Oh yea of little faith :)

[Mr Walker]

8 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

I would tend to disagree with this point as for me I need certain tangibles/evidences of something in order to believe. If someone came to me with a sales pitch for some new developing product/service and has no documentation to support their pitch then I am less inclined to believe that they are serious about dealing with me because if they knew of me then I would expect that they would know enough to come prepared for examination.

Just like to point out that I don't say things are impossible only that there has not been evidence strong enough to support any claims and I suspect that many of the people here that debate you hold the same position.

jmccr8

Ok you disagree. But for me, if you know anything, then this prevents belief or disbelief as a mental construct  You can gather some evidences to support or reject a belief but it remains a belief until you come to know the truth  No one really NEEDS evidences to believe. Eg what do you believe about life on mars ?  

I wish everyone actually was as open to being convinced by evidences as you are but online one has to either believe /disbelieve or suspend both. No one can truly know a single thing about another online poster.  

[Mr Walker]

9 hours ago, freetoroam said:

The way it was explained here was vague.  As she worked there, this could have read she found it - on the library floor. 

 

yep i saw your point as i re read the story.  I could have explained more clearly that it was her chain and cross .

[Mr Walker]

4 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I said 'solely' though, you must have missed that.

Ha, ah no, not quite.  I'm seeking some explanation as to if there is something unexplained about this, I don't need an explanation 'around' another internet story, especially this one.

You just said 'the narrative was complete'?  Where was this mentioned in the OP?  Wonder what other part of the conversation you're forgetting.  You know, a very typical strategy in helping someone find something lost is to ask them to recount everywhere they were since the last time they knew they had the missing item, which makes me wonder if something like, 'well I stopped to get a soda out of my home fridge before driving in to the library', was mentioned.

Well if you think coincidence and luck are possibilities for once that's a very good sign that it's the explanation.  I'm not very convinced of your ability to determine whether something is incredibly lucky, you have a reputation for only counting the hits and not counting or disqualifying the misses. 

It's weird too, and of course as always convenient, that you don't actually know whether you are are using powers or not until there is later some confirmation of accuracy.  It's not like there's something to distinguish your use of powers from just imagining things apparently, it's not like you say, 'before I had her call her husband to look for the chain I knew she'd find it as there's always a bright light around the edges of my vision when this remote viewing/mind reading power manifests' or 'I know when I'm really viewing remotely as my angel always appears and guides me'.  It'd be easier to test if it worked that way and you didn't have to find out later if your guess was accurate or not and just knew from the nature of the use of these powers.  Just another purely coincidental, "it doesn't work that way", example I guess.

I mentioned the fine in reference to the likelihood of her finding it without help. it was on her kitchen floor in plain sight yet no one spotted it until i gave a specific location and her husband d looked closely  Thus it might have been spotted and found without my help, or it might have been vacuumed or swept up, and lost for ever.

   it is not really relevant to the story   otherwise.

i didn't mention the names  I didn't mention that all the witnesses were  adult women. i might have mentioned tha t one was my neighbour.  I didn't mention the time or what  i was wearing or that i couldn't stop for long because I had our 3 dogs in the back of our x trail     Of course i could go on adding to the story, but the relevant bits are complete 

There are a lot of things which happen to us which it helps to have independent verification of /for, although basically self  verification is the best way,  otherwise you come to need require independent verification for anything which happens to you   

I agree its weird,  but it is both rewarding and exciting 

luck and coincidence are always possible, and indeed sometimes are the actual answer.   but, as a fan of probabilities you need to consider the probability of such an outcome occurring from  luck or  coincidence, not just once, but about 95% of the time.

  Because you dont believe in such things, then it only leaves you with luck or coincidence. However suspend that disbelief, and suddenly the y seem unlikely 

[jmccr8]

22 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Ok you disagree. But for me, if you know anything, then this prevents belief or disbelief as a mental construct  You can gather some evidences to support or reject a belief but it remains a belief until you come to know the truth  No one really NEEDS evidences to believe. Eg what do you believe about life on mars ? 

Hi Walker

I usually spend my time building so I know that what I am being asked to do or choose to do for myself can be done so no there is nothing in that sense that I need to believe or disbelieve and after work I may spend time planing for a few hours as well as spend some time here learning. If there is a reason to believe in something then for me there needs to be something that validates it that is tangible otherwise there is no reason to consider it until it can be shown to be demonstrable in real time. So For me evidence is a fundamental element in belief.

I don't hold a position as to what is on Mars and will wait and see what scientists and data collection is published and use that as a barometer when information is made available because I have enough to think about concerning the environment I exist in and don't really have time for idle speculation based on limited data.

35 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

I wish everyone actually was as open to being convinced by evidences as you are but online one has to either believe /disbelieve or suspend both. No one can truly know a single thing about another online poster.  

I do think that there are things that we can know about certain aspects of a poster by the positions they maintain and how well they can support them which does lend a certain level of credibility for or against them.

jmccr8

[Mr Walker]

43 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

I usually spend my time building so I know that what I am being asked to do or choose to do for myself can be done so no there is nothing in that sense that I need to believe or disbelieve and after work I may spend time planing for a few hours as well as spend some time here learning. If there is a reason to believe in something then for me there needs to be something that validates it that is tangible otherwise there is no reason to consider it until it can be shown to be demonstrable in real time. So For me evidence is a fundamental element in belief.

I don't hold a position as to what is on Mars and will wait and see what scientists and data collection is published and use that as a barometer when information is made available because I have enough to think about concerning the environment I exist in and don't really have time for idle speculation based on limited data.

I do think that there are things that we can know about certain aspects of a poster by the positions they maintain and how well they can support them which does lend a certain level of credibility for or against them.

jmccr8

You sound interesting in your cognitive reasoning 

one question 

A loved one has a condition where the y may die or may survive.

The outcome is unknown and unknowable.

Do you chose to believe the y will live, believe the y will die, or not to form and hold any belief on the matter ?

You might well have a very strong reason to choose to  believe they will live, but no evidences that the y will 

Ps how do you know anything about a poster? Their whole posting history might be from a persona created for the purpose of posting here and may not resemble the reel person at all  

Hence we can  choose to believe or disbelieve the characteristics presented to us, but  we cant know the y are genuine 

pps 

you must think about things  while working on mundane tasks.

It  does not require special thinking time to consider and reflect on issues and ideas.  You can be doing tha t while doing anything else physically, as long as the task does not require full concentration. I filled my mind all the time i was doing physical work, with mental work.

It passed the time, allowed me to multi task, and not waste time,  and kept me from getting bored.   eg washing 1000 square metres of windows by hand,  or scrubbing   5000  square metres of floors with a mechanical scrubber can get very boring, very quickly,  if you  dont occupy your mind  

i suspect this is just not one of the thngs you choose to think about while working    

Edited October 28, 2019 by Mr Walker

[jmccr8]

25 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Do you chose to believe the y will live, believe the y will die, or not to form and hold any belief on the matter ?

Hi Walker

I accept that they are at a difficult point in their lives and try to be supportive, I believe we all die and no one knows when so I can neither believe or disbelieve that this is the time, and accept the potential for what it is.

34 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You might well have a very strong reason to choose to  believe they will live,

I realize that me believing without evidence is futile and would give what support I can as my belief will likely have not impact on the outcome.

36 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Ps how do you know anything about a poster? Their whole posting history might be from a persona created for the purpose of posting here and may not resemble the reel person at all  

Yes it is possible that a person is capable of fabricating a persona but for the most part how they challenge and support positions is very much a means of expression, mental, emotional and intellectual and many of the members here do come here to actively engage in social exchanges.

40 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Hence we can  choose to believe or disbelieve the characteristics presented to us, but  we cant know the y are genuine 

Hence I see the value of their input and the level of competency that they have on a subject.

42 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

you must think about things  while working on mundane tasks.

Yes I do and most of them are planing work strategies or something else that I am planing to build or resolve.

44 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

It  does not require special thinking time to consider and reflect on issues and ideas.  You can be doing tha t while doing anything else physically, as long as the task does not require full concentration. I filled my mind all the time i was doing physical work, with mental work.

I didn't say that I don't think I said I don't spend time on idle speculation on subject not sufficiently evidenced I think about what I do know and how I can make it work in the real world and it is a creative process based on what I can actualize.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

yep but what you consider " lies" or impossible  I know to be truth, and possible, so my past experience is very different to yours. Thus, for me, it would be  totally irrational/illogical NOT t believe it  It is not logical to deny evidences or reality just because you don't believe in them 

I tend to allow for the sciences. If they show a certain conclusion is wrong, then the outcome must be readjusted, wether the real answer be obvious or not. 

We differ here. Like many paranormal proponents, you consider your conclusions infallible, and that is what is not supported. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

You believe i lie. i know i tell the truth. This makes a huge difference 

I don't know if you lie, or believe your own claims, I can say that you often extrapolate well beyond the data to support your personal conclusions. 

As such, it might make a difference to you, but not anybody else 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

NO  no story online can be proven to an unwilling audience. It requires willingness to believe 

That's why probabity is so important. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

So one more story wouldn't make a difference 

We agree in this at least. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

i rushed home to tell this story as it happened BECAUSE it excited me and was one more example that i have not lost my talent  

it is fascinating because i KNOW i tell the truth  Thus i kNOW that your incredulity is unfounded.

i know you are wrong to doubt my claims. I understand  why you do, and can even empathise with the logic behind your reasoning   but still,  i know you are wrong.

This example just gives ME more assurance that you are wrong.

Your over excited response also indicates to me at least that you tend to jump to conclusions. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

i can't explain it, and am open to suggestions, but every word of it is true.

Make of it as you will.

I have, that's why I asked you about familiarity with the subject in question. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

That is also the  case with all similar stories i post   Every one of them may be pure coincidence but again, statistically, that is more unlikely than mind reading. how many people do you know who have successfully found/recovered almost 20 lost or stolen  objects. If it was just coincidence it should be happening to everyone, all the time 

Subliminal or not, information can be read, it's how cold readers work. My suspicion is that you know the people, their habits, and residence, and that was enough fir you to make some obvious guesses that had a high probability of being correct. 

On 10/25/2019 at 9:31 PM, Mr Walker said:

 Of course, if you believe mind reading is impossible, then you a re forced to seek other explanations, however improbable  

I don't see how mind reading is the most likely conclusion here. Again, you seem over zealous to label this incident as some sort of power, when as anyone can see, when asked to show it, you cannot. I think that says a great deal more than this claimed incident 

[+Liquid Gardens]

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

There are a lot of things which happen to us which it helps to have independent verification of /for, although basically self  verification is the best way,  otherwise you come to need require independent verification for anything which happens to you 

No, as the available evidence, and the whole enterprise of and need for science, clearly shows, 'self-verification is not the best way'.  Nor does the fact that independent verification is better 'require' it then for anything that happens to you, that doesn't follow either.

10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

but, as a fan of probabilities you need to consider the probability of such an outcome occurring from  luck or  coincidence, not just once, but about 95% of the time.

Ha, no, I don't need to consider that either until you provide some data and your probability calculation.  Your desire to have something happen to you that is 'rewarding and exciting', and that also oh-so-coincidentally makes you 'special', explains this and all of your stories.  If that explanation is true, and there's lots of evidence for it, that also should explain why self-verification is not the best way, especially in your case.

[+Sherapy]

14 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually it does. If i could always find an object it would be 100 %

Out of all objects I have been asked to find I have located and retrieved 80 % approx. In another 15% of cases ive been able to show the person where the object was but it was not retrievable This does not count the dozens of items i have located informally for family or friends   

However that point is moot.

Really i should NEVER be able to find anything using only this method. I means tha t humans have some abilities we do not always recognise or utilise 

The 3 things I declined are a totally difernt abilty. I have successfully located one real item for a person on  this forum but unfortunately her brother had sold it for drug money and i dont think she was ever able to retrieve it 

As ive said, except for one online case every case ive solved, I have had the person standing next to me.  You are just making up reasons to stay in your comfort zone of scepticism and disbelief 

lol i dont know about Charles. I couldn't find any director (official title of the Marine science centre, not manager)  called Charles .

This doesn't mean he is not telling the truth. His real name may be different  or he may mean a different centre

  However i know that i am  telling the truth,  and that all that counts for me, 

You know what would help me with the skeptical aspect? The proof you offered several times in the first posts you made. 
 

Have you considered this was just a guess, you were wrong the first guess, this rules our psychic. 
 

I am only hearing your version.

 

You said “I got 4 words” you couldn’t have got four words since you have no ability to visualize images and words count. 

You didn’t say you “heard” 4 words.

I wonder if the excitement to make a thread is a result of being hit with the idea that you could redirect posters attention away from giving evidence for the whale story.

Any progress on the whale story news clip? 
 

 

[SHaYap]

Can't even tell the difference between 'ye' and 'yea' 

So much for being an 'educator'

Oh come ye oh come ye to Bethlehem... Oh yea oh yea 

~

[+Hammerclaw]

The third installment of the Walker Chronicles mini-series is titled "Castaways Of Thylacine Island" a delightful parody of "Gilligan's Island" staring Mr Walker as the Skipper, Habitat as Gilligan, Psyche 101 as the Professor and Sherapy as Mary Ann. The episode begins with the Skipper and Gilligan's bumbling attempts to repair a truck-sized hole in their ship, the SS Argument.....

Edited October 28, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[jmccr8]

On 10/25/2019 at 6:32 PM, Mr Walker said:

I dont see a direct connection to any specific alien encounter, but i do think the re is a connection between my connection to the cosmic consciousness aged about 12/13  when i became conscious of the whole universe and my connection to it.   Feeling part of the universe in a physical and mental sense theoretically would make it easier to locate an object However i suspect as above that this comes from my abilty to link to other minds and read their subconscious.  However i also never get lost and never have to look for a car park when shopping which are both sort of abiliites like having an extended  chi.

 

On 10/25/2019 at 10:25 AM, jmccr8 said:

When you went to get tested after seeing Phenomenon it was because you thought you might have a tumor and over the years have seen several movies where special abilities were rooted in the subject having a tumor, did these experiences start  then for you and  if it did have a relationship to either of those incidents and how does astral travel fit in as you say you have been doing this since your youth but have indicated a relationship in past?

Hi Walker

I just wanted to re-track here and ask about the first time you went to get tested, you said that you were in tip top mental and physical condition and that the testing and first encounter were within months to less than a year but are not sure if the encounter occurred before or after the testing just within the time range that I mentioned. I have to wonder why you decided to get tested if everything was going good as in the second quote you had been concerned about a tumor so in that instance you have demonstrated that you had health concerns even if there was no actual health problem found.

Was it just because it was free and you were curious?

jmccr8

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

 

Hi Walker

I just wanted to re-track here and ask about the first time you went to get tested, you said that you were in tip top mental and physical condition and that the testing and first encounter were within months to less than a year but are not sure if the encounter occurred before or after the testing just within the time range that I mentioned. I have to wonder why you decided to get tested if everything was going good as in the second quote you had been concerned about a tumor so in that instance you have demonstrated that you had health concerns even if there was no actual health problem found.

Was it just because it was free and you were curious?

jmccr8

I had the psych evaluation done after( and as a result of)  that encounter because i wanted to make sure  I wasn't mentally ill.

It gave me more than just a clean bill of health.

Indeed i was about 21 and in top physical and mental condition  That was summer of 72/73 

The test using scans was after  watching phenomenon with john Travota That would have been about 1997 Then i had more advanced scans because i was getting bad headaches in the early 2000s Turned out it was some damage to my neck,where a student accidentally hit me as i stopped two of them from beating each other up by stepping between them,   causing pressure on nerves .

It took a few years, but eventually the headaches disappeared.  I had to keep my neck warm for a long while, as the cold caused severe headaches.

  Because of Australia's  health system i get a full medical check up every 2 years. I also have all the extra tests for cancers etc which are provided  for free  To me its better to prevent problems than have to deal with them after they become serious.

These days i see the doctor once every month for blood pressure and blood thickness tests  and a general check over including a weigh in.

  It is free, as are all our medicines if the y are prescribed 

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, third_eye said:

Can't even tell the difference between 'ye' and 'yea' 

So much for being an 'educator'

Oh come ye oh come ye to Bethlehem... Oh yea oh yea 

~

lol you little old pedant you   yea 

[Mr Walker]

19 hours ago, Sherapy said:

You know what would help me with the skeptical aspect? The proof you offered several times in the first posts you made. 
 

Have you considered this was just a guess, you were wrong the first guess, this rules our psychic. 
 

I am only hearing your version.

 

You said “I got 4 words” you couldn’t have got four words since you have no ability to visualize images and words count. 

You didn’t say you “heard” 4 words.

I wonder if the excitement to make a thread is a result of being hit with the idea that you could redirect posters attention away from giving evidence for the whale story.

Any progress on the whale story news clip? 
 

 

Sorry i don't follow your points. I think  that is because you are making assumptions and starting from  those assumptions 

eg what "guess" are you speaking of 

There was no guess.

Just 4 words, all of which helped locate the chin but also refered to the locationof the cross eve thoughthe y wwere in difenrt buildings mies aprt. 

I dont know how your mind works.

I only hear words and dont see in images 

i cant think of any other way to explain it than this. When i closed my mind and focused on finding the  chain i "got" four words directly into my mind  Same  as the saying I get it " 

sometimes i wonder why i bother explaining  things to you. Your mind is so closed you neither take any of it in, nor accept any of it as told 

Or are you seriously telling me you don't often just "get" knowldge understanding answers etc pop into your mind 

 I guess there are people like that, but most of us often suddenly "get " an answer understanding  or knowledge come into our head  Indeed its a phrase often used ineduction 

"eg Sammy suddenly got it today.  It just clicked for him/her "

Um no I am not that devious Only someone like yourself would think of such a stratagem   

and i think maybe the whale thing didn't blow up until AFTER I posted the post about finding the chain.  Coukdnt swear to that and i dont care. . 

You might be interested that yesterday another local  librarian asked me if I could find a school key she had lost 

I told her it was in an envelope  in  a drawer with some note paper  with pictures of roses on it, and possibly scented. 

She hasnt had time to look yet but she said that makes sense.

She put the key away somewhere before going on a trip to Adelaide because she didnt want to lose it while travelling,  and when she returned couldn't remember where she put it.

However the envelope rang a bell with her. She the told me that the key was by itself, not on a ring,and it was quite likely she had put it in a n envelope in a drawer. She intends to look when she has time but it is not too urgent as the school provided her with another key, when she finally  owned up to misplacing the original  I knew this would happen. Next i will have half  a dozen more people asking for help   

[Mr Walker]

22 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

No, as the available evidence, and the whole enterprise of and need for science, clearly shows, 'self-verification is not the best way'.  Nor does the fact that independent verification is better 'require' it then for anything that happens to you, that doesn't follow either.

Ha, no, I don't need to consider that either until you provide some data and your probability calculation.  Your desire to have something happen to you that is 'rewarding and exciting', and that also oh-so-coincidentally makes you 'special', explains this and all of your stories.  If that explanation is true, and there's lots of evidence for it, that also should explain why self-verification is not the best way, especially in your case.

You judge me by your own motivators  i dont do this stuff for reward or excitement though it can be rewarding and exiting i do it to help others  Luckily they dont happen very often.

  I really do not want to feel obliged to spend my time finding lost objects for people 

Not sure what you mean about probability calculation. It is statistcally almost impossible for me to be able to locate lost objects around 95 percent of the time I am asked to,  and be able to recover them about 80% of the time  There is no statistical calculation which can establish the probability of such a thing give the unknowns 

Your bias simply prevents you from accepting the truth and reality of such cases  Ps in these cases the verification comes from results You aren't here to see those results and you dont believe in them. But that  is irrelevant  The results speak for themselves 

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

You judge me by your own motivators  i dont do this stuff for reward or excitement though it can be rewarding and exiting i do it to help others 

I judge you by the evidence you have provided.  Of course you do this for excitement, that you created this post speaks for itself.

5 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Not sure what you mean about probability calculation. It is statistcally almost impossible for me to be able to locate lost objects around 95 percent of the time I am asked to,  and be able to recover them about 80% of the time

Why is there a difference in those percentages, are you finding things that are out of reach and unrecoverable?

I don't believe you that you locate lost objects around 95% of the time, you've proven you are biased in your data gathering.  I don't know why it is so difficult for you to not recognize when you are just providing more claims with no evidence.

7 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

There is no statistical calculation which can establish the probability of such a thing give the unknowns 

Yet despite that you admit that all of your locating powers might be coincidence, you nonetheless estimate that there is a higher percentage for mind reading than you just finding these things by coincidence.  So now you admit that you can't actually calculate the probability for such a thing.  Thus, you don't have much basis for thinking that this is actually psychic mind reading.

9 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Your bias simply prevents you from accepting the truth and reality of such cases

As your bias and lack of memory simply prevent you from being able to judge your experiences accurately, or even get the facts straight sometimes (a la your whale story, having had a vertical leap equal to the top athletes, etc).

[Mr Walker]

On 10/28/2019 at 7:17 PM, psyche101 said:

I tend to allow for the sciences. If they show a certain conclusion is wrong, then the outcome must be readjusted, wether the real answer be obvious or not. 

We differ here. Like many paranormal proponents, you consider your conclusions infallible, and that is what is not supported. 

I don't know if you lie, or believe your own claims, I can say that you often extrapolate well beyond the data to support your personal conclusions. 

As such, it might make a difference to you, but not anybody else 

That's why probabity is so important. 

We agree in this at least. 

Your over excited response also indicates to me at least that you tend to jump to conclusions. 

I have, that's why I asked you about familiarity with the subject in question. 

Subliminal or not, information can be read, it's how cold readers work. My suspicion is that you know the people, their habits, and residence, and that was enough fir you to make some obvious guesses that had a high probability of being correct. 

I don't see how mind reading is the most likely conclusion here. Again, you seem over zealous to label this incident as some sort of power, when as anyone can see, when asked to show it, you cannot. I think that says a great deal more than this claimed incident 

1 Science does not yet know everything and some things are even unknown unknowns

2 No not infallible, just he best fit given logic, and an open and unbiased mind  which does not discount anything as impossible You begin by ruling out some things as physically impossible which means you could not ascertain a truth unless it fell within what you consider to be possible  

3 The probability you speak of is not mathematical probability but a subjective value you assign to the likelihood of something 

 Without knowledge or experience your subjective opinion on what is probable is flawed   (and again you begin by eliminating things you believe to be impossible )

3 lol criticised for being too unemotional and for being too emotional 

This was an exciting event, like any such event  The lady was absolutely stunned and thrilled. I was happy  It's been a while since I have been asked to find a lost object and to do so so quickly and easily was pleasing  there was not a lot of intrinsic value in the chain unlike the last object i located (a lost purse with a lot of money  ID and credit cards in it )  but clearly t meant a lot to the librarian  At last a sensible attempt to explain how this might occur 

yep its one of the things i often consider when i go though these events  However i don't see how it would have worked in this case 

The chain was on the floor of a place i have never seen or been near. I know nothing about this woman's home life,  (except that she has a teenage son ) only seeing her in the library.  So no idea of her habits or residence and only minimal knowldge of her (i didnt even know she wore a cross and chain) 

also it doesn't work in that way. The last item i found was on the floor of a car and had been placed there during a community garage sale.

  However i didnt  get "car " or work out that it was likely to be in the car.

Indeed  the lady said she had checked the car carefully  (And she had, visually) 

I told her it was in the dark on a grill/ribbed patterned surface.

We checked a number of such places without  luck.  Then, despite her saying she had checked the car, i said " Well i need to look at it"

It was parked in an indoor garage accessed through the house  As soon as opened the door i saw  that the rubber flooring had the grill/ribbed surface i was looking for.   Turned out the purse was right back under the seat it couldn't be seen, and had to be extracted by hand and touch.  

A girl once came to me to find her lost phone. I said something like,   "green bag, on top of the lockers, in the year 9 room" (and that is exactly where it was found;  her best friend having taken it and hidden it) 

 

 

[SHaYap]

53 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

lol you little old pedant you   yea 

Oh ye the great liar thou art, yea , yea , yea and aye... 

~

[Mr Walker]

5 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I judge you by the evidence you have provided.  Of course you do this for excitement, that you created this post speaks for itself.

Why is there a difference in those percentages, are you finding things that are out of reach and unrecoverable?

I don't believe you that you locate lost objects around 95% of the time, you've proven you are biased in your data gathering.  I don't know why it is so difficult for you to not recognize when you are just providing more claims with no evidence.

Yet despite that you admit that all of your locating powers might be coincidence, you nonetheless estimate that there is a higher percentage for mind reading than you just finding these things by coincidence.  So now you admit that you can't actually calculate the probability for such a thing.  Thus, you don't have much basis for thinking that this is actually psychic mind reading.

As your bias and lack of memory simply prevent you from being able to judge your experiences accurately, or even get the facts straight sometimes (a la your whale story, having had a vertical leap equal to the top athletes, etc).

Yes The only two failures to retrieve lost objects came when i could say where the y were but that y could not  be reached Eg a usb filled with reports which was on the floor of the ocean and a gold nugget on a chain which had been left in a rucksack in Darwin and apparently then taken by other residents of the house  

About 10 % of the time I just do not get any idea or feedback and simply have to say that i cant help. ive never had a failure  to locate an object when i gave the information i received to the owner  except where it was inaccessible   

and again this is ALL just something you have to believe or not.

One reason i was excited by the latest case was that, while i feel no need to evidence it, it is nice to know that independent evidences do exist and COULD be provided  (with the lady's permission) 

hey i am not perfect.

I misremembered the whale story but maintain that it is true,  based on the fact that others in the community also recall it,

i did often do dunks when playing basketball as a teenager even though today i find that hard to believe myself. I think I was just able to leap a long way into the air i was young, muscly, thin and very very fit  My nick name a t school  in my last two years  was mighty mouse because i had a physique like his,  (but a longer thinner body shape )

[Mr Walker]

2 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Oh ye the great liar thou art, yea , yea , yea and aye... 

~

really intelligent commentary, as usual   

[SHaYap]

1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

really intelligent commentary, as usual   

A declaration, verdict and conclusion accordingly to pedantry afforded by pleasantries, have a nice evening. 

~

[Habitat]

39 minutes ago, third_eye said:

conclusion accordingly to pedantry afforded by pleasantries

Another meltdown with the word processor?

[+Liquid Gardens]

45 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Eg a usb filled with reports which was on the floor of the ocean and a gold nugget on a chain which had been left in a rucksack in Darwin and apparently then taken by other residents of the house

Did someone see the usb on the ocean floor, did you scuba or snorkel and spot it?  How did you know the gold nugget was in a rucksack?

47 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

this is ALL just something you have to believe or not.

So like Santa then.

49 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

I misremembered the whale story but maintain that it is true,  based on the fact that others in the community also recall it,

You're just equivocating on 'it'.  "It" is not true, because you've provided two different contradictory stories.  Furthermore I see no indication that were it not for the participation of ChrLzs and your own documented forgetfulness on this topic that you wouldn't be insisting on how humans can remember things perfectly and we couldn't survive if we misremembered or misinterpreted things, etc.  So in one of the rare cases where you tell a tale that doesn't depend 100% on your memory to be challenged or "supported", we quickly find a problem with it indicating that what you remember doesn't match what occurred, nor does it match what you've said previously. That's evidence, and is the explanation why disbelieving your stories is not out of bias.

[SHaYap]

36 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Another meltdown with the word processor?

Nope, another logic whisper whooshed over your malignant subsumed head... 

~