Are you trying to learn Telekenisis?

[signal7]

Whats up everyone! After reading some of the posts here, I've noticed that there are a lot of people trying to learn TK. Because of this fact I've decided to start a thread were people can post there progress and ask questions of those more experienced in telekenisis. Unfortunately I myself am not one of these more experienced people. I am just a rooke like the rest of you but I welcome everyone from inquireing minds to expert telekinetics to the group of sceptic sceptics or what ever you call yourselves (I forget the name) . This thread has one perpose, to help those that want the help. This is not a thread to prove anything, debate anything or to argue about anything. If you are here for anyone of those things post all you want..... each one will be ignored. We have argued over this subject already, anymore arguing is just redundant, STUPID and POINTLESS. If arguing does breakout Mod's FEEL FREE TO CLOSE THE THREAD. Other than that post away. I cant wait to see how far along everyone is. Later

Anakim...

Honest to whatever deity you contact: I moved a pen once. About a freely floating piece of paper. When told to: 'Grasp that pen!...', I did so, and the ink flowed in perfect, readable fashion.

This is documented by a many a Swami. As, this set would love the loss of the occupation of the time formalizing their employment. Where, in fact, there presence must be mandated for formal claim of insurance matters.

This is of no joking matter. I seriously moved a pen in "free" space. And, it's well documented. Only, though, due to lazy, fat people who wish of the ability...

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

Honest to whatever deity you contact: I moved a pen once. About a freely floating piece of paper. When told to: 'Grasp that pen!...', I did so, and the ink flowed in perfect, readable fashion.

This is documented by a many a Swami. As, this set would love the loss of the occupation of the time formalizing their employment. Where, in fact, there presence must be mandated for formal claim of insurance matters.

This is of no joking matter. I seriously moved a pen in "free" space. And, it's well documented. Only, though, due to lazy, fat people who wish of the ability...

Whatever. Whats your documentation? A comic.

[signal7]

Whatever. Whats your documentation? A comic.

Yeah, it's called Batman Subsists/& lives to tell about it. If you don't already know, you need not...

It is classified, Unto U...

Seriously, though. You must like comics. Could have said I was "INSANE", or is it??? U already have an inclination...?

[The Skeptic Eric Raven]

Yeah, it's called Batman Subsists/& lives to tell about it. If you don't already know, you need not...

It is classified, Unto U...

Seriously, though. You must like comics. Could have said I was "INSANE", or is it??? U already have an inclination...?

Your posts don't really make sense. Sorry.

[signal7]

Your posts don't really make sense. Sorry.

Yeah, and I chide one line comments from those that try and dictate their own version of reality. As I do myself, for me.

Statements that seem to indicate that one is using little brain capacity in order to draw a contradiction often do not warrant much attention from me.

Your LUCKY!

[jay123]

"why do would you want to show anyone anyway?"

Well the psi kids have an easy time telling us about it, but when it comes to showing us they dont have anything to prove

I've said this before, and i feel im gunna say it again. telekenisis is a nice fantasy, but that is all it is FANTASY.

[Sporkling]

well maybe there are people who don't talk about this and they have it and there are people who talk and they don't have or don't even really believe in it. there are many people on this world. Besides have you ever tried all this before?

[drakonwick]

This topic alone is just ridiculous. (Are you trying to learn telekinesis?) Trying to learn something that is from speculation and has no facts,

only other peoples beliefs on how you should try and learn telekinesis, (For which is speculation.) Is just mind boggling.

It must be a new generation thing, where all these kids are wanting to have an extraordinary ability.

[Sporkling]

arrr well vanquish it christmas do you really want to fight on this special day? oo i can't wait.

[drakonwick]

arrr well vanquish it christmas do you really want to fight on this special day? oo i can't wait.

Tom adds:

[Virtual Particle]

In December 1989 Dean Radin of Princeton's Psychology Department and Roger Nelson of the PEAR lab published a paper on the meta-analysis of micro-PK experiments not, as might be expected, in a parapsychology journal but in the respected physics journal Foundations of Physics. Their paper was entitled, 'Evidence for consciousness-related anomalies in random physical systems.' In their analysis, Radin and Nelson tracked down 152 reports describing 597 experimental studies and 235 control studies by 68 different investigators involving the influence of consciousness on microelectronic systems.

Radin and Nelson's studies showed that the aggregate of all these trials dramatically provided powerful evidence for micro-PK. For they found that the odds against the overall result being the result of chance was 1 in 10 to the power of 35.

To understand how unlikely it is that this result was obtained by chance, it is like finding a lottery ticket in the street, finding that it is the winning ticket and you have won first prize of millions -- and then continuing to find the winning lottery in the street every week for a thousand years.

That such findings continue to be dismissed shows more clearly than anything could that the "skeptics" are not evaluating the data with extra care -- they are in denial.

Here is where the whole denial thing (of course in respect to skeptics) comes into play. You see the probability is so high that in relation to macro Pk, while it may in fact be rare for an individual to have such ability it cannot be ruled out as a valid capacity within the context of a population. For the sake of argument and taking into consideration what is in fact, an extremely conservative amount of 1 in 100 billion, would in fact be capable of performing acts clearly definitive as Macro-Pk.

Lets me clear here, it’s a matter of physics and fundamentally a math question who, given the above amount (1 in 10 to the power of 35), leaves no question. Again 1 in 100 billion is the most conservative conclusion one can reach and that pretty much covers earths population for the last 2000 years.

Merry Christmas everyone.....

For the record, in relation to the above quote the link can be found at top and with respect to the two links below

Any thoughts??

[Sporkling]

and this be more simple?

[inkblot]

EVERY experiment that "proved" the existance of PK was flawed. How is this one any different? What were the methods used in it?

[Sporkling]

do you really want to know?

[inkblot]

do you really want to know?

Yes.

[Sporkling]

well there was one i remember the wind did it and the rest errr heat and the rest were for real

[Virtual Particle]

EVERY experiment that "proved" the existance of PK was flawed. How is this one any different? What were the methods used in it?

inkblot you can claim anything you want,but please explain the basis of you comment or otherise get yourself something else to do....... you sound like an Think about it........

Any thoughts??

Edited December 27, 2007 by Triad

[Virtual Particle]

Clearly the methodology is respect to the experiment has been made clear beyond any shadow of doubt. The only real problem that exists is in relation to "skep-tics" is, there clearly false philosophical argument. Here is something to consider, 1 in 100 billion is extremely conservative but taking it to a liberal standpoint 1 in 100 million is not unrealistic.

Any thoughts??

PS: Happy New Year

Edited January 1, 2008 by Triad

[drakonwick]

Clearly the methodology is respect to the experiment has been made clear beyond any shadow of doubt. The only real problem that exists is in relation to "skep-tics" is, there clearly false philosophical argument. Here is something to consider, 1 in 100 billion is extremely conservative but taking it to a liberal standpoint 1 in 100 million is not unrealistic.

Any thoughts??

PS: Happy New Year

So, are you saying that, 1 in 100 million may have an ability? If so, it may not be unrealistic! But, is it really worth it considering

the really low variable, (1/100 Million!) that people actually have an ability.

Regards,

Tom

[Sporkling]

maybe but its worth thinking about

[drakonwick]

maybe but its worth thinking about

Sure, we can talk about it until the world ends. But, it will never change my views on it.

That is unless you can show me a substantial amount of proof that will sway my views on it.

Regards,

Tom

[Sporkling]

looks like we all can't we swayed but its better this way

[drakonwick]

looks like we all can't we swayed but its better this way

Belief and facts! That is the residing brick wall between believers and skeptics.

Regards,

Tom

[Sporkling]

it always is

[drakonwick]

it always is

So, tell me which is better!

1. A belief with no basis of facts or proof.

2. A fact that shows a belief with no basis of facts.

Regards,

Tom