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 -

Possible Evidence


Astrocreep

Recommended Posts

You might not know it but it is your PSI who is asking these questions.

Ok, thanks for answering the questions! :D

I now have a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Jj -=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 295
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Jjbreen

    70

  • mattman

    45

  • ShaunZero

    18

  • drakonwick

    13

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I estimate that my hands would have to be well over 400 degrees Fahrenheit for them to move the wheel like they did in the first video. And even if that was the case, which is impossible, the wheel wouldn’t stop spinning as suddenly as it did unless I provided a proportionally *cold* and sudden current of air. Simply removing the source wouldn’t stop the wheel for spinning until the air heated from my hands equalized, which would take some time considering the air is contained, right? Heat takes a while to leave a container for the same reason is takes a while to fill a container. Since we are talking about mere seconds here (as seen in the first video), it would take both extremely high and low temperatures to produce the results seen in the video, ones that could not possibly come from ones body.

Anywho, thats my position in a nutshell.

Do you know how much air there is in a room? As soon as you move your hands out of the range necessary to create the currents necessary to move the pin wheel the heat form an equilibrium with the rest of th air in the room....explaining how the wheel stops so quickly. It seems like a lot of the statements you make are just your assumptions and not actual fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know how much air there is in a room? As soon as you move your hands out of the range necessary to create the currents necessary to move the pin wheel the heat form an equilibrium with the rest of th air in the room....explaining how the wheel stops so quickly. It seems like a lot of the statements you make are just your assumptions and not actual fact.

Im talking about inside the glass container, not outside.

If vast amounts of 140 degree air heating the glass (for 2 minutes) doesnt even make the wheel twitch (remember, the hair dryer isnt simply radiating 140 degree heat like my hands would be doing), how could the heat from my hand make the wheel spin so suddenly, and rotate at those rpms unless my hands were significantly above 140 degrees?

Its not assumption, its logic. If 140 degree heat doesnt make the wheel twitch, it takes more than 140 degree to make the wheel spin, right? The real question is how much more heat would it take to move the wheel, keeping in mind that temperature is already 42+ degree over the 98.6 degrees of the human body. So, in order to guesstimate this, you first have to compensate for the fact that the hair dryer isnt radiating 140 degree heat, but rather realeasing many times that much heat (energy) do to the sheer volume of 140 degree air being emitted. That alone would proportinally increase the temperature my hands would have to be in order to equal the energy release of the hair dryer. However, we also have to account for the fact that the figure "140 degrees" accounts for the temp directly contacting the glass, not the temp at the muzzle of the hair-dryer. This means the difference between what would be the 98.6 degrees of my hands (the muzzle if you will), and then temp of the air a few inches away from my hand (not above my hand, but off to the side) in an otherwise 60 degree room (meaning slightly over 60 degrees, no more than 65 degees for sure). (Of course, if you dont believe me, you can buy a digital thermometer and first measure the temp of the room, and then place it 4 - 6 inches away from your hand (not above your hand, but to the side) and take a second temperature reading. )

Anyway, this would also raise the temp my hands would have to be, and even if i did, id get the same results seen in the video, which isn't so much as a twitch after two minutes. So, lets do some crude math shal we? If the hair dryer is emitting 3 times the amount of 140 degree air that it would otherwise be radiating if it were simply a 140 degree object (which it is emiting far more than that lol), then that alone would mean my hands would have to be 3 x 140 degrees to equal the same amount of energy being created by the hair dryer. Thats 420 degress right there, and since the hair dryer didnt make the wheel move, neither would 420 degree hands, directly on the glass. Of course, thats not taking into account how much more heat it would take to make it spin, much less move since that amount of energy didnt even budge the wheel. Nor have we accounted for the position of my hands yet (distance and height)....nor have we account for the time it took for the wheel to spin ( a second or so) compared to the 2 minutes it took with the hair dryer, which still yeilded no spins.

So, just to be on the safe side, i thinks is conservative of me to estimate that my hands would have to be well over 400 degree's in order to make the wheel spin like it did in the video, which was abruptly and at decent rmps. In reality, if we were to account for the time differences, i think we could add a couple hunder degrees more onto that figure, but that would be unnecessary to my point. It already far beyond the realm of possibility that my hand-heat could move the wheel, which is covered, from that far out.

Now, i think its time you start contributing to the discussion by sharing your own facts and/or logic about how your theory could be true. As of now your theory isn't holding water. Its far too general. We already know heated air creates currents. And thanks to me, we now know vast volumes of 140 degree air directly contacting the glass doesnt yeild any movement, so naturally 98.6 degree heat directly contacting the glass doesnt yield any movement. And since direct 98.6 degree heat doesnt yield any movement, distanced 98.6 degree heat most definately wont move the wheel.

Now you go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what. How about I make another video to further reinforce my point. I'll use two lighters to heat up the glass for mintues on end....and if that doesnt make the wheel spin, will you please stop pretending like you know what your talking about?

so far I have:

-placed my hands near the glass for 30 seconds, and have gotten no movement

-Placed my hands directly on the glass for 30 second, and have gotten no movement

-Blown 140 degree air directly on the glass for 120 second, and have gotten no movement

Yet, I have gotten the wheel to aburptly and rapidly spin in approximately 1 second in my first video.

Whats is it going to take before you stop being so stubborn and admit that your theory just deosnt make sense?

I really will make that third video if it will reach you, you know? I dont mean to be harsh, but it seems as if youre being unreasonable because you have already set your mind on discrediting me (instead of being reasonable). I have no choice but to do someting so drastic that you simply cannot deny what it shows. Im going to make that video, and hopefully you'll see how unreasonable your being when you attempt to explain why two 1400 degree celcius flames couldnt get the wheel moving, but my hands could. The video will be done either today or tomorrow. I will first show how a flame effect an exposed pin wheel (like before), then ill put a glass over the wheel, light two lighters (one in each hand to represent each hand) and place the flame directly on the glass for a few minutes. Ive acually done this before (with one lighter) still got no movement, but hey, dont take my word for it. You'll see it with your own eyes, in painful clarity, soon enough.

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please NO MORE PM's calling me "F...ing Non-Believer..." please. THANKS...

You all can call me nonbeliever. I will wear the badge with pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell you what. How about I make another video to further reinforce my point. I'll use two lighters to heat up the glass for mintues on end....and if that doesnt make the wheel spin, will you please stop pretending like you know what your talking about?

The below is NOT addressed to Matt specifically - I've gotten some more PM's asking some of the questions addressed. So I just answer them all together instead of seperate posts. So Matt - do not take offense at this, ok?? Just killing a lot of 'birds with one stone..." :)

Ok, the problems with this, the hair drier, lighter ect ....

A.) You have to take into consideration the mass and volume of the jar and the temp outside the jar. What??

If you heat the jar up to quickly you exceed the hot/cold ratio. You do not allow time for the air to heat and cool at a speed that the hands provid.

You heat the jar hot too quickly and there is NO room for cool down and rewarm. Think about this. The hands on the other hand do not 'over heat' to quickly for the mass/volume of the jar thus the heat rise, cools down and drops back down. If you heat it up to hot the there is no > (greater than) cold temp at the top - the heat is stronger then the coldest point. The cool down will take much longer - because the temp of the room is simply not cold enough to cool the super heated air. (No I am not making this up, just think about the hold/cold ratio you are playing with.)

Example on the other side of the spectrum. Which will melt ice faster? Put an icecube in a 30 degree, 40 degree, 50 degree on up to 80 degrees. Which will melt faster? Why? Ok, no reverse that put heat say a 100 degree fry pan. PUT it in an 80 d, 70 deg, 60 deg, 50 deg on down to 30 degrees. Which room will cool it down faster? Why??

The heat provided has to allow for heat/cool down in a time fashion to create air flow.

That's why sometimes it works with hands and sometimes it does not. If your hands are equal to or just slightly warmer it will not spin. This really isn't "rocket science". Just the ice cube melt and fry pan, example. Not 'rocket science' just logic of understanding the dynamics of temps at play.

J.

Jj -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you are using your energy - but nothing super natural - nothing psi and nothing extraordinary. Just the normal temp that is naturally coming from your hand. There is NOTHING special about it at all.

Well, I meant that you are controlling your energy. I guess the only way to really know, is if someone moved the psi-wheel, but being distanced from it. Like, have your hands ike 2 feet away(2 feet should be enough distance) from the psi-wheel or something, and trying to focus your energy on the psi-wheel. If it moves, that means you can control your energy(or you are still too close, which I would doubt). If you can't, then it proves your theory correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? No no, the heat from a single hair dryer wouldnt heat all of the air evenly at the exact same time. Are you kidding me?? It would first heat the air on the closest side to the hair dryer (as that would be the hottest part of the glass), while the air on the opposite side would sink, creating a current. If anything, the more dramatic the heat change (the hotter, the faster), the more dramatic the current (within reason) unless you are heating something from all sides...which i clearly wasn't. What are you trying to pull Jj? You know thats not how it works. The only way that would work is if somehow heat disperses evenly throughout the glass before it heats up the air inside the container. And if it does, it doesnt matter if the heat comes from my hand or the hair dryer, it will disperse evenly regardless (meaning the air would be heated up from all sides) meaning there would be no current either way.

In fact, a lighter would be superb in this case because, unlike the hair dryer, the heat would be far more localized than the hot air comming out of a hair dryer. Now that I think about it, the hot air could be flowing around the glass (hugging the curves as air does) so that actually could be heating up the glass a little from all sides. Im making that third video.

I know you said that wasnt aimed at me, but it indirectly was. And since no one seems to be acknowledging that I have already tried using only hand heat to move the wheel, what else can I really do? Everyone seems to be ignoring the evidence right in front of them, for one reason or another. You say the wheel is soooooo sensitive that even a minute amount of heat from ones hands can move the wheel. I show that it can't, but its not enough to convice you all. So I also show that a dramactic change in heat doesnt move the wheel either, which it didnt. But that wasnt enough either. wtf?

Lol. You know what i think? I think many of you would rather assume I was wrong than find out that im right. Its the same story with the naive "tkers" would despise sceince for no good reason, except now its the "scientists" who are ignoring reason. And remember when i was talking about the after-the-fact critics back a few pages? They do that because its a poor attempt at discrediting new and relevent information. Im pretty sure thats why you have revised your stance a bit from "heat will make the wheel move" to "only the exact temperature will cause the wheel to move, no more no less".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following questions were asked 3rd Rock.

His answer is at the end of each:

Ok, let me ask some specific questions here, 3rd rock....

Is it "Psi" that keeps our hearts beating?? Yes

Is it "Psi" that keeps us breathing? Yes

Is it "Psi" that digests our food? Yes

Is it "Psi" that comunicates our fingers to type on the keyboard? Yes

Thanks - Jj

Then he added to his answer:

You might not know it but it is your PSI who is asking these questions.

So ok, I see now that I have a different meaning to "Psi" then 3rd Rock does. His definition is MUCH broader than mine is.

So I now realize I have to ask another question: :unsure:

Is the definition that 3rd Rock has for "Psi" also the majority of the people here?? :unsure2:

That basically every body function from: going pee, pooping, picking up chicken at the dinner table with your hand/fingers - to typing on the computer - to using the remote to change channels on the TV with your hand/fingers, etc. Is this what the majority means when they use "Psi"?? :blink:

Because I admit that my definition of "Psi" is much more narrow in meaning.

Jj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok - Matt et all -

Does your definition fit what 3rd Rock's definition what "Psi" is??

I am beginning to wonder if my definition is much more narrow then 3rd Rock and maybe some others are??

If you are in agreement w/3rd Rock - then I would have to stop and say - based on the broad definition of what 3rd Rock uses for "Psi" - then ya - "psi" (please note "") is being used to spin the pin wheel, based on the broad definition of "psi" being used.

But I also will submit that I do not agree with that definition of "psi".

So it comes down to I mean "This" and 3rd Rock and who ever means "that" - We are then not talking about the same things and thus the frustrations of what is happening in the dialogs.

Jj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be honest, I dont know enough about this phenomena to define what it is or how exactly it works. I just call it psi out of convience. All I know is that, whatever it is, it exists and its definately something more than convection currents (at least in my case). I think ive done a good job showing why i think this way, but I feel the next video will be the clencher. I might even use ice to cool one side of the glass while I use a lighter to heat the other. If that doesnt get the wheel to move, myth busted. That definite contrast in heat should be more than enough to show whether or not convection currents effect the covered pin wheel in the same way as they would effect an uncovered pin wheel. Fair enough?

Does anyone anticipate any problems with this next video? Speak now or forever hold your peice....

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, it’s clear that nobody has any doubts about this creating movement in the wheel because nobody has yet to voice those doubts. What this tells me is that, should someone have a sudden revelation about how this wont work *after they see the video*, then this person is full of crap and just trying to rationalize away "inconvenient" evidence. For example, if the wheel were to have spun when I used the hair dryer (in my convection current video) not one of you skeptics would have thought that to be odd in the slightest. And you freakin' know it, don’t even try to lie. But since it didn’t create movement, instead of just accepting your theory was off, you switch around you rationale to fit the evidence because the evidence doesn’t fit your rationale.

Let me repeat that again. If you switch around your rationale to fit the new evidence, because the new evidence doesn’t fit your rationale...then you're wrong. That’s the definition of being wrong. That’s why I stress the importance of predictions and scoff at after-the-fact criticisms. After-the-fact criticisms are crap, plain and simple. They hold no credibility whatsoever because anyone can come up with some bogus theory that seems to contradict the new evidence, but when that theory is tested and found to be bogus with newer evidence, they just alter that theory to fit the newer evidence so that they never have to admit that they were wrong the first time around. Does everyone understand that?

This is why I want to make sure I take into account all concerns before making the second TK video. I will effectively be testing and discrediting all of those after-the-fact criticisms I received in my first video. And what I don't want is for skeptics to think they are being clever by coming up with some bogus theory explaining away the second TK video *after they have seen that they were completely wrong the first time*. You know? It would be a never ending cycle of me disproving their retro-criticisms, and them suddenly changing around their theory to escape being wrong about how I "cheated". Its cowardice. If you come up with a theory about how this isn’t TK, tell me now because it will be of no relevance after I make the video, understand? If you don't please re-read this post because, quite frankly, im getting tired of this nonsense. I’m sick and tired of being hounded by people who don’t even see the error of their own ways, yet seem to think they are in a position to criticize me and/or my video.

It’s ridiculous. So please, for the love of god, if you have a theory as to how this isn’t TK...say it now or don't say it at all. There is no point in presenting a theory as to how this isn’t TK if that theory cannot be tested. And that theory cannot be tested unless you speak up *before* I make the next video. Ok?

Now, im going to make a video where there is ice on one side of the glass, a flame on the other, and a pin-wheel in between. If you don't think this will cause the pin-wheel to spin, explain yourself now so that I can alter what I do to compensate for your concerns. That is what you want, isn’t it? I mean, why even say anything unless you wanted me to be aware of your concerns? Thus, there is no reason to keep to yourself until after the video has been made, that is unless you are just being cynical about all of this. That is unless you aren't as much concerned with truth as you are with making me look bad (regardless if I can actually do telekinesis or not).

So, now that this is on the table, I expect not to get the ever popular wave of criticism after I make the video, despite the fact that it was dead silent before the video, mmkay? That's what I meant by 'speak now or forever hold your piece'. The only reason you would speak out is to share your concerns, and the only reason to share your concerns is to do something about those concerns. However, it’s impossible to do something about those concerns if you don't speak out before we do something (as in make a video).

And now we wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone enterested, please see my post:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...p;#entry1459831

As this addresses now 2 1/2 days of playing with science.

Matt - I'm sorry dude, but after my time spent on observations over the past 2 1/2 days - I'm just not convienced that the pin wheel is going to be even close to being a good way to measure "PSI". Sorry - but in the homework I've been doing to be ready for the video on Fri - that the pin-wheel is just not a valid test of Psi.

Read the post - look at my observations and stuff I did - you'll see why. There is one suggestion that would work for/with the PIN WHEEL - other wise there are just too many differences that can and does effect the pin wheel that has nothing to do with Psi, but everything to do with science.

Jj -

Edited by Jjbreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, Everyone. Read the comments.

Its easily done. Just a small unseen piece of metal. There are magnets that can affect metals from 3 feet away! He possibly has snuck this in both his sleeves. And viola you hav a PSI fake. Plus that would explain it moving in different directions! Try it with a compass the same thing happens!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad but true - but at this stage in the game with all the hoax and illusions out there being produced... the pin wheel especially just is too easy to be faked and/or science being passed off as PSI.

Any science teacher in Jr High or Highschool can tell you what is going on... it's so not "rocket science"....

Jj -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here we go again with people just jumping to conclusions instead of giving my video a critical thought. You all just keep reverting back to your comfort zones of thinking this is a hoax without actually keeping an objective mind. It obvious. So far, despite your the way you all rally together to reassure each other about this being a hoax, not one person has been able to defend thier ciriticisms. Not one. For example, the convection current theory went out the window with that last video.

As for the magnet theory, there are a few things wrong with that. First of all, how can a stationary magnet produce multiple rotations? A magnet works by attraction...once the metal is the closest to the magnet, it would stop moving...which means the wheel could have only done, at most, a single 180 degree rotation. Secondly, if there were magnets in my sleeves, why doesnt the wheel move when im putting the glass over the wheel at the beginning of the video? That is when im the closest to the wheel, meaning that is the very point when there would be maximum magnetic pull...yet the wheel doesnt even twitch?

Do you see what im talking about here? No one even thinks twice about their own theories, much less mine!

Jjbreen, I understand what you are saying, but you must understand where im comming from. None of you are giving me a fair chance here, and that is not being "scientific". Sceince doesnt censor information, nor do they assume anything. You should know this well by now. For something to be accepted by sceince, it must be tested throughly and repeatedly. This is no different when it comes to disproving something (as opposed to proving something)...yet no one is doing this. What you all are doing is sitting back and thinking of ways this could be faked instead of actually doing some tests. You jjbreen, if you are indeed making a video then that last part doesnt apply to you. But as of now, no one but me has supported their claims at all. Not with a video, not with a link to a video, not with anything but gossip. Yes, its gossip because its clear to me that 90% of the people in this discussion have little-to-no understanding of science are specific scientific princibles. All they are doing is regurgitating p***-poor theories they heard from someone else and trying to pass them off as credible.

I actualy read that topic a few days back, and all it is is a general criticism of TK and illusionists. Your mistake was thinking that, if some TK people are frauds, then all of them must be. Thats clearly a logical fallacy. And i have already told you in a PM that "whatever PSI is, its mostly likely a natural phenomena, just one we have yet to understand" which would indeed put it in the realm of sceince, but outside the realm of being a hoax.

But you don't seem to understand that sceince is emphemeral. Its always changing, always redifining itself, always learning new things. So what makes you think sceince just hasnt matured enough to understand TK? Again, "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", and this is true because sceince, as extensive as it is, still has a long long way to go before they understand everything there is to understand. And until then, simply because sceince doesnt condone it now doesnt mean they are right.

Lets take a look at history to better illustrate my point. Germs, there was a time when the germ theory was thought to be as ridiculous as TK is today. Back then, before the microscope was invented, people thought that the idea of these little things (too small for the eye to see :rolleyes: ) were able to invade your body and make you sick. lol How crazy that man must have seemed, that was until the microscope was invented. Or what about the world being round? Who in their right mind would have thought the world was round when it was easy to see that the horizon line was flat?

Simply put, your being just like the people who didnt believe germs existed. You never gave it a chance, and made the mistake of looking at our *current* scientific understanding and thinking that what we know now is all there is to know. I do beleive that is the definition of being niave.

Ill tell you what, when I make my next TK video, ill be sure to take into consideration all of the concerns voiced to me so far. And when you see that the wheel still moves despite the fact that I left no room for these bogus theories to be true, I hope you all have the integrity to swallow your pride and realize that there are still things in this world we do not yet understand.

Its amazing how arrogant the human race can be. We always think we know everything despite the fact that we consistantly learn new things and discredit old "truths". How foolish we can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt -

I am truly sorry that so many people have been fooled into the scam of the pin wheel being used to measure Psi. I can honestly say, I am not the one that started this scam, nor am I one that supports it. For in all honesty I cannot support it. It simply is not a good medium for measuring Psi – but an excellent one for measuring Sci. Sorry but that is facts that I have come to see and observe, especially since last Sunday through today. I have four of them set up on my work bench, two under glass and two not. The fact they all move and not even in sync with each other when I’m not even around – means simply put: There are simply too many outside forces of science and not PSI that can have a cause and effect on them. Too many! Again I am sorry, but I didn’t choose this medium as a means to “prove Psi”.

Here is the point - it's a pin wheel. It sits on a needle, pin or other long pointed object. I guess I'm going with people and their claims of PK, TK or what ever - this specific medium is not a good medium. It's not. I'm sorry - I didn't pick this. I didn't choose this. People got fooled into this.

The problem is this medium is simply to easily influenced by science.

For instance: I think it was one of your videos, but it may not have been?

There was a dark wood table. What is a rule of heat with dark –vs- light colored objects?

Dark absorbs heat, when it reaches its mass limit for that absorption it gives it off. <- Science fact, I really do not feel the need to prove this.

Light reflects heat. Again well established science fact, I do not feel the need to prove this either.

Both colors would have an easy effect on this piece of paper on the sharp pointed object. So then one has to answer this in their video as well as many other facts and laws of science. Again I am sorry, I did not pick this medium to measure Psi, nor would I ever!

Then in that same video there is a glass lid or small bowl on top of that a glass jar, if I remember correctly? What is created here amounts to small ‘greenhouses’ – yes it does. My high school science teacher friend, Mike point this out, “Jj – there are basically what amounts to two greenhouses. What happens in them?” he asked me. Yes, he’s right. It may very likely be small and insignificant, but none the less it plays it’s part in the science equation also.

Then add to that the color and material made up that holds the pin, needle or object? What is it’s color? What is it made of? This two actually plays into the science of it. It’s true it may be ‘small’, but it does actually play into the big picture of this. Especially since it’s right UNDER it and could and does likely play into the spin of the paper. Then add to that the pin or object holding the paper up. What is its play in the heat/cold exchange? Again YES small in the picture, but none the less it IS in the picture and thus plays into it as well.

Then you have ALL the other things that I addressed in my posts on Sci -vs- Psi, #88 & 89. There is just way too much cause and effect in this.

It’s just too easily ‘shot down’; again I am sorry, but remember I didn’t choose this as a means to measure Psi. Someone else did. I am simply pointing out the serious challenges that have to be met!

One person wrote me a PM. He saw something that I was relieved to read. “Jj – I see now that you do accept Psi as real. I also am beginning to read that you are showing that if we are going to claim or prove Psi, we have to make sure we totally understand the means by which we do it. You give us “hell” as one who accepts it, showing if you accept Psi as being real – then the real world is going to give a whole lot more!” This person is right on. That is exactly my point! If I being one who accept the reality that Psi does exist and I can tear this medium of proving apart, why are you expecting one who doesn’t accept and believe in this to do less??

For one to use the pin wheel to measure Psi – they have no small task ahead of them! Actually IF one wishes to continue to use this – they will have to go to an extreme measure. Actually have it already spinning CCW or CW with an obvious outside source, like a mall desk fan or something to that effect. Then one would have to keep their hands to their side at all times, show a clear FOV and then make the pin wheel stop for a noticeable period of time and if even possible make it spin against the outside force. Nothing short of this with the pin wheel will easily be accepted nor should it for the reasons clearly stated.

Again Matt, I do apologize for the challenge. I am sorry that so many got fooled into this medium and yes I actually am! I do believe in Psi, I honestly and really do – I simply have too many experiences with it to say other wise. But the more I look at this specific medium – the more as it is “billed” simply is bogus, pure and simple. It simply cannot be taken a viable or accepted means as measuring Psi, unless done so as specified in the above in making it move against a force already in play.

Respectfully – Jj

Edited by Jjbreen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I don't mean to sound angry or offensive but my tolerance for this stuff has long worn thin, as you can imagine. Its not that im tired of being held under scrutiny, im tired of being held under the scrutiny of people who:

a.) Don't know enough about sceince to use sceince to critique me.

b.) Are too narrow-minded to even consider something that they don't believe is true.

c.) Care less about truth than they do about making me look bad/wrong.

d.) Complain about my evidence not being good enough, yet have yet to provide any (contrary)evidence themselves.

e.) Contribute nothing but after-the-fact criticisms

So, as fair warning, I will not be posting any more comments on this thread until the completion of my second TK video (with the exception of my next post), unless:

1.) Jj, or anyone else, posts a video/s with contrary evidence to my own filmed experiments

2.) People give me suggestions as to what else i should do for my second video

3.) I feel that people are trying to take advantage of my absence to sully my name or my video, thinking I would not defend myself.

If you are wondering why im doing this, its because anything a-e would be futile for me to respond to, with the exception of things 1-3 (3 being a matter of what I deem applicable). As Jj signature says, "time is teller or all tales great and small". We'll see who changes their mind when the next video comes out, a video that will discredit all of the previous theories in one fell swoop. And not only that, we'll then see who doesnt change their mind despite the fact that they no longer have a bogus theory to back them up. In short, only time will tell who is skeptical out of reason, and who is skeptical out of closed-mindedness.

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt -

I am truly sorry that so many people have been fooled into the scam of the pin wheel being used to measure Psi. I can honestly say, I am not the one that started this scam, nor am I one that supports it. For in all honesty I cannot support it. It simply is not a good medium for measuring Psi – but an excellent one for measuring Sci. Sorry but that is facts that I have come to see and observe, especially since last Sunday through today. I have four of them set up on my work bench, two under glass and two not. The fact they all move and not even in sync with each other when I’m not even around – means simply put: There are simply too many outside forces of science and not PSI that can have a cause and effect on them. Too many! Again I am sorry, but I didn’t choose this medium as a means to “prove Psi”.

wheres your evidence? I have reason to believe you have not actually done any experiments at all. My video is more than enough to call your experiment under question, so we are going to need more than your word that the wheels were "just moving" under the glass.

Here is the point - it's a pin wheel. It sits on a needle, pin or other long pointed object. I guess I'm going with people and their claims of PK, TK or what ever - this specific medium is not a good medium. It's not. I'm sorry - I didn't pick this. I didn't choose this. People got fooled into this.

The only ones who are being fooled are those who follow your rationale. There is nothing wrong with using a pin wheel to demonstrate TK. You seem to think thst your theories would actually pan out *of you were to test them* but you havent, and it shows.

The problem is this medium is simply to easily influenced by science.

For instance: I think it was one of your videos, but it may not have been?

There was a dark wood table. What is a rule of heat with dark –vs- light colored objects?

Dark absorbs heat, when it reaches its mass limit for that absorption it gives it off. <- Science fact, I really do not feel the need to prove this.

Light reflects heat. Again well established science fact, I do not feel the need to prove this either.

Both colors would have an easy effect on this piece of paper on the sharp pointed object. So then one has to answer this in their video as well as many other facts and laws of science. Again I am sorry, I did not pick this medium to measure Psi, nor would I ever!

Tell me this, if the dark table is absorbing light (and thus heat) how does the wheel start and stop and start again when the light is obviously constant? Gievn that is even enough to move the wheel, which is isnt, but if it was...I would have to turn the light on and off to get the results seen in the video. Nice try though. You are abusing sceince to become a better cynic, but that fails to work when you run across someone with an equal or greater understanding of sceince than yourself. Hopefully people can recognize you for the phony you are by being sceintists themselves. I have yet to see you encoruage people to test your theories, nor have we *actually seen* your thoeries in action. Why is that?

Then in that same video there is a glass lid or small bowl on top of that a glass jar, if I remember correctly? What is created here amounts to small ‘greenhouses’ – yes it does. My high school science teacher friend, Mike point this out, “Jj – there are basically what amounts to two greenhouses. What happens in them?” he asked me. Yes, he’s right. It may very likely be small and insignificant, but none the less it plays it’s part in the science equation also.

That falls short of explaining how the wheel starts and stops on command, doesnt it? Your damn right it does.

Then add to that the color and material made up that holds the pin, needle or object? What is it’s color? What is it made of? This two actually plays into the science of it. It’s true it may be ‘small’, but it does actually play into the big picture of this. Especially since it’s right UNDER it and could and does likely play into the spin of the paper. Then add to that the pin or object holding the paper up. What is its play in the heat/cold exchange? Again YES small in the picture, but none the less it IS in the picture and thus plays into it as well.

And what of the convection current video, ?? 140 degree heat did nothing, what makes you think the miniscule heat absorbed from a 60 watts bulb from 6 feet away is going to change anything lol? And how did I get the wheel to start and stop and start again?

Then you have ALL the other things that I addressed in my posts on Sci -vs- Psi, #88 & 89. There is just way too much cause and effect in this.

It’s just too easily ‘shot down’; again I am sorry, but remember I didn’t choose this as a means to measure Psi. Someone else did. I am simply pointing out the serious challenges that have to be met!

You have yet to shoot down anything because you have yet to provide any *actual evidence* of what you are claiming to be true. I think your just making up all of these experiments you have supposedly done. I think your full of crap. My video shows that what you are saying is wrong eventhought you keep saying that they do (keyword: saying). You have yet to do anything, why should anyone believe you when I have clear evidence that what your saying is not true, and you do not have any evidence to defend yourself? Im not the only one on trial here, you are two my man.

One person wrote me a PM. He saw something that I was relieved to read. “Jj – I see now that you do accept Psi as real. I also am beginning to read that you are showing that if we are going to claim or prove Psi, we have to make sure we totally understand the means by which we do it. You give us “hell” as one who accepts it, showing if you accept Psi as being real – then the real world is going to give a whole lot more!” This person is right on. That is exactly my point! If I being one who accept the reality that Psi does exist and I can tear this medium of proving apart, why are you expecting one who doesn’t accept and believe in this to do less??

You say you believe but your actions seem to tell a different story. You seem to be so resistant to the idea that PSI is real that you'll fabricate theories and evidence to justify your otherwise unfounded skepticism. Ofcourse, If I am wrong, please feel free to rub it in my face when you manage to contribute something more than dialouge :rolleyes: These words you are typing are not sceince, nor evidence, nor anything that should be confused with either sceince or evidence. Your not fooling anyone.

For one to use the pin wheel to measure Psi – they have no small task ahead of them! Actually IF one wishes to continue to use this – they will have to go to an extreme measure. Actually have it already spinning CCW or CW with an obvious outside source, like a mall desk fan or something to that effect. Then one would have to keep their hands to their side at all times, show a clear FOV and then make the pin wheel stop for a noticeable period of time and if even possible make it spin against the outside force. Nothing short of this with the pin wheel will easily be accepted nor should it for the reasons clearly stated.

Ill show that my container is air tight by using a hair dryer to blow all over the setup. That should take care of the concern of stray air currents. Use a magnet to go around the set up to show no metal/other maganets are involved. Keep my hands and body away to show no heat is being used. Show 360 degrees above and below the table to show not devices are being used. Perdict and move the wheel cw and ccw (at least one time each) to show suffient control...AND BEST OF ALL, have it all on camera so people know im not talking out of my **** like so many skeptics I run ito nowadays. What else is necessary?

Again Matt, I do apologize for the challenge. I am sorry that so many got fooled into this medium and yes I actually am! I do believe in Psi, I honestly and really do – I simply have too many experiences with it to say other wise. But the more I look at this specific medium – the more as it is “billed” simply is bogus, pure and simple. It simply cannot be taken a viable or accepted means as measuring Psi, unless done so as specified in the above in making it move against a force already in play.

Respectfully – Jj

No, you can't accept it as credible, and that your problem not mine. There is no reason why this method, given the right precautions, can demonstrate TK in a credible way. But, you have single-handedly come up so many unfounded theories (unless you got videos or something) thats is funny how you try to act like im the one trying to trick somebody. If i came in here saying I could lift a car over my head with TK, but failed in producing, at the very least, a video...would you believe me? No, of course not. So why should I, or anyone else, believe half of the stuff you claim is true when you have yet to post any real evidence (especially when my videos directly contradict your own theories)?? Come on Jj. Don't dish out what you can't take. If this is a game of "show me the evidence", then either start playing or sit down.

Im not the only one who can see that, so far, you are all talk and no credibility. And its getting old, fast.

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt -

Wow, what can I say?? You take what I said and blow it 'up' to what I didn't say or you simply did not read what I said??

But aside from this: Since last Sunday I have averaged 1-2 PM's a day asking, "Jj - did you make up that air molecules rise when warm and drop when cools?? ..." Yes Matt I have! Now just imagine how frustrating that is to get!! No one ever heard of HOT AIR BALLOONS??? Good grief. Now since I do not have permission to post PM's sender names and doing so could possibly get me banned from the board - I obviously cannot. But imagine my frustration getting told/asked this daily!???

Then in POST 88 - 89 - what do I clearly state in those: You do not need PSI to do what I did - so DO IT YOURSELF! For what better evidence to provide then finding it out for one's self??? Especially since I am NOT making any claims of extrodinary abilities. I am saying ANYONE AND EVERYONE can prove this for themselves - again - you do not need Psi to do this. So when you see it for youself - the video becomes nothing short of a waste of time to produce. I'm sorry.

Funny thing is one person did, I actually think before #88 & 89 and found this to be so! So now what? If more do these experiments for themselves and post the same thing findings - then what??? I suppose you want a video too, of something you can clearly do yourself? See that's the evidence I offer - do it yourself and see, or do this: Take a print out of 88 & 89 unedited and shot it to ANY Jr. High or High School Science teacher! Again - external evidence that has no influence from me! In fact I even "DARED THEM TO DO THIS"!! Gee, now if I wasn't that sure - would I dare??? (No....)

At this point, Matt - I am totally dropping this Pin Wheel proves Psi. I'm sorry it's simply not viable except as stated in my recent posts. I have already spent more time on this than should even be needed. ALL of what I submit is basic Jr High & High School Science!

But I doubt no one will attempt the recent needed evidence of the pin wheel. WHY?

As for , and I quote:

Sceince doesnt censor information, nor do they assume anything.

I do not remember censoring you??

I do not recall even telling you to NOT make the video!

I did tell you and others how seriously challenging your task will be! That is not censor - that is stating what science will need to be met to prove you case. So please do NOT accuse me of censor. Since I never did, suggest or imply such! I have recently been so "taken out of context" - 'mis-quoted' - and "proof texted quoted" - that I'm actually getting fed up.

Do your video - go for it dude. Just do not expect it to be easily and readily accepted for a few more reasons:

A. We do not know who Matt is, do we? We no nothing about you - except that you seem to make an extrodinary claim. So honestly how do we know you are not fixing it before the video? really think about it. We only have your word. Nothing more. We know nothing about you -

B. what you offer is 'extreme'. Extrodinary claims! Which will and does need extreme and extrodinary evidence.

1. What I offer I clearly and simply state - ANYONE can do this, ANYONE can see this, ANYONE can prove what I say.

If they do not wish to do so - they can take the unedited posts 88 & 89 and show it to any science teacher from jr. high level to high school level science teacher. It's really that simple. :yes:

So I offer the best proof possible - better then what most do. You can do this, you can prove this, you can ask any science teacher! No special abilities needed! A no video needed! You can find out FIRST HAND for yourself! Such a deal!! :)

This is going like the pin wheel. Around in Circles.

Extrodinary claims need extrodinary evidence and it will be looked at with very sharp and critical eyes - for obvious reasons!

Even when new science claims are made - it goes under Pier Review and not friendly either. Why do you expect less?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tell you what, you can talk about the credibility of my videos when you stop being a hypocrite and start making some of your own (to discredit mine). You've done, and continue to do, nothing but talk. We want evidence! Yes, me too, the guy you thinks your lying about the fact that you did experiments...I want to *see* your evidence. I want documentation that you are not lying about doing the experiment and/or getting the results you did...because frankly I think you are lying. I thinkk you are being cynical, and have already gone too far to turn around and admit you were mistaken. Can or can you not provide us with documentation? If not, I dont see why your still talking.

and I know heat rises, thats not what I was talking about. Im talking about these theories:

-Hand is heat *enough* to move a psi wheel under a glass container from a few inches out, given my hand position (both distance and height)? (I say no and my video says no, you have no video but still say yes...video please?)

-is 140 degree air enough cause movement in a covered psi wheel?(my video says no) How can hand heat, but not 140 degree hair-dryer heat, move the wheel? (You have yet to make a video demonstrating your bogus explanation)

-is the darkness of the wood *enough* to cause movement in the psi wheel(by absorbing light)? (where is your evidence?) How do you explain the starting and stopping of the wheel? (please do explain.)

-if there is a green house effect, is it *enough* to move the wheel? and if so, how does the wheel start and stop twice ? (again, where is your evidence and explanation?)

Without the above, you have no case whatsoever. Your whole perspective is based on unfounded assumptions which are *loosely* based on other sceintific princibles. But im guessing you didn't think I (or anyone else) would notice that :rolleyes: You take an established princible (such as heat rising) and then manipulate it to fit an otherwise bogus theory. My videos have already established that you are mistaken about your specific assumptions about my video (as listed above) so who do you think you are fooling when you say "your video is just to easy to shoot down"? Its funny that you arent even aware if all of this.

lmao, im beginning to see that your more and more full of crap. I guess we are just going to have to wait until the next video and see what cockamamie theory you come up with then. (ps, sorry for being a dic (yes, i know im being a dic lol)....again, i have no tolernance left for those who ignore the evidence because its inconvient to thier bias).

This next video won't be as easy to talk crap about, I promise you. Now that I know what exactly I need to do to calm your suspicions, I will deliver a video that will render everything every skeptics has said to me so far as N/A. When this happens, it will be extremely easy for others to see what (dishonorable) lengths closed-minded skeptics will go to rationalize the video away. Just wait and see, time will tell.

[edit] Ill let you go ahead and have the last word. I think we've said all that we had to say. I already waisted more time than I should have in the hopes you'd open your mind a bit, and you have alread wasited more time than you should have is trying to push that pseudo-sceintific garbage down our throats. You won't be seeing any more of me until the video is done. And then ill be back to watch you squirm under the spot light. Mark my words.

And have a pleasent day.

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can or can you not provide us with documentation?

Matt - et ALL -

READ MY TYPE:

Do the damn tests yourself - that's better than ANY VIDEO! If you do not wish to do the tests yourself or need MORE - I gave you all a very easy out: Print out UN-EDITED posts #88 - 89 and show it to ANY Jr High - High School or heck even college Science Teacher! See what they say!!

Unlike you - I am not providing any extrodinary claims - none at all. It's all basic science. PROOF - Go ask a Science teacher! How much more evidence is that?? I DARE YOU!! You do NOT have to take my word for it - ask a science teacher that I do not know! That's really easy to do!! THERE IS YOUR PROOF!! (Unless of course you think all science teachers are lying to you?? :blink: )

Like one person already found out by ask their science teacher - "Jj - she said you were right and explained everything you said..." So go do the same thing! I cannot make it any easier - UNLESS you already know these facts and do not wish to look silly asking a science teacher to read it and ask, "Is this guy Jj telling the truth??"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when are you going to get it through your head that your words are not substaintial enough to be considered evidence (even your words about others testimonies)? After all, where are these people and why aren't they showing their faces?? Maybe they dont actually exist lol.

Look, I dont care what you have to say because you are fully capable of lying. Ok? I want something more substaintial, I want video. And I have a right to demand video evidence since i have provided video evidence myself (twice as a matter of fact).

And I did do it myself, that is what the video was meant to "prove". You havent, and thats why you have no video, isnt that right? If im worng, correct me by *showing us* your experiments and thier results, because simply telling us isnt enough. And If anyone else has actually done these experiments and has conflicting evidence to my own, as JJ so proudly claims, feel free to post the videos in this thread. Go ahead, i dare you :rolleyes:

lol

[edit] ok, now you can have the last word. :innocent:

Edited by mattman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I dont care what you have to say because you are fully capable of lying. Ok? I want something more substaintial, I want video. And I have a right to demand video evidence since i have provided video evidence myself (twice as a matter of fact).

Let's see here you will not print out my posts # 88 - 89 and show them to science teacher and take their word for it but you'll accept a video??? :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

But if your serious about this and you are moving it with your mind then you might wanna figure out how your doing it. I think your just BSing. And if you want people to take you serious than aproach it seriously.

1: Define the question

2: Gather information and resources

3: Form hypothesis

4: Perform experiment and collect data

5: Analyze data

6: Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypotheses

7: Publish results

Number 1 you did, the question being can you use your mind to move objects. A better non-objective one would be, what is moving the PSI Wheel

1 - Pass

Number 2 you said you didnt even know what PSI was you just used the term. But you did gather the resources. But 50% is still failing.

2 - Failed

Number 3 maybe I skiped it but I never read how you think it works.

3 - Failed

Number 4 You didnt do any measurements, do you even know how much force is needed to move "your" wheel? Did you measure air tempature or any other factors?

4 - Failed

Number 5 again no data to rule out contamination of said experiment.

5 - Failed

Number 6 again no data.

6 - Failed

Number 7 This one you did.

7 - Pass

If your trying to prove PSI as a scientific fact then approach it like a scientist. If your not than whats the point of showing a video of a Pin Wheel moving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.