people with supernatural ideas
QUOTE
You Must Understand that it worked the other way around as well you have any idea how many times someone has made a claim to have evidence of aliens, UFO's and such things, yet it all comes down to that little thing we call truth and at the end Many have openlly admited to FAKING and making up evidence
Taking into consideration recorded history people through-out the world have been talking about such things since history began and people fake lots of things unrelated to either UFOs or Psi. As far as faking and making up evidence of things unrelated to Psi and UFO's lets face facts, if it were not for that the world would have no need for policemen or judges and so on.
QUOTE
and my friend you also need to know that skeptics are not Skeptic about everything,, some of us belive in things, just not things presented to us by 8th graders (Hope You know where i am going with this)
QUOTE
P.S. you must understand that if a serious, Grown up man/woman came up to me and said they can move things with their mind, i would be MORE than happy to waste few minutes of my time to see this wonder, however when i am aproached by a 13-14 year old kids who in one post say they make rain fall, in next they are moving stuff with their mind, 2 days later thay can move water,,,
ITS JUST HARD to belive them
you know i tried playing Super Mario once, and it took me longer to go through the game than it takes these kids to go from noone to I CAN MAKE RAIN FALL
so please try to understand these kids are reasons we on UM are so Hars at people with supernatural ideas
Well taking into consideration the limits inherent in internet conversations, communications of this type (related to the paranormal) can be frustrating, but that is because of the medium not the people. Personally it’s nice to see adolescents involved in intellectual and creative pursuits.
QUOTE
I would really enjoying looking at this data "Proof please"
The links provided as well as the experimental data afforded in the link included in my sig is proof, from the context from the context of being the best available in every sense. The best scientist in the world and one of the most renowned scientific journals in the world (in reality). See I see a problem here and that is, it is possible that your request for proof in relation to the internets capacity, as a medium, which can convey that proof, is unrealistic.
But let me just say, that the information provided, from the context, of this medium is discussable, in so far as being verifiable using the information provided. One can research the content, identify the format as correct in relation to computational issues (the math) and verify the source of the material.
Understand that if I were to walk into a lecture hall in any major university in the world and engage in a debate ,regarding the validity of PSI with this data my opponent would loose (been there done that), and your suggesting to me it is not good enough??
Please understand to me that seems very strange but we are having a pleasant conversation and I am enjoying that, so let me just ask that you respond to this
question...what to you is proof?? Keep in mind now I have asked several UM skeptics
to provide an answer to that question and thus far have received no responses.
Take the opportunity to look as well at the link included in my sig…..
Any thoughts?
If you watch LOST Walt has this ability...maybe...
what kind of proof am i looking for, one that will not be questioned by 90% of scientist world wide
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 7 2006, 04:38 PM) [snapback]1260964[/snapback]
I can move small objects with my mind but am now having trouble moving on to larger objects. Anyone have tips for me?
dude when i do it i get light headed, ive not managed to move anything heavier than a pringle tube and i got spooked after i managed to actually make it roll towards me the other day so i aint done it since
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 11 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]1265981[/snapback]
i just thought of something. If animals were smart enough wouldnt they be able to use telekinesis?
it has nothing to do with how smart u are, u can either do it or u can't and if u could really move things with your mind ud know that
besides animals are already more psycic than humans could ever be, i mean come on, they use telepathy to comunicate for crying out loud
QUOTE(gryffin1 @ Jul 15 2006, 04:21 PM) [snapback]1271483[/snapback]
it has nothing to do with how smart u are, u can either do it or u can't and if u could really move things with your mind ud know that
QUOTE(gryffin1 @ Jul 15 2006, 04:21 PM) [snapback]1271483[/snapback]
animals are already more psycic than humans could ever be, i mean come on, they use telepathy to comunicate for crying out loud
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 17 2006, 01:19 AM) [snapback]1272578[/snapback]
uhhhh... it kinda does. most techniques for telekinesis require a visualization or concentration. animals are just to dumb to understand that. Do you think they would be able to focus at all? no too stupid
uhhh.... no it doesn't for someone who claims to have such abilities (which btw ur proberbly lying about anyway) u have a very closed mind. and i resent that crack about animals being dumb. stick to playing magic the gathering
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 17 2006, 01:21 AM) [snapback]1272579[/snapback]
No they don't. they use signals such as barking twitching of noses ect. mister sarcastic. although they can read emotions in humans very well.
reading emotions very well huh? and wouldn't u of all people perceive this to be even the tinyist bit of psychic ability mr know it all
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 17 2006, 01:21 AM) [snapback]1272579[/snapback]
No they don't. they use signals such as barking twitching of noses ect. mister sarcastic. although they can read emotions in humans very well.
reading emotions very well huh? and wouldn't u of all people perceive this to be even the tinyist bit of psychic ability mr know it all
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 17 2006, 01:21 AM) [snapback]1272579[/snapback]
No they don't. they use signals such as barking twitching of noses ect. mister sarcastic. although they can read emotions in humans very well.
reading emotions very well huh? and wouldn't u of all people perceive this to be even the tinyist bit of psychic ability mr know it all
wow...
some animals are certianly as smart as human children--some even smarter than the 13 year olds on here, so the generalization that animals are dumb is a pretty dumb thing to say,,,
an african grey can read
dolphins have language
chimps have culture
need more examples?
some animals are certianly as smart as human children--some even smarter than the 13 year olds on here, so the generalization that animals are dumb is a pretty dumb thing to say,,,
an african grey can read
dolphins have language
chimps have culture
need more examples?
QUOTE(kariudo115 @ Jul 17 2006, 08:27 AM) [snapback]1273267[/snapback]
wow...
some animals are certianly as smart as human children--some even smarter than the 13 year olds on here, so the generalization that animals are dumb is a pretty dumb thing to say,,,
an african grey can read
dolphins have language
chimps have culture
need more examples?
QUOTE(gryffin1 @ Jul 17 2006, 06:59 AM) [snapback]1273164[/snapback]
uhhh.... no it doesn't for someone who claims to have such abilities (which btw ur proberbly lying about anyway) u have a very closed mind. and i resent that crack about animals being dumb. stick to playing magic the gathering
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 18 2006, 11:09 AM) [snapback]1274506[/snapback]
you retards. i am not comparing an animals intelligence to a babies. They are dumb compared to a human being that is over twelve. most animals are pretty dumb. consider this. some animals will eat their own puke or poop even with "decent" food being right in front of them. some may be pretty smart but compared to humans, we are much much smarter. and no being able to read emotions is not a "psychic" trait. I can read emotions due to facial expressions and how they react when they talk to me. Does that make me psychic? no i dont think so. BTW your statement about the african grey is false. the only way you would be able to tell if it was true is it started speaking to you and it told you that what you wrote on paper was funny. only problem about that is we dont exactly speak the same language.
Such intelligent posts. You do your family proud.
Agreed with blieve.
Human beings are the smartest creatures. Although animals may be quite intelligent.. That really don't make them psychic.. Who cares if an african grey can read, dolphins have language and if chimps have culture .. -.-" It's not proving how they can connect to the other worlds..
Human beings are the smartest creatures. Although animals may be quite intelligent.. That really don't make them psychic.. Who cares if an african grey can read, dolphins have language and if chimps have culture .. -.-" It's not proving how they can connect to the other worlds..
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 18 2006, 11:09 AM) [snapback]1274506[/snapback]
BTW your statement about the african grey is false. the only way you would be able to tell if it was true is it started speaking to you and it told you that what you wrote on paper was funny. only problem about that is we dont exactly speak the same language.
the african grey speaks english ITS A PARROT--it is not a false statement
do your research... ill go find a link
EDIT: here is a link to alexes stuff http://www.alexfoundation.org/index2.htm
i have no respect for you any longer
QUOTE(jianeloh @ Jul 18 2006, 11:19 AM) [snapback]1274522[/snapback]
Agreed with blieve.
Human beings are the smartest creatures. Although animals may be quite intelligent.. That really don't make them psychic.. Who cares if an african grey can read, dolphins have language and if chimps have culture .. -.-" It's not proving how they can connect to the other worlds..
i wasnt talking about them being psychic, i was talking about intelegence---read the WHOLE paragraph critically, instead of just skimming, you look stupid when you make ignorant comments
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 18 2006, 11:09 AM) [snapback]1274506[/snapback]
you retards. i am not comparing an animals intelligence to a babies. They are dumb compared to a human being that is over twelve. most animals are pretty dumb. consider this. some animals will eat their own puke or poop even with "decent" food being right in front of them. some may be pretty smart but compared to humans, we are much much smarter. and no being able to read emotions is not a "psychic" trait. I can read emotions due to facial expressions and how they react when they talk to me.
funny, because you're probably 12(lol, my bird is smarter than you!!!)
give me three examples of animals that will eat their crap when there is perfectly good food around (besides turkys, theire dumb...)
Edited-UA
QUOTE(kariudo115 @ Jul 18 2006, 12:09 PM) [snapback]1274847[/snapback]
i wasnt talking about them being psychic, i was talking about intelegence---read the WHOLE paragraph critically, instead of just skimming, you look stupid when you make ignorant comments
QUOTE(kariudo115 @ Jul 18 2006, 12:07 PM) [snapback]1274843[/snapback]
you dumbass the african grey speaks english ITS A PARROT--it is not a false statement
do your research... ill go find a link
dumbass........
EDIT: here is a link to alexes stuff http://www.alexfoundation.org/index2.htm
i have no respect for you any longer
QUOTE(kariudo115 @ Jul 18 2006, 12:19 PM) [snapback]1274867[/snapback]
funny, because you're probably 12(lol, my bird is smarter than you!!!)
give me three examples of animals that will eat their crap when there is perfectly good food around (besides turkys, theire dumb...)
Now I am going to start moving small objects with my mind but how should I meditate and I do this with my eyes open right because I need to make a visual tunnel between me and the oblect right? Also how long would you say this takes to learn?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
QUOTE(chronicburst @ Jul 18 2006, 06:05 PM) [snapback]1275216[/snapback]
Now I am going to start moving small objects with my mind but how should I meditate and I do this with my eyes open right because I need to make a visual tunnel between me and the oblect right? Also how long would you say this takes to learn?
Thanks in advance.
When you start trying to move the object it is best to keep your eyes open. If you were to close your eyes, you should be able to see the object the way it is in your "minds eye" you do not need to make a visual tunnel. you can if you want but it is best only for beginners. I advise it only for beginners due to the fact that concentration instructs for a mainly clear mind. May i ask what you are trying to move?
Any more questions?
If I'm not mistaken, in high school Biology, we learn that all rodents [i.e: rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs] eat their own poop. You should know that, animal expert. 
PS: Blieve.. I'm a she. (:
PS: Blieve.. I'm a she. (:
QUOTE(blieve @ Jul 18 2006, 10:21 PM) [snapback]1275227[/snapback]
you don't need to meditate. If you were to meditate then just clear your mind, you needn't visualize anything. There are many ways to move the object.
When you start trying to move the object it is best to keep your eyes open. If you were to close your eyes, you should be able to see the object the way it is in your "minds eye" you do not need to make a visual tunnel. you can if you want but it is best only for beginners. I advise it only for beginners due to the fact that concentration instructs for a mainly clear mind. May i ask what you are trying to move?
Any more questions?
Well I was in my room practicing for the first time and there as a pencil on my desk so thats what I am using for now because it is light and well in my prospective it would be good right?
QUOTE(chronicburst @ Jul 18 2006, 09:04 PM) [snapback]1275382[/snapback]
Well I was in my room practicing for the first time and there as a pencil on my desk so thats what I am using for now because it is light and well in my prospective it would be good right?
QUOTE(jianeloh @ Jul 18 2006, 10:38 PM) [snapback]1275317[/snapback]
If I'm not mistaken, in high school Biology, we learn that all rodents [i.e: rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs] eat their own poop. You should know that, animal expert.
good point... i had forgotten about rodents
and blieve, did you read the studys about alex?
(bet he was lazy...)
QUOTE(kariudo115 @ Jul 19 2006, 04:28 PM) [snapback]1276476[/snapback]
good point... i had forgotten about rodents
and blieve, did you read the studys about alex?
(bet he was lazy...)
dududer
neither can half the population of humans
neither can half the population of humans
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.