Telekinesis: Fact or Fiction?

[eqgumby]

http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf

from the above link to THE document....

See bolded above.....a little more than 'experiments at a kitchen table'.

The Pentagon and an INSCOM retreat with high-ranking personel.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...ecurity_Command

The Pentagon is a big place. Did they hold these "experiments" at the Caffeteria during Halloween? Who was there? Was it scientifically documented?

...at officers’ or scientists’

homes, and at one quarterly INSCOM retreat attended by the commanding general and a group of

colonels and generals commanding INSCOM units around the globe.

And at their homes...do you know any "high ranking military" commanders that bring this type of classified work home? Or did they have these "spoon benders" stop by the house to perform?

What's an INSCOM retreat?

Retired Major General Albert Stubblebine, then commanding officer of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), was an attendee of Houck's parties, and was so impressed he added it to the itinerary of a retreat for senior INSCOM staff officers at a conference facility near Leesburg, Virginia. Jim Schnabel tells the story in his book Remote Viewers:

Someone handed out spoons and forks, and Stubblebine gave a short talk on how it was done, and then 25 to 30 colonels and generals stood around holding these eating utensils and staring at them, waiting for something to happen.

At one point, a somewhat skeptical colonel turned his head to say something to a colleague, and as he did, his fork suddenly drooped into a ninety-degree angle. Everyone looked at him and his fork, at which point the fork bent back up, then down again, and finally settled into an angle of about forty-five degrees. The colonel whose fork it was put the thing down, shaking his head, evidently unsettled. He was a Christian, and later would denounce the entire thing as the trickery of the devil.

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/12/10/92746/307

I found more about this stuff here.

I think it's a load of hokey-pokey. Trickery. Because being able to bend spoons (metal) with ones mind, would be a highly sought after skill.

[eqgumby]

Uri Gellar was a fraud. I saw the video where he got busted, confronted, and confessed to being a trickster.

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

[Ziggy Stardust]

This could go on indefinitely.....I'm finished with this thread for now

A wise choice. You have done nothing but succeed in making a fool of yourself, and no one else here is fool enough to fall for your ridiculous claims. I still can't get over what you actually choose to embrace as fact. The government is not hiding telekinesis from us and Uri Geller does not have psychic abilities. Did I also mention we aren't in an episode of powerangers?

[DrawingPics]

A wise choice. You have done nothing but succeed in making a fool of yourself, and no one else here is fool enough to fall for your ridiculous claims.

You are so mean. It is very rude to call people as such. If you must know, beliving in something is not wrong cause it does not do any harm. But calling people names is bad.

I would rather be a believer like bee than a skeptic like you. So I announce. I am a believer from now.

And I will be reading up, so I will be able to debate as well.

Edited October 30, 2008 by AGoodWriter

[Ziggy Stardust]

You are so mean. It is very rude to call people as such. If you must know, beliving in something is not wrong cause it does not do any harm. But calling people names is bad.

I would rather be a believer like bee than a skeptic like you. So I announce. I am a believer from now.

And I will be reading up, so I will be able to debate as well.

If people are offended by what I say, it is their problem. The reality is, I won't let people get away with making unfounded claims as though they are fact. Bee's allusions to the government's involvement in a scheme to hide telekinesis from the general populace is nothing short of ludicrous, and it should not go unchallenged. I am not so much mean as realistic. People cannot make such claims without expecting to be met with criticism. I am only a skeptic towards Telekinesis; there are other unexplained phenomena that I do believe in. So when you 'announce' that you are a believer, do you mean a believer in Telekinesis, or in anything that might be met with some degree of skepticism?

[DrawingPics]

If people are offended by what I say, it is their problem. The reality is, I won't let people get away with making unfounded claims as though they are fact. Bee's allusions to the government's involvement in a scheme to hide telekinesis from the general populace is nothing short of ludicrous, and it should not go unchallenged. I am not so much mean as realistic. People cannot make such claims without expecting to be met with criticism. I am only a skeptic towards Telekinesis; there are other unexplained phenomena that I do believe in. So when you 'announce' that you are a believer, do you mean a believer in Telekinesis, or in anything that might be met with some degree of skepticism?

Not everything Zig. I only believe in precognition. And maybe ghosts and the afterlife.

But still, telling people that they are fools is not nice.

Edited October 30, 2008 by AGoodWriter

[Ziggy Stardust]

Not everything Zig. I only believe in precognition. And maybe ghosts and the afterlife.

But still, telling people that they are fools is not nice.

I agree that it isn't nice. However, if the conspirators who claimed that 300 Jews had been evacuated from the towers before 9/11 weren't discredited as fools, and were simply left unchallenged, what would happen? See what I mean?

[DrawingPics]

I agree that it isn't nice. However, if the conspirators who claimed that 300 Jews had been evacuated from the towers before 9/11 weren't discredited as fools, and were simply left unchallenged, what would happen? See what I mean?

Oh ok I see. By the way, you did not say anything about my belief in precognition. You are a non believer right?

[Ziggy Stardust]

Oh ok I see. By the way, you did not say anything about my belief in precognition. You are a non believer right?

Of course not. I believe in many things, including God. My skepticism is, in the instance of this thread, limited solely towards Telekinesis.

[Max.L]

How about asking Flamedragon to state the results of the chakras thingy , he said there were , what were they?

[bee]

You are so mean. It is very rude to call people as such. If you must know, beliving in something is not wrong cause it does not do any harm. But calling people names is bad.

I would rather be a believer like bee than a skeptic like you. So I announce. I am a believer from now.

And I will be reading up, so I will be able to debate as well.

Just popped back to say cheers for the support........

I thought I was starring in 'The Truman Show' for a while there....

[DrawingPics]

Of course not. I believe in many things, including God. My skepticism is, in the instance of this thread, limited solely towards Telekinesis.

o.0 I thought that it was not possible to believe one thing and not another. I mean they are both instances of psychic in some sense. And should have lesser contradiction than religion, as there are many different types and people fighting over it. Do psychic also fall into many catagories too then? And why the belief in one type and not another?

[bee]

The reality is, I won't let people get away with............

As you have taken the trouble to insult me yet again....(in a couple of posts...)

I'm back, briefly, to shine the spotlight back onto you...

I believe that this is just about still on topic because it brings into question the sincerity of one of the debaters,

ie. you. And high-lights the incongruity of your adopted stance. (re. telekinesis)

Astral Projection: http://ascensionforums.invisionplus.net

These quotes are from you on, your own forum that you are displaying as your signiture....

On the Astral Plane the possibilities are almost endless. Flying, passing through walls, and even time travel are all possible. Thoughts and feelings have great power - for example, while astral projecting, the thought of returning to your body will instantly return you. The Astral is made up of many different levels or dimensions, each with its own vibrational frequency. Everything in its simplest form, both in this world and the astral, is a vibration.

A note to those who are skeptical about astral travel but still wish to try it: You must keep an open mind while attempting to project. Any negative thoughts or feelings will certainly hold you back. Stay positive, open, and willing.

You must remember that it is a matter of willpower. You can't just casually attempt to project in a one-off scenario. Think about astral travel throughout the day. Buy a book on astral travel. Attempt to astral travel everynight. Eventually, I gurantee, you will project.

And my favourite.....when I remember that at the beginning of October you were made to

remove your, then, signiture, because it contained instructions on how to make a molotov cocktail....

If you enter the astral plane with good intentions and the white light of love, you will be safe.

How about shining a bit of that 'white light of love' in my direction, Ziggy Stardust......

Just spotted your new post AGoodWriter.....we seem to be thinking the same way about the

incongruity of compartmentalising these kind of subjects.....

[The One Who Is]

Ziggy, what's with the insults? You've proven yourself fully capable of making points without them, so why bother? As lawyers say: "If you can't attack the evidence, attack the person." Conversely, "Don't attack the person if you can attack the evidence." It only undermines your own credibility.

As you have taken the trouble to insult me yet again....(in a couple of posts...)

I'm back, briefly, to shine the spotlight back onto you...

I believe that this is just about still on topic because it brings into question the sincerity of one of the debaters,

ie. you. And high-lights the incongruity of your adopted stance. (re. telekinesis)

[snipped quotes because I don't want to cut and paste them manually and they can be located easily]

How about shining a bit of that 'white light of love' in my direction, Ziggy Stardust......

Just spotted your new post AGoodWriter.....we seem to be thinking the same way about the

incongruity of compartmentalising these kind of subjects.....

There are considerable differences between astral projecting and telekinesis. The most obvious one is, astral projecting doesn't really affect the physical material world. It involves another plane of existence which is mostly separate. One can't simply AP and then begin tossing objects around.

o.0 I thought that it was not possible to believe one thing and not another. I mean they are both instances of psychic in some sense. And should have lesser contradiction than religion, as there are many different types and people fighting over it. Do psychic also fall into many catagories too then?

Yes, many psychic phenomena are mostly unrelated to one another, beyond the part where they all involve the mind.

And why the belief in one type and not another?

Well, given the differences, separate phenomena may or may not fit within one's individual belief in what is possible. For example, I tend to be more "hard evidence" oriented [no, I'm not accusing other people of being non-evidence oriented].

Therefore, I believe in certain types of "psychic" phenomena, and not in others.

For example, I believe most of the people who say they are empathic, because this could easily be just a psychological issue with someone who's really good at reading people. I believe in astral projecting to a certain extent as well. Though I admit I think it's nothing more than a journey within one's own mind [and will until I experience something to the contrary, since this isn't really something that can be proven, only verified through personal experience], the main purpose it seems is to gain knowledge and understanding, and where better to gain self-knowledge or awareness you didn't know you had than from yourself?

However, I don't believe in telekinesis, because I've never seen any real evidence for it. I admit it could be possible, but only theoretically, and I won't go past believing it's theoretically possible until I do see some actual evidence, preferably not involving unnamed people doing experiments at other unnamed peoples' kitchen table, unless I'm at the table to witness it myself. Heck, I'm not too hard to convince, actually. If someone ever sits down at my table, I put a spoon in front of him, and he can bend it without ever touching it or goofing around with an apparatus, or putting his hand over mine while I touch it, I'll believe cheerfully. If someone does that in an actually controlled, actually scientific study, I'll believe that, too.

I don't believe in telepathy or mind-control as it's commonly understood, because I don't think the energy from our minds is nearly strong enough for anything like that, and since it varies from person to person, it's probably incompatible anyway.

So, it's fairly easy to believe in one type of psychic phenomena over another, it just depends on your personal standards for what constitutes believable.

Glad to see you want to read up and debate, that's always fun.

[eqgumby]

o.0 I thought that it was not possible to believe one thing and not another. I mean they are both instances of psychic in some sense. And should have lesser contradiction than religion, as there are many different types and people fighting over it. Do psychic also fall into many catagories too then? And why the belief in one type and not another?

That would be pretty silly, don't you think? Imagine all the abilities that are labeled "psychic". I think believing in intuition or even minor precognition is NOT the same as believing in psi-tards and their weather-control or Dragon Ball Z psi-ball fights. They seem to be worlds apart.

And religion is about faith, not proof. Huge difference there, and one that people confuse all to often in my opinion.

[oslove]

We are talking in telekinesis about a physical phenomenon.

Before anything else, a physical phenomenon must be physically observable even though we cannot enact it in our laboratory, because it is too grand a phenomenon or too complicated, to enact.

Now, science is concerned with showing how a phenomenon can be explained by the laws of the behavior of the physical world which laws are known actually to mankind, even just the ones we do know and we do avail ourselves of for inventing useful things, useful to mankind.

But science does not explain as of today all the phenomena that we today can observe with our senses even by devices invented by man.

In the debate whether telekinesis is fact or fiction, the proponent has not established even that it is an observable phenomenon, thus for not being an established observable phenomenon, it is not a fact, at most only a figment of man's imagination.

About telekinesis being investigated by the government, that says nothing because such a recourse is a species of argument from ignorance.

Oslove

[Ziggy Stardust]

We are talking in telekinesis about a physical phenomenon.

Before anything else, a physical phenomenon must be physically observable even though we cannot enact it in our laboratory, because it is too grand a phenomenon or too complicated, to enact.

Exactly, thank you. Bee, my belief and practice of astral projection has absolutely no relevance to this debate, and your use of it 'against' me, shows a degree of desperation. Astral Projection - an esoteric concept, assuming the existence of an ethereal world. Telekinesis - the practice of moving physical objects, on the physical plane. How are they at all related? Not in the slightest. Bee's lack of evidence has reached the point at which he/she is questioning the nature of the debater rather than the debater's points.

By the way, I thought you were gone?

[Nuclear Science]

Staunch scepticism aside - I, personally, look for an objective argument - I believe Ziggy won this debate hands down.

Though his absolute determination is both a vice and a virtue, to me it is he who has presented the more logical, more reasoned and ultimately more 'believable' argument.

For most believers here (FlameDragon, for example) it seems to be a big-bucket of placebo; you want to believe something so badly, you're going to irrational lengths to justify it.

[Guyver]

I thought both people did a great job. I liked that they were polite to each other. I found the debate interesting, especially the guy who went without food and water for ten days. That's truly amazing. I find it very difficult to believe that he went as long as he said without food and water though.

[stackofbooks]

Aaahhhh...the innocence of youth... It is not unusual for a 19 year old or a 26 year old to believe that they

know it all and have all the answers.

Oh, the irony! D:

It's nothing but a normal human activity and feeling that one is right; it comes along with the cognitive capturing of an idea as true or epistemologically favorable. If you do not think you are right, then you think you are wrong, or you're neither [undecided], so if you choose to say something is right or true, that thing is something you don't just think you know, but you feel you know, as well. It really has nothing to do with age.

You see? I'm doing it right now. Every statement we see and actually do cognitively capture and then project as expressive of the external world, "true", also gives us high emotional esteem in intellect and makes us feel good, especially when in a subject/theme/topic of interest.

Just, since opinions change, and we presently may think something is right which we thought was wrong before, we still have this feeling of intellectual grandiose, thus we look at other opinions or things as foolish, which is why people have that "this-aging-got-me-smarter" feeling. It isn't necessarily true you get wiser, or smarter, or such when you get older and older, it's just an emotional/cognitive perception that we are so. No age, buddy. Then again, I guess that might just be an [un-testable] hypothesis.

Enough of my rambling, though.

Edited November 5, 2008 by stackofbooks

[Ziggy Stardust]

Oh, the irony! D:

It's nothing but a normal human activity and feeling that one is right; it comes along with the cognitive capturing of an idea as true or epistemologically favorable. If you do not think you are right, then you think you are wrong, or you're neither [undecided], so if you choose to say something is right or true, that thing is something you don't just think you know, but you feel you know, as well. It really has nothing to do with age.

You see? I'm doing it right now. Every statement we see and actually do cognitively capture and then project as expressive of the external world, "true", also gives us high emotional esteem in intellect and makes us feel good, especially when in a subject/theme/topic of interest.

Just, since opinions change, and we presently may think something is right which we thought was wrong before, we still have this feeling of intellectual grandiose, thus we look at other opinions or things as foolish, which is why people have that "this-aging-got-me-smarter" feeling. It isn't necessarily true you get wiser, or smarter, or such when you get older and older, it's just an emotional/cognitive perception that we are so. No age, buddy. Then again, I guess that might just be an [un-testable] hypothesis.

Enough of my rambling, though.

Whilst I agree with your idea of intellectual grandiose, I can't help but feel you have defied wisdom; I was once an impressional, open-minded human being who believed the unfounded concept telekinesis, and, over time and through my own experience, I have learnt that belief should be accompanied with valid inference. I certainly perceive that I am wiser, but that is because I am so. Thus in my case, perception is but a product of actuality.

[The Wandering Star]

I just thought of a sort of interesting possibility: A lot of you say that if TK were real, we would have discovered it by now, but what if that's not the case? Hypothetically speaking, what if TK were something new; something that has taken many centuries to develop. It could be that now, despite being popularized by the media, it exists somewhere, and it isn't taken seriously because of the elaborate illusions of stage magicians or something like that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a firm believer in psychic powers or whatever, but some of the things that the human body are capable of, biofeedback for example, are amazing. There could be more to it that we have yet to discover. I think that everything is possible in one form or another.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I just thought of a sort of interesting possibility: A lot of you say that if TK were real, we would have discovered it by now, but what if that's not the case? Hypothetically speaking, what if TK were something new; something that has taken many centuries to develop. It could be that now, despite being popularized by the media, it exists somewhere, and it isn't taken seriously because of the elaborate illusions of stage magicians or something like that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a firm believer in psychic powers or whatever, but some of the things that the human body are capable of, biofeedback for example, are amazing. There could be more to it that we have yet to discover. I think that everything is possible in one form or another.

The problem with that is that it's extremely easy to say, but, from what I have seen - impossible to back up. It's like saying "we haven't discovered the power of flight yet, but what if it exists somewhere?" Such what ifs are what make people turn to religion, i.e there's no proof of God, but what if he does exist? I'd better not screw this up. It is, essentially though, limited to a hypothetical daydream. Don't get me wrong; I have nothing against religion.

[Psikillion]

The study above is a remarkable example of human endurance, which is no doubt the result of extraordinary biological aberrancy. However it does not provide suppport for Telekinesis.

If Telekinesis existed it would be extremely easy to prove. Empirical evidence, properly documented in accordance with scientific method, can be published in any country at any time. The fact that the test would be under 'scientific' conditions would not hinder the self-professed telekinetic's skill in any way; it would simply mean that there would be no way for trickery or illusionist techniques to be used. Once published, the study would provide irrefutable evidence for Telekinesis. So why, in the thousands of years that people have claimed to possess this ability, has this not happened? Well, it's for the same reason that nobody who claims to be able to summon undead pig-monsters has had their ability documented. It can't be documented under controlled conditions. Why? Because it isn't real. It's a farse dreamed up by people who need to feel different and special.

Your statement is wrong, because psychokinesis is a hard ability to learn. Most people I have heard of take at least 9 months to even learn so much to make a psiwheel spin for a few seconds.

How can we trust what we see if you're talking about is an unseen energy? In the case of Telekinesis, I have never seen any incidence of the phenomena ever occuring, and despite much searching, have never seen a single documented incidence either.

If Chakras, like God, cannot be explained through the physical aspect, that is fine. In fact, for the sake of argument I will consider it. But Telekinesis is not "of the spirit." Telekinesis is not unseen. It is the manipulation of physical objects. If Telekinesis existed, it could be seen by all. Arguing the existence of unseen energies in order to prove Telekinesis is absurd.

Psychokinesis is basically the mind effecting the environment around it. Thus how it is happening is unseen and the what is seen.

A non-belief in Telekinesis is not narrow-mindedness. It is simply rationality. I have never seen any proof, study, documentation, or unexplained event which even began to provide support for the existence of Telekinesis. How is thereby choosing not to believe in it narrow-minded? Were I to see Telekinesis performed before my very eyes and still discount it, that would be narrow-mindedness. Until that day, I insist on taking a logical approach, rather than living a lie. There are a few things wrong with saying "this can be real." If Telekinesis existed, we would know it was real by now. Let's live in reality. My opponent urges us to be open-minded, because that is the only way Telekinesis can be believed; if a person can maintain unfounded, unquestioning belief. His anecdotal evidence is insufficient, and his asking for us to learn Telekinesis in order to prove it to ourselves is hardly grounds for a proper argument. He calls Telekinesis 'fact' but how can it be fact if it is unverified? At the end of this debate, we are much the same as when we began; there remains no evidence or adequate arguments for the existence of Telekinesis and thus, until such evidence is found, those who claim to be able to perform it should not be believed. Thank you to my opponent.

Here is your proof...

You can click the link if you want, it is too what I personally think is the number 1 psionic discussion site ever.

And just to throw some more stuff to prove that it is real, I lowered the saturation on the picture (that is all I did)

That way you know there are no photoshopped out things and there are no strings attached

[Ziggy Stardust]

As an avid user of photoshop myself, I am well aware of how easy it is to manipulate photos and videos alike these days. Thus I cannot accept those photos as 'evidence.' Without even looking at it carefully, I can't discount the possibility that the guy is simply throwing the thing up in the air and chanced a good shot. Let's make a deal. If you can teach me to 'perform' telekinesis in 9 months, I will withdraw my skeptical claims. What is the first step to 'learning' telekinesis?