Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Why do people feel like they're being watched, even when no one is there?


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, we are at impasse once again as to what are the most honest and truth-seeking sources as opposed to agenda driven.

Mentioned these folks to you guys before: Guerilla Skepticism on Wikipedia

After decades of involvement I clearly believe people like Sheldrake, Radin, Utts and many others are the ones more interested in portraying a true understanding of the facts. Skeptics like the guerillas I don't hold to be true skeptics but no-hold-bars defender of a materialist-atheist worldview. The more I see the more I am convinced of my assessment. 

 

To give the other side of the argument, I'll quote Jessica Utts once again:

A professor of Applied Statistics has reviewed things more professionally than I can: Paper

Excerpt:

Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud

 

I'll repeat: In the end it comes down to who you believe is competent and more interested in being objectively honest with the evidence.

You think Theosophy is legitimate.
 

Your opinions and beliefs can be safely dismissed on that basis alone. You have no right using terms like ”evidence” and “objective”.

  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
6 hours ago, Antigonos said:

You think Theosophy is legitimate.
 

Your opinions and beliefs can be safely dismissed on that basis alone. You have no right using terms like ”evidence” and “objective”.

Thanks: You’re just what I meant by a honest, neutral, truth-seeking source for my consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They feel they are being watched because they ARE being watched. They just can't see the watcher.  For example, my Aunt Doris who lived in Philly always felt that she was being watched, and it turns out there was a homeless person living in her walls, and under her house.  He was caught under the property by an electrician Doris hired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2024 at 11:48 AM, papageorge1 said:

I'll repeat: In the end it comes down to who you believe is competent and more interested in being objectively honest with the evidence.

No it really doesn't.  The mere fact that you mention the same 'scientists' over and over again, two of them at least who have books to hawk (speaking hypocritically of 'agenda-driven'), should give you pause. What is left utterly unexplained is why, assuming your assessment is correct, if these three have made stunning discoveries why no one else is backing them up with additional studies confirming their findings.  That is how science is usually done, right?  The usual explanations from you why their findings haven't been supported by other scientists usually just betray that you don't know much about how science is done, so your decades of 'involvement' aren't really of much value at this point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

No it really doesn't.  The mere fact that you mention the same 'scientists' over and over again, two of them at least who have books to hawk (speaking hypocritically of 'agenda-driven'), should give you pause. What is left utterly unexplained is why, assuming your assessment is correct, if these three have made stunning discoveries why no one else is backing them up with additional studies confirming their findings.  That is how science is usually done, right?  The usual explanations from you why their findings haven't been supported by other scientists usually just betray that you don't know much about how science is done, so your decades of 'involvement' aren't really of much value at this point.

I also feel mainstream science has a materialist bent that is affixed in its nature now. I do not see the interest in parapsychological/paranormal subjects not because there is a dearth of suggestive evidence, but because there is a group dislike of things that smack of these nonsensical silly ideas and science is to show what is really going on.

And the lack of great scientific Nobel Prizes and interest and such is because the mechanism behind these phenomena cannot be directly studied by the physical senses and instruments of today. When that can happen things will open up. Right now, scientists can show statistical results in psi experiments that have no known scientific explanation back up by reproducible studies (in the thousands). Science needs testable mechanisms to progress though.

The list of names supporting this stuff though is much longer than I mention frequently. The names of those publicly opposed to this stuff is also a pretty tiny cabal too. Really, choose your side on who is being open and honest with the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2024 at 2:52 PM, Still Waters said:

You're alone, and you suddenly have the sneaking suspicion that someone's there. Maybe you watched a scary movie or read the latest thriller novel and wonder if there's a killer lurking in your room. You look around and open the closet door, but no one's there. So why does your mind make you feel as if you were being watched?

https://www.livescience.com/human-behavior/why-do-people-feel-like-theyre-being-watched-even-when-no-one-is-there

It's the spider sat in the corner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Right now, scientists can show statistical results in psi experiments that have no known scientific explanation back up by reproducible studies (in the thousands).

Is this you trying to provide an explanation of what 'meta-analysis' is?  There are thousands of 'reproducible studies' showing a psi effect?  That of course makes zero sense.

A known scientific explanation is, 'meta-analysis is only as good as the quality and accuracy of the studies it is analyzing'. Otherwise known as, 'garbage in, garbage out'.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Is this you trying to provide an explanation of what 'meta-analysis' is?  There are thousands of 'reproducible studies' showing a psi effect?  That of course makes zero sense.

A known scientific explanation is, 'meta-analysis is only as good as the quality and accuracy of the studies it is analyzing'. Otherwise known as, 'garbage in, garbage out'.

One side tells us the experimental quality meets or exceeds standards accepted for other sciences. The other says as you do that all the experiments constitute ‘garbage in’.

Whose view is more honest and accurate?

After decades of dealing with so-called believers and skeptics I think the higher quality believers are the far more professional group. I consider the professional skeptics to be operating under an anti-paranormal bias. You can always create the unresolvable claim of garbage testing.

At this point I think we must continue on respecting different sides and realize that difference is going to have to sit there indefinitely.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

One side tells us the experimental quality meets or exceeds standards accepted for other sciences. The other says as you do that all the experiments constitute ‘garbage in’.

Which makes it like many other scientific topics: disputed and unproven.  All of this would be moot if you simply had some good studies showing a psi effect that scientists can reproduce (and publish).  That's why they're resorting to meta-analysis in the first place.  Not 'all' the experiments need to be garbage to throw off a meta-analysis.

55 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

After decades of dealing with so-called believers and skeptics I think the higher quality believers are the far more professional group.

Logically it doesn't really matter though what you think though, since you are so far removed from being an expert and being able to evaluate the quality of these 'studies'.

57 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I consider the professional skeptics to be operating under an anti-paranormal bias.

Hahaha, yes and the fact that Sheldrake and Radin are trying to sell books doesn't even register on your 'bias' evaluation...  We've already covered that there would be no anti-paranormal bias if what you believe, that psi studies have shown results that have no scientific explanation, was actually true.  Where does 'worldwide fame and fortune', which awaits anyone who can show psi exists, fit on your 'bias' analysis?  I think that overwhelms any 'anti-paranormal bias' you are guessing exists.

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

You can always create the unresolvable claim of garbage testing.

False, not if you actually have evidence. You need one person who can actually do 'psi' well, it's not that difficult to test; instead you have to resort to statistical analysis we don't understand yet you believe/feel shows something scientifically meaningful.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel like I'm being watched when no one is there.  Do any of you?

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I don't feel like I'm being watched when no one is there.  Do any of you?

Nope, and I chalk it up to schizophrenia. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I don't feel like I'm being watched when no one is there.  Do any of you?

The only time I feel like it is when it is dark outside the lights are on and the curtains are open, but I know it's all in my head.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
17 minutes ago, TashaMarie said:

The only time I feel like it is when it is dark outside the lights are on and the curtains are open, but I know it's all in my head.

I do that naked :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OverSword said:

I don't feel like I'm being watched when no one is there.  Do any of you?

Hi OverSword

Nope not when I'm alone and don't care if people do when I'm out in public.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There are thousents of cameras everywhere now, on houses , fences, corners , stop lights , stores you name it. 

Feeling watched is no longer just a feeling , it's a reality 

Edited by qxcontinuum
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/18/2024 at 3:52 PM, Still Waters said:

You're alone, and you suddenly have the sneaking suspicion that someone's there. Maybe you watched a scary movie or read the latest thriller novel and wonder if there's a killer lurking in your room. You look around and open the closet door, but no one's there. So why does your mind make you feel as if you were being watched?

https://www.livescience.com/human-behavior/why-do-people-feel-like-theyre-being-watched-even-when-no-one-is-there

I first thought it was about this guy:

https://www.sheldrake.org/research/sense-of-being-stared-at


https://www.sheldrake.org/research/sense-of-being-stared-at/the-sense-of-being-stared-at-confirmed-by-simple-experiments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Why do people feel like they're being watched, even when no one is there?"

Screenshot_20240424-193431_Firefox.jpg.eb91660a20cb50edbf8093073dabec83.thumb.jpg.44f054dffc9482287faaa1a8d2aca5fb.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.