Tonight I Visit The The Bowlless Bowl

[TENYEARS]

The barrenness usually comes after one finds that one was in the matrix to begin with. It is not a bad thing. It is a cleansing which occurs so one can see/experience more clearly. Did not see the new movie yet but I will.

My mind was thrown open, had another vision come true and floored many people bigtime including myself. This is a rush. So I was thinking once again, I think I am going to start busting up all the fish bowls? You think they would award the Nobel prize for proving the existence of the reality unseen? I can, the question is where and who and how should it be presented? Writing papers to be looked at by fish is not the way to go so don't go there. What should be done any suggestions? Leave the bowl or stand by the boarderless boarder if you are going to answer, otherwise don't silence is golden.

[BoulderHead]

Tonight I Visit The The Bowlless Bowl I preferred the hubless wheel which had many spokes coming out of the hub.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
The barrenness usually comes after one finds that one was in the matrix to begin with. It is not a bad thing. It is a cleansing which occurs so one can see/experience more clearly. Did not see the new movie yet but I will.

My mind was thrown open, had another vision come true and floored many people bigtime including myself. This is a rush. So I was thinking once again, I think I am going to start busting up all the fish bowls? You think they would award the Nobel prize for proving the existence of the reality unseen? I can, the question is where and who and how should it be presented? Writing papers to be looked at by fish is not the way to go so don't go there. What should be done any suggestions? Leave the bowl or stand by the boarderless boarder if you are going to answer, otherwise don't silence is golden. If what you say is true about the visions I'm sure word will get around. As for ascertaining the existence of God, this is already possible (more so on a personal level), although it would be nice if someone could spell it out in general terms so science could get the picture. And then maybe we could all strive for a common goal, like cleaning up the planet or something?

Have you considered a publicist?

[Dissident Dan]

I dub this thread a matrixism.

[TENYEARS]

IC, if you only knew my friend if you only knew. As for writing, I have written down many individually, but that does not matter. You see only one has to be understood as real and everything else falls away. I know the universe is infinite and there are probably and infinite number earths. Some where you may be able to perform an event unconciously and it may repeat 1,000,000 times and yet is may have no relevance to reality. The very first one of these experinces I had does. This I do not believe. This I know.

Some once said to be consistency, that is the key. I laughed to myself when the same person read to me consistency is a facet of small minds reading the quote at me as they saw the word consistency and thought the quote was going their way before they read the entire quote. It was pretty funny. There are no small minds only minds that do not realize what they are part of.

If any of you believe in yourselves to the point where you have a real answer to this post please do. You can never have enough ideas for a red brick. Sometimes it is the idea that is not even used that makes all the difference. If not, maybe nothing will happen, or not.

[zk4586]

As for ascertaining the existence of God, this is already possible (more so on a personal level)

more so on a personal level? Can you offer any non-subjective proof for the existence of God?

[Mentat]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
The barrenness usually comes after one finds that one was in the matrix to begin with. It is not a bad thing. It is a cleansing which occurs so one can see/experience more clearly. Did not see the new movie yet but I will.


Well, the next movie was even better, in my opinion. However, are you really prepared to accept some screen-writer's science fiction idea as an actual account of reality? I can assure you, the screen-writer himself doesn't believe in this fabricated reality, and neither do the actors, who played in the movie.


My mind was thrown open, had another vision come true and floored many people bigtime including myself.


I'm wondering when you are going to start actually telling us a vision, instead of just telling us that you've had one.


This is a rush. So I was thinking once again, I think I am going to start busting up all the fish bowls?


Obviously you cannot do this. It is not within your power. If one doesn't wish to leave their fish-bowl, they do not have to - in the end, the only person one can truly convince is oneself.


I can, the question is where and who and how should it be presented?


Perhaps you should try it out on us here at the PFs first, and then work on springing it on the world.


Writing papers to be looked at by fish is not the way to go so don't go there.


But think of this: Those you are proposing to preach to are (for the most part) all fish. You are trying to break a few fish free of their "universes", but you must first deign to the level of a fish. Otherwise your wasting your time, looking down on other fish, while they can't (and don't care to) see you at all.


Leave the bowl or stand by the boarderless boarder


If the boarder is truly boarderless, then it is only a matter of time before the fish "fall out", along with the water that was their feeling of security and acceptance.


otherwise don't silence is golden.

But it doesn't help you at all, does it?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
If any of you believe in yourselves to the point where you have a real answer to this post please do. You can never have enough ideas for a red brick. Sometimes it is the idea that is not even used that makes all the difference. If not, maybe nothing will happen, or not. How about the schmuck of schmucks, James Randi, and his $1 Million Paranormal Challenge? Of course you could probably waiver the million bucks (if your claim is legitimate) just to show what an *** he is for making such a foolish proposition in the first place ... while also making the waiver contingent upon him publishing the results. At this point you could probably do without the money, as I'm sure the notoriety will follow.

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by zk4586
more so on a personal level? Can you offer any non-subjective proof for the existence of God? Did you ever see the Nova program about the CIA conducting tests regarding Remote Viewing? A very interesting program! I believe the website below was created by one of the original test subjects.

Of course this may be the actual key right here, if only the rest of the scientific community cared to take a look?

http://www.probablefuture.com/

[zk4586]

...yes, if only.

[Iacchus32]

From the URLAT, http://www.probablefuture.com/matrix.htm ...

Most human entities spend their "waking" lives hypnotized by their sensory world, which gives them the illusion of a material reality "out there."

In reality, space and time are really nonexistent both at the level of Pure Aware Consciousness, and also at the level of the unaware "blind parts" that experience for It the illusion of creative thought within an illusory space/time construct called Creation.

Mankind rarely realizes that life is but a sensory illusion that gives experience and learning to Thought, and that the only reality is Thought Itself, which is forever evolving.

Consciousness can be defined as Awareness projected onto a vibratory Dream. Period. For Space/Time Creation it is but pure Dark lesser vibratory (conscious and subconscious) thought interacting more or less intensely with the inner Holographic Light/Thought Reality originating through the facets of The MATRIX ("Deep" of Genesis 1: 2).Oh my God! ... Is that you Lifegazer!?

[Dissident Dan]

LoL: "Being means Be-In-GOD"

[TENYEARS]

IC, Randi is not interested in truth and I would not give him the rights to my visions, experiences and a method I thought of to provide a form a proof for what I speak and a bit more. The planet is my concern and its future. I hope there is one.

Mentat, you want a vision, I will not post it here. I will send it to you on a personal message. On these conditions you can tell no one the content, only that if the paramters which you read are in accordance of what you percieve to be some sort of viable proof of a vision. You may never speak of it or show it to anyone regardless of what you think. If you ask for it I will send it but you are bound by your word. Remember it's your word if you ask. I will give it to anyone who abides by this and only this.

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
IC, Randi is not interested in truth and I would not give him the rights to my visions, experiences and a method I thought of to provide a form a proof for what I speak and a bit more. The planet is my concern and its future. I hope there is one.

Mentat, you want a vision, I will not post it here. I will send it to you on a personal message. On these conditions you can tell no one the content, only that if the paramters which you read are in accordance of what you percieve to be some sort of viable proof of a vision. You may never speak of it or show it to anyone regardless of what you think. If you ask for it I will send it but you are bound by your word. Remember it's your word if you ask. I will give it to anyone who abides by this and only this.

Uh - Man whatever your "vision" is, I'm sure it's already been falsified. I doubt you're doing any thinking that no one else has done.

[zk4586]

What's with all the James Randi bashing? Since when did he become the scapegoat for your own failed attempts to objectify God?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by zk4586
What's with all the James Randi bashing? Since when did he become the scapegoat for your own failed attempts to objectify God? Because Randi is so materialistically set in his views that you might as well be talking to a block of concrete. He couldn't possibly conceive of anything "spiritual" behind the nature of a cockroach. And yet it wouldn't be so bad if he wasn't so smug and arrogant about it, while standing up and mocking the whole of idea of religion. Tell me this is not what he's doing when dressed up in priestly garb (or as a monk) and goes around spouting off the virtues of Atheism?

While it's this very notion of being so matter-of-fact (self-assured), yet consolidated by arrogance, that will become the great millstone that hangs around his neck when the time comes. For which reason Randi reminds me of the "spirit of death." Honest. And I can picture him standing there in his robe and hood, with sickle in hand, and say yep, that's him, the "grim reaper."

And indeed, this may be the very reason why he's here, to consolidate the "spirit of death" with death ... And hey, I'm not even a religious person when I say this!

[TENYEARS]

I had many they came true and I have had more and they came true they are not mine the reality exists I just happen to see it. I have an idea no that would not be fair would it. That would be stealing if I knew I was right and took your money anyway would'n't it? Or is this an exuse I am making to hide what you belive to be a fear which is mine of not being right which would be my fear because humans are relative and cannot go beyond their little chemical bodies right. Or is this little scam of a paragraph nothing more than a mirror that looks into a mirror into a mirror...... Know this as an attempt to get you tired or to make you think that there is some dept there at all. Tired yet?

But you an ZK are both kids without even a paper route so I would probably be taking your allowance money.

Zk, who said I failed? 1987 son it was more than a relative marker in the movement of infinity for me. All markers were called in on that day.

IC, you seem to know a lot about this character. I just saw his site and watched a video of him speaking. I know he is not interested in answers. Tucker had a car that worked, it was better and the big three had him shut down. There is something far bigger here than the big three or randi or goverenments. It is the human condition to take the path of least resistance which means it will wait until there is now choice and by then it is usually to late.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Zk, who said I failed? 1987 son it was more than a relative marker in the movement of infinity for me. All markers were called in on that day.Yep, 87' was a vintage year alright ... the year that I died and gave birth to myself.

http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html

[TENYEARS]

Iacchus32, already knew there was some experience there. I have read things you have posted somewhere and certain things are not parrotable in the context you said them.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Iacchus32, already knew there was some experience there. I have read things you have posted somewhere and certain things are not parrotable in the context you said them. Parrotable? What does that mean? Do you mean not repeatable?

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
if only the rest of the scientific community cared to take a look?

http://www.probablefuture.com/

Of course it'll cost them $98 to do so. [;)]

[TENYEARS]

What I ment was I found the spirit motivating some of your words and even if they were read, they could not have been put in that context and in that way at that time by logic alone. Logic falls short of the spirit. The spirit is the next level or the only level.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
How about the schmuck of schmucks, James Randi, and his $1 Million Paranormal Challenge? Of course you could probably waiver the million bucks (if your claim is legitimate) just to show what an *** he is for making such a foolish proposition in the first place ... while also making the waiver contingent upon him publishing the results. At this point you could probably do without the money, as I'm sure the notoriety will follow.

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

LOL, uh huh..how dare he ask for PROOF?!?! Who does he think he is, not just taking people's words that they aren't having psychotic delusions, or scamming people?!?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
Of course it'll cost them $98 to do so. [;)] Actually, based upon the two or three pages that I visited, there's a great deal of information that can be gleaned without having to cough up the $98.00. In fact I don't recall seeing that on any of the pages I visited?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
LOL, uh huh..how dare he ask for PROOF?!?! Who does he think he is, not just taking people's words that they aren't having psychotic delusions, or scamming people?!? Did you know I had posted this before you brought up James Randi in the other thread? (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2448) This is why I thought maybe why you brought it up there? If not, it's kind of funny how we were thinking along the same wavelength?

Anyway, why should I put my "faith" in James Randi? Why should I "follow" him? And what is it about me, that's "skeptical" about him? Why should I buy what he's selling -- which, is "James Randi?" ... And hence the old addage, "Buyer beware."

[jammieg]

Tenyears is a poet and a good one like all crazy poets.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Did you know I had posted this before you brought up James Randi in the other thread? (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2448) This is why I thought maybe why you brought it up there? If not, it's kind of funny how we were thinking along the same wavelength?

Anyway, why should I put my "faith" in James Randi? Why should I "follow" him? And what is it about me, that's "skeptical" about him? Why should I buy what he's selling -- which, is "James Randi?" ... And hence the old addage, "Buyer beware."
Well, at least he tells the truth...maybe the mystics and pseudo-crackpots could try that...at least stop lying to themselves.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
What I ment was I found the spirit motivating some of your words and even if they were read, they could not have been put in that context and in that way at that time by logic alone. Logic falls short of the spirit. The spirit is the next level or the only level. Thanks, I guess? ... Yet I think it's more the matter of evaluating what's in my mind with what's in my heart, in accordance with those things I understand in the "spiritual sense," before committing it to writing ...

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, at least he tells the truth...maybe the mystics and pseudo-crackpots could try that...at least stop lying to themselves. Somebody can tell you the truth, and then turn around and take you for all you've got! ... even in the guise of your "best buddy."

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28).

It's like I said, James Randi reminds me of the "Grim Reaper." He speaks "the truth," yet I think is leading everyone down the wrong path -- of "James Randiism."

[ahrkron]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
It's like I said, James Randi reminds me of the "Grim Reaper." He speaks "the truth," yet I think is leading everyone down the wrong path -- of "James Randiism."

"Down the wrong path" for exposing fraud and superstition? "James Randiism"?

It seems you're stretching things quite a bit.

[Zero]

Originally posted by ahrkron
"Down the wrong path" for exposing fraud and superstition? "James Randiism"?

It seems you're stretching things quite a bit.

Oh yeah...stretched to the breaking point, I think. How is a rational world-view EVER the wrong path? Especially when he is so willing to work with people?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by ahrkron
"Down the wrong path" for exposing fraud and superstition? "James Randiism"?

It seems you're stretching things quite a bit. Would you say that all people who believe in God are superstitious and, that their beliefs are undfounded? If so, then you're just as bad as James Randi. Because to me, he doesn't express anything other than this "very belief." As a matter of fact it comes across loud and clear.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Oh yeah...stretched to the breaking point, I think. How is a rational world-view EVER the wrong path? Especially when he is so willing to work with people? Actually there's nothing in this life that doesn't involve some sort of superstition or, "belief system." Therefore you should be very careful of what -- or better yet who -- you come to accept. I'm sorry, I just can't accept somebody who wants to make a big joke of the purpose of God or Religion, in spite of all the crackpots who "come in His name."

If on the other hand, Randi were to get his big fat ego out of the way, and stop drawing so much attention to this guy named "James Randi," then that might be another story?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Would you say that all people who believe in God are superstitious and, that their beliefs are undfounded? If so, then you're just as bad as James Randi. Because to me, he doesn't express anything other than this "very belief." As a matter of fact it comes across loud and clear.

Actually, if you bothered to read his stuff...you would know how wrong your statement is.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Would you say that all people who believe in God are superstitious and, that their beliefs are undfounded? If so, then you're just as bad as James Randi. Because to me, he doesn't express anything other than this "very belief." As a matter of fact it comes across loud and clear.

I find that it is funny that you harp on his Ego, since his site is made up mostly of letters from other people.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Actually, if you bothered to read his stuff...you would know how wrong your statement is. Then I'm sure you're familiar with the Pigasus Awards? Hmm ... A pig with wings? It kind of brings to mind Pegasus, the winged horse of Greek Mythology? Now I remember him bringing this up on the program I watched, and I think it was about the time that he expounded on the nature of superstitious beliefs, and I couldn't help but believe he was mocking the Pegasus of Greek Mythology. Which suggests to me that he has no perception or understanding whatsoever, of what the Pegasus entails. And that's sad. For indeed there's a great deal more to the Greek Myths than what this man would hold up to mock and ridicule.

[Zero]

Well, the Pigasus Awards are FUNNY...and mythology should be mocked too, you know! So should religion, frankly...not the PC thing to say, but I still think it is semi-true.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, the Pigasus Awards are FUNNY...and mythology should be mocked too, you know! So should religion, frankly...not the PC thing to say, but I still think it is semi-true. And let the truth be known!

[TENYEARS]

If you need someone to show you you are right you will never be right.

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
If you need someone to show you you are right you will never be right.

Yeah, why check with others when you can invent 'truth' from the whole cloth of your imagination.

[TENYEARS]

Truth is not invented it is. Anyone that needs an ontarage of idiots to prove something is an idiot(it's ok it's not a permanant state).

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Truth is not invented it is. Anyone that needs an ontarage of idiots to prove something is an idiot(it's ok it's not a permanant state).

If you are claiming that objective truth comes simply from your mind...you are saying that your imagination is truth.

[TENYEARS]

Getting closer.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Actually, based upon the two or three pages that I visited, there's a great deal of information that can be gleaned without having to cough up the $98.00. In fact I don't recall seeing that on any of the pages I visited?

Here ya go...

http://www.probablefuture.com/order.htm

Scroll down and you will see accepted credit cards and the $98 package is the cheapest. There are other more expensive packages below that.

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Getting closer.

So the closer I come, the further I have to go from what is generally considered to be sanity and rational thought?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
Here ya go...

http://www.probablefuture.com/order.htm

Scroll down and you will see accepted credit cards and the $98 package is the cheapest. There are other more expensive packages below that. So? And what if these guys are on the level? You would probably have to pay a lot more than that to visit a shrink. Based upon what I've seen on the site, these guys are practically giving it away anyway.

Which, brings up an interesting question. Why is it that only man, out of the whole of Creation, requires the need to "get his head together," by visting a psychiatrist, shrink or whatever? Doesn't that seem kind of odd? And why is it that man seems to have the incessant need to build all these instituions (monuments, monoliths, et al) around himself? I mean what gives?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
So? ... And what if these guys are on the level? You would probably have to pay a lot more than to visit a shrink.

Which, brings up an interesting question. Why is it that only man, out of the whole of Creation, requires the need to "get his head together," by visting a psychiatrist, shrink or whatever? Doesn't that seem kind of odd? And why is it that man seems to have the incessant need to build all these instituions (monuments, monoliths, et al) around himself? I mean what gives?

It could simply be because we think further into teh future, and ask more questions, and the need for an answer unsettles us.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
So? ... And what if these guys are on the level? You would probably have to pay a lot more than to visit a shrink.

Which, brings up an interesting question. Why is it that only man, out of the whole of Creation, requires the need to "get his head together," by visting a psychiatrist, shrink or whatever? Doesn't that seem kind of odd? And why is it that man seems to have the incessant need to build all these instituions (monuments, monoliths, et al) around himself? I mean what gives?

Well, I am always a bit leary when people are asking for my money. But maybe thats just me. Here is the question that I always ask myself.. "If I had the knowledge or ability that this person claims to have, would I be selling it to other people?" The answer is almost always "no". If money is needed to fund "getting the word out" then there is almost always better ways to do it. In this case, if money is what I need then I would take James Randi up on his offer and demonstrate remote viewing. Then I wouldn't need to charge $98 to change the world. Once you've won the million dollars going through this test, the world will definitely begin to change. With James Randi's help I might add!

My question will also keep you from buying any get rich quick schemes. If you know how to get rich quick then why are you bothering to sell it to me for a fee? LOL. You could claim you're doing it out of the kindness of your heart, but the act of spreading such an idea would utlimately seal it's doom. Thats how capitalism works.

Overall, answering these questions rationally just doesn't lend a whole lot of credibility to these websites and ideas.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Fliption
In this case, if money is what I need then I would take James Randi up on his offer and demonstrate remote viewing. Then I wouldn't need to charge $98 to change the world. Once you've won the million dollars going through this test, the world will definitely begin to change. With James Randi's help I might add!


That is the truth, isn't it? If there were anything solid to it, all you would have to do is get James Randi to test you, and you could write your own ticket from there!!

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Zero
That is the truth, isn't it? If there were anything solid to it, all you would have to do is get James Randi to test you, and you could write your own ticket from there!!

With what little I know of him and his program, yes I have to agree. I would much rather jump through his hoops then go to the trouble of setting up websites, brochures, and infommercials to sell my products. Not to mention all the trouble I go through to bill and collect from my customers, and prepare my business tax returns. UGH! And the last thing I would want to do is go to all this trouble and teach people how to do this only to have them go collect the $1M!

IMO, what this $1M offer accomplishes is that it automatically exposes all these type of sites as frauds because it automatically puts their motivations in question. I can't think of a single rational reason why they would do what they are doing if they were legit. It is much easier to believe they can't do anything special and are taking advantage of people to earn some quick bucks.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Fliption
With what little I know of him and his program, yes I have to agree. I would much rather jump through his hoops then go to the trouble of setting up websites, brochures, and infommercials to sell my products. Not to mention all the trouble I go through to bill and collect from my customers, and prepare my business tax returns. UGH! And the last thing I would want to do is go to all this trouble and teach people how to do this only to have them go collect the $1M!

IMO, what this $1M offer accomplishes is that it automatically exposes all these type of sites as frauds because it automatically puts their motivations in question. I can't think of a single rational reason why they would do what they are doing if they were legit. It is much easier to believe they can't do anything special and are taking advantage of people to earn some quick bucks.

And Randi has his tests done independently, the money is in a trust, and you can set the terms of the test, within limits. If I had magic powers, I'd walk in, do the test, and never work another day in my life. Even if you were a good faker, if you could convince Randi, it would be worth possible millions in publicity.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
Well, I am always a bit leary when people are asking for my money. But maybe thats just me. Here is the question that I always ask myself.. "If I had the knowledge or ability that this person claims to have, would I be selling it to other people?" The answer is almost always "no". If money is needed to fund "getting the word out" then there is almost always better ways to do it. In this case, if money is what I need then I would take James Randi up on his offer and demonstrate remote viewing. Then I wouldn't need to charge $98 to change the world. Once you've won the million dollars going through this test, the world will definitely begin to change. With James Randi's help I might add!Unfortunately (I guess?) in a capitalist society money is the rate of exchage, so instead of asking for barter in exchange for services (although I guess that's probably still capitalism), we ask for money. "The workman is worth his meat." While I hate to tell you this, a lot of us don't "believe" in James Randi.


My question will also keep you from buying any get rich quick schemes. If you know how to get rich quick then why are you bothering to sell it to me for a fee? LOL. You could claim you're doing it out of the kindness of your heart, but the act of spreading such an idea would utlimately seal it's doom. Thats how capitalism works.

Overall, answering these questions rationally just doesn't lend a whole lot of credibility to these websites and ideas. I did happen to check out the "order page" by the way, and noticed they're offering a 30 day money back guarantee, so that might help to ease the uncertainty of some people. That's capitalism at work too now isn't it?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
While I hate to tell you this, a lot of us don't "believe" in James Randi.




Regardless of what you believe, he DOES at least exist...and I can PROVE IT. Anyhoo, I don't believe in him...worship belongs to your side of the argument, not mine...and you guys will follow anyone or anything yourheart so desires, without any proof but teh good feelings that comfortable lies provide.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
With what little I know of him and his program, yes I have to agree. I would much rather jump through his hoops then go to the trouble of setting up websites, brochures, and infommercials to sell my products. Not to mention all the trouble I go through to bill and collect from my customers, and prepare my business tax returns. UGH! And the last thing I would want to do is go to all this trouble and teach people how to do this only to have them go collect the $1M!Then that sounds to me like there's no sense of a commitment on your part. You know what they say, put your money (and hence resources) where your mouth is.


IMO, what this $1M offer accomplishes is that it automatically exposes all these type of sites as frauds because it automatically puts their motivations in question. I can't think of a single rational reason why they would do what they are doing if they were legit. It is much easier to believe they can't do anything special and are taking advantage of people to earn some quick bucks. Then by this you're "implying" that the guys who do remote viewing are not legitimate ... whatever.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32


Then by this you're "implying" that the guys who do remote viewing are not legitimate ... whatever.

He might imply it..I am saying outright that it is a scam, a fraud, and a delusion, until someone presents evidence to the contrary. ANd, by evidence, I mean more than anecdotes, I mean something that can be submitted for peer-review.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Regardless of what you believe, he DOES at least exist...and I can PROVE IT. Anyhoo, I don't believe in him...worship belongs to your side of the argument, not mine...and you guys will follow anyone or anything yourheart so desires, without any proof but teh good feelings that comfortable lies provide. Yes, but can you "prove" his intentions? Ahh, it's just a big act and you know it!

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Yes, but can you "prove" his intentions? Ahh, it's just a big act and you know it!

Well, it is easy...all someone has to do is accept the test!!

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, it is easy...all someone has to do is accept the test!!
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Originally posted by Fliption
IMO, what this $1M offer accomplishes is that it automatically exposes all these type of sites as frauds because it automatically puts their motivations in question. I can't think of a single rational reason why they would do what they are doing if they were legit. It is much easier to believe they can't do anything special and are taking advantage of people to earn some quick bucks. Then by this you're "implying" that the guys who do remote viewing are not legitimate ... whatever.If somebody believes in something strongly enough, then they should be willing to put their money where there mouth is and not have to rely upon somebody like James Randi for support. Matter of fact I think people would find it much more believable if you were to do the work yourself, rather than "selling out" to some crackpot like James Randi.

[FZ+]

If somebody believes in something strongly enough, then they should be willing to put their money where there mouth is and not have to rely upon somebody like James Randi for support. Matter of fact I think people would find it much more believable if you were to do the work yourself, rather than "selling out" to some crackpot like James Randi.
But the million dollar test is not a matter of proving their belief - it is a certificate confirming the execution of a controlled, scientifically objective test. It is not a matter of relying on selling out to randi, it's a legal idea - the independent witness. And Randi is about as independent from any claim of paranormal activity as you can get. The randi fund was never about the money - it was about putting something to a reasonable scrutiny in an environment where someone's intentions or beliefs are irrelevant. Randi does not fudge the tests. They are not impossible tests, but tests carried out regularly in any scientific work.
There is no apparently reasonable reason why anyone would not submit to this test, unless if they think that finding out if their idea is true is irrelevant.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
While I hate to tell you this, a lot of us don't "believe" in James Randi.


I'm not sure I understand what this means. Forget James Randi. Let's just talk about the general situation. Someone has offered a large sum of money to anyone who can show that they have these abilities. What possible rational reason could one have to NOT do this?


I did happen to check out the "order page" by the way, and noticed they're offering a 30 day money back guarantee, so that might help to ease the uncertainty of some people. That's capitalism at work too now isn't it?

Well sure. But statistically it can be shown that there are "some" people who will be satisfied with substandard results and also that another group of people who aren't satisfied won't bother to return it for a refund. It's all about money in the end.

Iacchus32, I have read many of your posts and certainly can respect your unique angle to the issues that get discussed here. But on this particular thing I am a bit perplexed. I'm sure you will admit that there are crackpot fakes in the world who are trying to do nothing but make a penny. I don't think anyone would deny this. So how exactly do you distinguish the frauds from the real thing? I can appreciate being open to things but being open to everything and everybody is a bit different. Especially when you know some are frauds. Right?

I think someone offering enough money to retire on for proof of supernatural abilities is a worthwhile thing. I cannot think of any reason why a legit person would not take this offer. Can you? Please let me know if you can.

As I said before I don't know much about this guy so maybe you have some information that makes his offer unreasonable. I am open to hearing it. But all this talk about ego is not sufficient for me. That is a bit of a dodge and an obvious attempt to avoid what this offer really means. If no one will step up and take the challenge, then they know they are frauds and don't want everyone else to know. I'm having trouble coming up with reasoning that differs from this.

[BoulderHead]

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dawkins/lecture_p11.html

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
But the million dollar test is not a matter of proving their belief - it is a certificate confirming the execution of a controlled, scientifically objective test. It is not a matter of relying on selling out to randi, it's a legal idea - the independent witness. And Randi is about as independent from any claim of paranormal activity as you can get. The randi fund was never about the money - it was about putting something to a reasonable scrutiny in an environment where someone's intentions or beliefs are irrelevant. Randi does not fudge the tests. They are not impossible tests, but tests carried out regularly in any scientific work.
There is no apparently reasonable reason why anyone would not submit to this test, unless if they think that finding out if their idea is true is irrelevant. And yet, one does not need to go through all this rigmarole to determine that God exists. In fact it's all about one's "interior perception." Which is the whole point, because if we were to establish God externally (i.e., through the sensationalism of Randi's approach), without learning how to approach the God "within us," then that becomes tantamount to idolatry, and we all will have missed the boat.

While it's for this reason that the ancient Israelites where forbidden to create idols and "bow down and worship them." Because they would not be worshipping the creation of God, but the creation of man. Neither would they be worshipping the "Spirit of God," which is that which redeems us.

[FZ+]

All well and good, but Randi is limited to paranormal claims regarding reality. A personal belief does not consistute proof, and so to rule out randi is to say that this belief neccessarily does not correspond to reality. With all such beliefs, they are not disprovable but they are neccessarily not provable. Hence, you cannot rightly make the statement they are true, and cannot determine whether god exists, only what YOU belief regarding this. You have missed the point - the point is that Randi is not about disproving God. It is about comparing views of the measurable reality. If something cannot go to any one of Randi's tests, then it cannot be true. It may not be false either.

Would any astrologer, remote viewing specialist, telepath, faith healer care to say that their practices are merely a belief, purely in the mind and have no effect on reality? I doubt it.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
All well and good, but Randi is limited to paranormal claims regarding reality. A personal belief does not consistute proof, and so to rule out randi is to say that this belief neccessarily does not correspond to reality. With all such beliefs, they are not disprovable but they are neccessarily not provable. Hence, you cannot rightly make the statement they are true, and cannot determine whether god exists, only what YOU belief regarding this. You have missed the point - the point is that Randi is not about disproving God. It is about comparing views of the measurable reality. If something cannot go to any one of Randi's tests, then it cannot be true. It may not be false either.No, what I'm saying is we don't want to be worshipping "external gods," because you're right, they don't exist -- not in time and space anyway which, I guess is saying the same thing. [;)]


Would any astrologer, remote viewing specialist, telepath, faith healer care to say that their practices are merely a belief, purely in the mind and have no effect on reality? I doubt it.And yet they don't seem to have too much trouble getting other people to buy what they're selling -- to what extent of it's mumbo jumbo or not I couldn't tell you? -- so why should they concern themselves with James Randi?

[TENYEARS]

So the closer I come, the further I have to go from what is generally considered to be sanity and rational thought?

Actually the first two can take you to the edge, you must jump into the unknowing knowing or maybe life will knock you in.

[FZ+]

No, what I'm saying is we don't want to be worshipping "external gods," because you're right, they don't exist -- not in time and space anyway which, I guess is saying the same thing.
Then you can't attack Randi here, because Randi as a factual test represents an attempt to get away from subjective beliefs into objective reality.

And yet they don't seem to have too much trouble getting other people to buy what they're selling -- to what extent of it's mumbo jumbo or not I couldn't tell you? -- so why should they concern themselves with James Randi?
Because supposedly they don't like to wear a sticker saying "I don't care about being true, I just want to make money off gullible people."

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Then you can't attack Randi here, because Randi as a factual test represents an attempt to get away from subjective beliefs into objective reality.What are you suggesting we "sanitize" our relationship with God?


Because supposedly they don't like to wear a sticker saying "I don't care about being true, I just want to make money off gullible people." Nope, not good enough. To "dismiss" is not to "disprove." However, if you wish to remain skeptical about the whole thing, that's entirely up to you.

[TENYEARS]

This is a decent conversation going on here with good opinions.

Randi will never attract the real thing with what he has posted and the way he goes about it. The real thing will not sell it self it cannot by it's nature. Christ in the devil in the desert it's about being a human being and not selling out. You cannot have both. If you take one the other goes. This is how it works. I am not saying that if you physically take the money all visions/experiences etc... will go instantaneiously, but the affect of what you have taken will diminish that which you have fought to understand.

My purpose is the affect that the lack of balance created from a departure of truth. Even if the truth is not a relization, if one does not waste because that is the way. If one does not pollute becuase one knows one must drink and breath. One watches the children and teaches them what it is to be a human being becuause they are our future. If one acknowleges ones family and people who surround us because that with the sweat from our brow is what made us.

There must be another way than Randi or getting people to buy a stinking book. I already know I could sell a stinking book and what ??? good would it do? I would have to write the ??? thing first but all it would do is have bunch of believers on hand either way I suppose you have nothing but believers.

Help me out here people, if you can. I need more uses for a red brick.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Regardless of what you believe, he DOES at least exist...and I can PROVE IT. Anyhoo, I don't believe in him...worship belongs to your side of the argument, not mine...and you guys will follow anyone or anything yourheart so desires, without any proof but teh good feelings that comfortable lies provide. Actually I don't believe in anybody, or anything, except the "ground of my own being" (my existence). Perhaps this is what makes me such a "good skeptic?"

[Iacchus32]

What do you mean when you describe intuition as a "dynamic therapeutic tool"?

As a psychiatrist and intuitive, I meet each patient with all my skills. In the first session I immediately get an overall grasp of what a patient's issues are; it doesn't take months of intellectual probing to "figure the situation out." Then, after I teach my patients to get in touch with and trust their own intuition, we work together very efficiently. I watch them gain confidence and skill confronting their problems, and the treatment benefits in unbelievable ways.


It seems that we, as a culture, are out of touch with intuition. Why is it blocked in so many people? Why don't people "trust their gut"?

Western culture reveres technology and the mind above all else - at the expense of intuition. As children we aren't trained to connect with and respect our intuition; so we can't tell what is truly meaningful because we don't know what, or whom, to trust, including ourselves. We lose touch with our instincts, and thus lose access to vital information about ourselves - physically and emotionally. Many people with depression or anxiety have blocked intuition; and biochemical imbalances, if present, make accessing intuition even more difficult. As adults, we need to be guided back to our inner knowledge.

For the rest of the conversation please follow this link ...

http://www.drjudithorloff.com/QnA.aspTENYEARS:

Dr. Orloff is a clairvoyant who went the through rigors of Medical School to become a psychiatrist, which she has been practicing for some time now, while including some of the techniques she developed as a clairvoyant. Perhaps if you contacted her maybe she could give you some advice? She is very much on the level here.

http://www.drjudithorloff.com/

[Fliption]

Originally posted by TENYEARS

Randi will never attract the real thing with what he has posted and the way he goes about it. The real thing will not sell it self it cannot by it's nature.

I'm not sure I see the difference between teaching Randi how to do something and collecting a million dollars and teaching me to do something and collecting $98 from me. Why is one a sellout and the other is not?

[Iacchus32]

Here are a couple of radio programs that discuss paranormal things and what not. In fact Judith Orloff appeared on the Laura Lee Show at one point. As for Art Bell, he may be only making appearances anymore. As a matter of fact if you follow the link you'll probably be directed to a different site, although I think it's still the same basic format.

http://www.lauralee.com/

http://www.lauralee.com/orloff.htm

http://www.artbell.com/

[TENYEARS]

Iacchus32, I checked out the one site and will probably check out the rest. My gut did not hit on the first site I will check the rest. Thanks

Flipton, money corrupts because it sets up walls which directs the flow of the waters of ones self. Taking 98 bucks per person is also stealing from people who are reaching out to try to understand something or possibly change their lives. The main purpose here is to show that reality exists beyond what has ever been done. If it is recognized because there is proof some people will break free from themselves and make the leap.

[Zero]

I think it is a cop out to say that there is something wrong with the idea of ESPers proving that they are the real thing.

[Iacchus32]

From the URLAT, New Dimensions Radio (http://www.newdimensions.org/online-journal/articles/developing-psychic-vision.html) ...

DEVELOPING A RELATIONSHIP WITH PSYCHIC VISION
a conversation with Judith Orloff, M.D.

The psychic realm has been much misunderstood and maligned in our Western scientifically biased culture. Science is just beginning to open it's long-biased eyes to the possibility that psychic phenomena may indeed exist. Things like synchronicity, precognitive dreams, clairvoyance, intuition, healing by touch and other meta-normal and metaphysical events may indeed be valid ...


Michael Toms: Judith, when did you start to feel that you had psychic gifts?

Judith Orloff: I had my first psychic experience when I was nine years old, when I had a dream visitation from my grandfather. In the dream he came to me to let me know that he was going to die. It was quite natural as it was happening. But when I woke up, it was dark and I got very scared. I ran into my parent's room, woke them up, and told them. They basically smiled at me and said, "Oh, no dear, you're just having a nightmare, that's all." But the next morning, my aunt called from the East Coast to let us know that my grandfather had passed on. So that was really my first experience that I had. My parents, who were both physicians in Los Angeles, kind of looked at me askance and wrote it off as an eerie coincidence.


MT: Were your parents supportive as you continued to have experiences?

JO: Not at all. For the next two years, I had many psychic experiences, all of which were quite negative. I would predict things like earthquakes, or disasters or illnesses ...

After that my mother told me never to mention another one of my premonitions to her again. And I didn't. I kept what I thought to be a shameful secret deep inside of me.

For the rest of the conversation please follow this link ...

http://www.newdimensions.org/online-journal/articles/developing-psychic-vision.htmlTENYEARS:

Am posting this only because Judith Orloff has an interesting story to tell, and I think it's something you'll be able to relate to ... You also might want to check the proprietors of the New Dimensions site (http://www.newdimensions.org/) ...

http://www.newdimensions.org/

[Zero]

I think we'll see most of this deleted by tomorrow afternoon, unless you would be so kind as to edit this down for us, that's a good lad?


(copyright violations, guys....we can get sued and shut down. Post a brief section and the link)

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
I'm not sure I understand what this means. Forget James Randi. Let's just talk about the general situation. Someone has offered a large sum of money to anyone who can show that they have these abilities. What possible rational reason could one have to NOT do this?Did you read my post to FZ+? I think to the degree that we rely on material proof (especially when sensationalized), then to that degree we don't rely on "spiritual proof," which is what affects us "interiorly." I know for me that there are any number of things that have happened to me in my life, that may or may not constitute proof in Randi's respect, and yet constitutes proof to me, because I was there. And yet being of a personal nature, with me being the only witness, it belies the fact that The Spirit was there guiding me. Therefore I'm very reluctant to take this to an outside source (which isn't to say I won't), especially when it involves someone who doesn't seem to have an appreciation for what it entails. I'm afraid I just don't see that in James Randi. I would rather go about my own business and remain an unknown.


Well sure. But statistically it can be shown that there are "some" people who will be satisfied with substandard results and also that another group of people who aren't satisfied won't bother to return it for a refund. It's all about money in the end.All I can say is "buyer beware."


Iacchus32, I have read many of your posts and certainly can respect your unique angle to the issues that get discussed here. But on this particular thing I am a bit perplexed. I'm sure you will admit that there are crackpot fakes in the world who are trying to do nothing but make a penny. I don't think anyone would deny this. So how exactly do you distinguish the frauds from the real thing? I can appreciate being open to things but being open to everything and everybody is a bit different. Especially when you know some are frauds. Right?As I said earlier (after your post here), I don't believe in anybody, or anything, except the "ground of my being" (my existence). Which is to say I can get pretty skeptical, indeed.


I think someone offering enough money to retire on for proof of supernatural abilities is a worthwhile thing. I cannot think of any reason why a legit person would not take this offer. Can you? Please let me know if you can.If it looked like it was being "orchestrated" from up above (so to speak), then I would say it would be worth looking into ... and yet this is not the sort of "go ahead" that I get with James Randi.


As I said before I don't know much about this guy so maybe you have some information that makes his offer unreasonable. I am open to hearing it. But all this talk about ego is not sufficient for me. That is a bit of a dodge and an obvious attempt to avoid what this offer really means. If no one will step up and take the challenge, then they know they are frauds and don't want everyone else to know. I'm having trouble coming up with reasoning that differs from this. The thing about Randi, in his totally "concrete view," is I don't think there's a spiritual bone in his body, which leads me to ask why he should be put in charge of those things which involve "spiritual matters?" Wouldn't that be akin to putting the fox in the hen house? Indeed, there's something very lacking in his attitude which just doesn't ring true.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Iacchus32, I checked out the one site and will probably check out the rest. My gut did not hit on the first site I will check the rest. Thanks

Flipton, money corrupts because it sets up walls which directs the flow of the waters of ones self. Taking 98 bucks per person is also stealing from people who are reaching out to try to understand something or possibly change their lives. The main purpose here is to show that reality exists beyond what has ever been done. If it is recognized because there is proof some people will break free from themselves and make the leap.

OK then you have at least provided a standard to determine what is legit and what isn't. And according to this standard, the links provided that sell knowledge on how to do remote viewing are not legit. I can agree with this.

As for the issue of whether providing objective proof undermines the legitmacy of the ability itself due to the nature of the source of such abilities........well thats a different discussion and I'm running out of time. Will try to respond a later.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Did you read my post to FZ+? I think to the degree that we rely on material proof (especially when sensationalized), then to that degree we don't rely on "spiritual proof," which is what affects us "interiorly." I know for me that there are any number of things that have happened to me in my life, that may or may not constitute proof in Randi's respect, and yet constitutes proof to me, because I was there. And yet being of a personal nature, with me being the only witness, it belies the fact that The Spirit was there guiding me. Therefore I'm very reluctant to take this to an outside source (which isn't to say I won't), especially when it involves someone who doesn't seem to have an appreciation for what it entails. I'm afraid I just don't see that in James Randi. I would rather go about my own business and remain an unknown.



I don't disagree with what you're saying here. But keep in mind that I wasn't referring to a spiritual subjective experience that Randi would need to comprehend and understand. What we are referring to are people claiming that they have certain abilties that result in non-spiritual results! Randi doesn't need to understand the spiritual experience. He only needs to see that this person can indeed tell him something that can only be known through a "supernatural" experience. Like the ability to do remote viewing would give the experiencer some information that can only be known through remote viewing. This is a tangle, measurable result of the spiritual experience. Randi is not asking to understand the experience. He is only asking to see enough of the tangible result to represent an objective proof of the spiritual experience. Again, I see no rational reason not to do this if the ability is legit.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
OK then you have at least provided a standard to determine what is legit and what isn't. And according to this standard, the links provided that sell knowledge on how to do remote viewing are not legit. I can agree with this.Then what are you saying? That anyone who works in the field of "the mind," doesn't have a right to make a living at it? Then should that also not include the whole field of psychiatry? While I can assure you, a lot of them have no business practicing either!

And what about when people go to the doctor, and the doctor says, "Sorry, you only have two months to live?" Don't you think they have the right to question that, and look for a possible alternative? Even if it wasn't "approved" by the AMA?


As for the issue of whether providing objective proof undermines the legitmacy of the ability itself due to the nature of the source of such abilities........well thats a different discussion and I'm running out of time. Will try to respond a later.But isn't that like with anything, where to the degree that you become "overly" self-conscious, that it affects your normal ability to do what you do, naturally?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
I don't disagree with what you're saying here. But keep in mind that I wasn't referring to a spiritual subjective experience that Randi would need to comprehend and understand. What we are referring to are people claiming that they have certain abilties that result in non-spiritual results! Randi doesn't need to understand the spiritual experience. He only needs to see that this person can indeed tell him something that can only be known through a "supernatural" experience. Like the ability to do remote viewing would give the experiencer some information that can only be known through remote viewing. This is a tangle, measurable result of the spiritual experience. Randi is not asking to understand the experience. He is only asking to see enough of the tangible result to represent an objective proof of the spiritual experience. Again, I see no rational reason not to do this if the ability is legit. And indeed this is entirely possible based upon the evidence that I've seen. Did you ever get chance to see the Nova program on remote viewing? It was pretty amazing, and they were backing up all their claims!

[TENYEARS]

As for the issue of whether providing objective proof undermines the legitmacy of the ability itself due to the nature of the source of such abilities........well thats a different discussion and I'm running out of time. Will try to respond a later.

Flipton, I was not refering to some moral code, but something which is intrinsic to the understanding itself when experiencing it. There is also something to be said of what relative objects do to your life when attachment begins to occur. Hey you figured out blurry theory, figure some more out. Life does not stop, it is continually new.

[FZ+]

What are you suggesting we "sanitize" our relationship with God?
No. I am saying that we maintain the division from things purely in the internal subjective belief, as you impression is, and things that supposed exist with an objective element. I am saying that we should be clear on which we mean, because you are attacking Randi for failing to do what he did not set out to do.
Nope, not good enough. To "dismiss" is not to "disprove." However, if you wish to remain skeptical about the whole thing, that's entirely up to you.
Depends on what you see by disprove. If it is shown that x has no effect on external reality, then the view held by these people that x does have an effect on external reality is disproved. If they maintain that x neccessarily has a side in objective existence, then their whole belief system is show to be inconsistent with the world, and is disproved. If their belief system can accept a lack of professional scrutiny, and real existence, then it is dismissed from rational judgement. If there is intentional to stop x from being proved, disproved or dismissed when the nature of x allows these tests, then their intentions are suspect.

Let's see again. You seem unclear about the facts.

Randi is NOT in charge. The money is in his bank account, but the actual people who carry out the tests and checks their fairness are chosen from independent scientific authorities.
The tests are double blind. The carrying out is randomnised, and the code to decrypt the results hidden on a computer. There is not possibility for someone to influence the test.
The tests are controlled to eliminate any chance of a placebo effect from experimenter error.
The money is not forced on you. If you pass the test, you don't have to take the money.
Without Randi's challenge, or an equivalent scientific test, any claim as to remote viewing etc cannot be accepted as true. Full stop.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
No. I am saying that we maintain the division from things purely in the internal subjective belief, as you impression is, and things that supposed exist with an objective element. I am saying that we should be clear on which we mean, because you are attacking Randi for failing to do what he did not set out to do.

Depends on what you see by disprove. If it is shown that x has no effect on external reality, then the view held by these people that x does have an effect on external reality is disproved. If they maintain that x neccessarily has a side in objective existence, then their whole belief system is show to be inconsistent with the world, and is disproved. If their belief system can accept a lack of professional scrutiny, and real existence, then it is dismissed from rational judgement. If there is intentional to stop x from being proved, disproved or dismissed when the nature of x allows these tests, then their intentions are suspect.

Let's see again. You seem unclear about the facts.

Randi is NOT in charge. The money is in his bank account, but the actual people who carry out the tests and checks their fairness are chosen from independent scientific authorities.
The tests are double blind. The carrying out is randomnised, and the code to decrypt the results hidden on a computer. There is not possibility for someone to influence the test.
The tests are controlled to eliminate any chance of a placebo effect from experimenter error.
The money is not forced on you. If you pass the test, you don't have to take the money.
Without Randi's challenge, or an equivalent scientific test, any claim as to remote viewing etc cannot be accepted as true. Full stop. Did you see that Nova program on remote viewing? They gave some pretty conclusive evidence to me. If you haven't seen it I would recommend you get a copy!

Hey, I don't doubt that there's a lot of fraud going on. So what! ... Most of these things I have no need for anyway. While as a rule, I don't accept anything that I can't see (experience) for myself.

[FZ+]

But you see, without something like what the Randi foundation does, that is still just "seems". No amount of programs in non-controlled circumstances is equivalent to one experiment in scientific surroundings. I have seen dozens of experiments attempting to find esp in controlled conditions, and they all failed. You can't say it's conclusive unless you follow proper scientific method.
While seeing may be believing, believing doesn't make it true. Ever seen a magic trick?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
But you see, without something like what the Randi foundation does, that is still just "seems". No amount of programs in non-controlled circumstances is equivalent to one experiment in scientific surroundings. I have seen dozens of experiments attempting to find esp in controlled conditions, and they all failed. You can't say it's conclusive unless you follow proper scientific method.
While seeing may be believing, believing doesn't make it true. Ever seen a magic trick? Apparently you didn't see the program then. These were extensive tests which were conducted by the CIA, and the whole approach seemed scientific to me. Here are a couple of sites which seem to substantiate the findings.

http://www.trv-psitech.com/newsletter/120701/the_matrix_p_4.html

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html

[FZ+]

Doesn't sound like exactly independent sources to me...
And I know lots of tricks around it. And so, why shouldn't this be subjected to Randi's challenge then? Seems that if it was tested so much, another little one would not make a difference. Does Randi have a negative aura then? Maybe the radiates antimagic?

[TENYEARS]

From another angle whos to say Randi would say it's real pay off some independent fools and then collect tons of cash for the rights. Or maybe take in the real thing collect all the data over a period of time and then release it in a way which is benificial to him. There are lots of possibilities here people. Who's to say the public would give to carps about some ???? fool who pays some people to do tests. Who is to verify the verifier of right or wrong.

The government already knows it's real. Through out history many great leaders knew individuals or worked with individuals or consulted individuals which used the capabilities that are part of all people. The governments already know it is real.

[TENYEARS]

The governments ability to harness it was inadaquate in many circumstances do to it's overall purpose which is less than the cause which generated it. It's like taking a ten mile wide shovel to pick up a gum rapper. If the people know the shovel exists, maybe they won't drop the gum wrapper to being with.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Doesn't sound like exactly independent sources to me...
And I know lots of tricks around it. And so, why shouldn't this be subjected to Randi's challenge then? Seems that if it was tested so much, another little one would not make a difference. Does Randi have a negative aura then? Maybe the radiates antimagic?
Originally posted by Iacchus32
The thing about Randi, in his totally "concrete view," is I don't think there's a spiritual bone in his body, which leads me to ask why he should be put in charge of those things which involve "spiritual matters?" Wouldn't that be akin to putting the fox in the hen house? Indeed, there's something very lacking in his attitude which just doesn't ring true.
Proof! ... That's such a dirty word. I didn't use to believe in any of this stuff either, and couldn't possibly conceive of how it was true ... that is until I found out. Hmm ... Now all I can say is, based upon my own experience, the likelihood that these things do exist is real. If you want proof, and it was meant for you to find out (it's more a matter of sincerity I believe), then you will have proof. In the meantime, I wouldn't waste so much time getting all worked up about it.

Whereas when you do find out, you can then began the thankless task, of wasting all your time, arguing with people who want proof.

[TENYEARS]

Either you posted three and two were deleted or this is messed up. I recieved three responses to your post.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Either you posted three and two were deleted or this is messed up. I recieved three responses to your post. That was because I deleted twice and reposted, sorry. I will do this sometimes (re-edit) so long as no one has posted after me.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Then what are you saying? That anyone who works in the field of "the mind," doesn't have a right to make a living at it? Then should that also not include the whole field of psychiatry? While I can assure you, a lot of them have no business practicing either!

And what about when people go to the doctor, and the doctor says, "Sorry, you only have two months to live?" Don't you think they have the right to question that, and look for a possible alternative? Even if it wasn't "approved" by the AMA?


I'm not talking about peoples rights. Sure they have a right to do it. But I also have a right to believe it isn't legit when they refuse to accept a very good offer to provide proof.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And indeed this is entirely possible based upon the evidence that I've seen. Did you ever get chance to see the Nova program on remote viewing? It was pretty amazing, and they were backing up all their claims!

And yet they still won't provide proof of it and earn some easy cash.

[Fliption]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
As for the issue of whether providing objective proof undermines the legitmacy of the ability itself due to the nature of the source of such abilities........well thats a different discussion and I'm running out of time. Will try to respond a later.

Flipton, I was not refering to some moral code, but something which is intrinsic to the understanding itself when experiencing it. There is also something to be said of what relative objects do to your life when attachment begins to occur. Hey you figured out blurry theory, figure some more out. Life does not stop, it is continually new.

Yes I know this. That's exactly what I meant. I didn't intend to discuss moral codes. If I said something about it I didn't intend to. I understand what you are talking about completely. It is the only argument not to take the $1M and still be somewhat rational. Of course some people, like zero, will think it is a cop out. I think it is certainly worthy of debate is all I meant.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Doesn't sound like exactly independent sources to me...
And I know lots of tricks around it. And so, why shouldn't this be subjected to Randi's challenge then? Seems that if it was tested so much, another little one would not make a difference. Does Randi have a negative aura then? Maybe the radiates antimagic? Would you say Randi was a died-in-the-wool Atheist? This was the distinct impression I got, which is an indication of bias right there. While I also got the impression that the only proof Randi is looking for is proof to justify his own Atheism.

So you tell me, is this the kind of person you want heading up a program like this, one who acts solely out of self-interest? Rather than someone who's at least impartial or, has an appreciation for both sides? Otherwise it comes across as a big joke, and the only people it's "likely to draw" are those (perhaps like Randi himself) who think they can trick the system. It's like Tenyears said way back at the beginning of the thread, Randi is not looking for truth.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Fliption
I'm not talking about peoples rights. Sure they have a right to do it. But I also have a right to believe it isn't legit when they refuse to accept a very good offer to provide proof. What are you saying they refused because they didn't respond, to something they otherwise might not be aware of? (Randi's challenge). Or, are you saying Randi approached them directly and then they refused? Hey, that's a big difference!


Originally posted by Fliption
And yet they still won't provide proof of it and earn some easy cash.Oh, I think you mean "cash in."

[FZ+]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Would you say Randi was a died-in-the-wool Atheist? This was the distinct impression I got, which is an indication of bias right there. While I also got the impression that the only proof Randi is looking for is proof to justify his own Atheism.

So you tell me, is this the kind of person you want heading up a program like this, one who acts solely out of self-interest? Rather than someone who's at least impartial or, has an appreciation for both sides? Otherwise it comes across as a big joke, and the only people it's "likely to draw" are those (perhaps like Randi himself) who think they can trick the system. It's like Tenyears said way back at the beginning of the thread, Randi is not looking for truth.
Did you read my list of facts about the Randi challenge?
I will repeat them for your convenience.

(a) Randi is NOT in charge. He simply has the money.
(b) The tests are design in such a way that there is no possibility of bias on any side.

If this was a factor of his opinion, then we can say that your objection was valid. But you don't seem to understand how the tests work. It is not a matter of what Randi is looking for.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Did you read my list of facts about the Randi challenge?
I will repeat them for your convenience.

(a) Randi is NOT in charge. He simply has the money.
(b) The tests are design in such a way that there is no possibility of bias on any side.

If this was a factor of his opinion, then we can say that your objection was valid. But you don't seem to understand how the tests work. It is not a matter of what Randi is looking for. Randi is no better than the damn news media that come on at night. It's all sensationalism. Therefore, if you get Randi out of the way, and you get the sensationalism out of the way, then it might be another story. And yet without all the sensationalism, who cares? Right? This is the kind of attention you need in order to draw attention to "James Randi." It's big joke! Whereas if it was that important, why isn't anybody else offering the same challenge? Unless of course it's already being done, in the name of private research, except without all the fanfare and the money.

[FZ+]

Randi is no better than the damn news media that come on at night. It's all sensationalism. Therefore, if you get Randi out of the way, and you get the sensationalism out of the way, then it might be another story. And yet without all the sensationalism, who cares? Right? This is the kind of attention you need in order to draw attention to "James Randi." It's big joke! Whereas if it was that important, why isn't anybody else offering the same challenge? Unless of course it's already being done, in the name of private research, except without all the fanfare and the money.
This is why:

What are you saying they refused because they didn't respond, to something they otherwise might not be aware of? (Randi's challenge). Or, are you saying Randi approached them directly and then they refused? Hey, that's a big difference!
The reason for the fanfare is so that no one can claim that they didn't respond because they never heard of it.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
The reason for the fanfare is so that no one can claim that they didn't respond because they never heard of it.
Except that he invalidates the whole thing by drawing so much attention to himself. And if he does draw anyone, it's the wrong kind of people, i.e., those who are probably more like himself and are trying to trick the system. How much money (or, at least notoriety) do you think James Randi has made out of this so far?

And indeed I can see how Randi comes across, like the "savior of Atheism."

[FZ+]

Notice another fact.
Randi.org <- .org being legally a suffix implying a non-profit making organisation. If he makes money out of it, then you can go sue them for false advertising.

I think you don't have any real evidence to go on here, except for your own bias against Mr Randi...

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Notice another fact.
Randi.org <- .org being legally a suffix implying a non-profit making organisation. http://www.dionysus.org/ ... Do you see the sufix here? I imagine it applies to "organization," but nobody seemed to make a big deal out of issuing it out to me, and I'm not a non-profit organization (I'm not commercial either).

If he makes money out of it, then you can go sue them for false advertising.

I think you don't have any real evidence to go on here, except for your own bias against Mr Randi... He dosn't have to make any money from it directly, not with all the notoriety he gets, which is probably the best form of advertising ... and then you start raking in the dough, through all the other little services the Randi Foundation provides. Or, if nothing else through accepting donations?

[Zero]

Do we need to attack teh personality of James Randi, or can we speak to the bigger issue of how no 'miracle' has ever been performed under anything like strict scientific protocols?

[FZ+]

Jeez... I thought you read the site...

The James Randi Educational Foundation is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1996. Its aim is to promote critical thinking by reaching out to the public and media with reliable information about paranormal and supernatural ideas so widespread in our society today.
Now notice the words NOT FOR PROFIT. The .org tag is taken very seriously. Throw away the comments on raking it in, because legally, they don't mean jack.

To raise public awareness of these issues, the Foundation offers a $1,000,000 prize to any person or persons who can demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability of any kind under mutually agreed upon scientific conditions. This prize money is held in a special account which cannot be accessed for any purpose other than the awarding of the prize.
The goal of the prize is very plain. As is the way it is only part of their overall activities, and that the money is an offer. Also notice "mutually agreed scientific conditions".

I suggest you read the site properly at:
http://www.randi.org/jref/index.html
And then make a criticism, if you still can.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
Jeez... I thought you read the site...

Now notice the words NOT FOR PROFIT. The .org tag is taken very seriously. Throw away the comments on raking it in, because legally, they don't mean jack.

The goal of the prize is very plain. As is the way it is only part of their overall activities, and that the money is an offer. Also notice "mutually agreed scientific conditions".

I suggest you read the site properly at:
http://www.randi.org/jref/index.html
And then make a criticism, if you still can.
Oh, did you check out this page? And I was just guessing when I brought it up. If you people want to scrutinize other people's motives, then I don't see any reason why James Randi should be exempt either. Do you really think they would be able to "stay in business" if it wasn't for their millon dollar gimmick?

http://www.randi.org/jref/join.html

Why Join the JREF?
The James Randi Educational Foundation is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1996. Its aim is to promote critical thinking by reaching out to the public and media with reliable information about paranormal and supernatural ideas so widespread in our society today.
Members support the work of James Randi and the Foundation.

All members receive:

Satisfaction of involvement
Personal membership card
10% discount on books & other cool stuff
Signed letter from James Randi
All new members get their choice of a JREF pen, mug or t-shirt. See below!Hmm ... Founded in 1996. Wasn't that about the time that the Nova program aired? Actually I think it first aired in 1994 ...


New Members Get a Gift
New members get their choice of:

Official JREF Ceramic Coffee Mug
With spiffy inscription. Suitable for decaf and regular coffee. May be used indoors or outdoors.
Official JREF Pen
Good quality item. Writes in any language. Sexy maroon color, trimmed in homeopathic gold. Takes standard refills.
Official JREF T-shirt
With a fierce portrait of James Randi on it. Sizes S, L, XL. Two arm-holes, one neck-hole. Oh yes, and one waist-hole. May be washed if needed.
Please mention in the subject box whether you want a XL t-shirt, pen or mug with your new membership. Spiffy inscription? ... Suitable for decaf and regular? ... Sexy maroon? ... I mean, what are they trying to sell?


Already a member and want something? Click here to buy it from the JREF Store. (http://www.randi.org/shopping/index.html)Hmm ... All kinds of neat stuff to buy on this page!


Act Now, Join Today!
Please select the level of membership you want. To view membership rewards, see below.

Patron ........ $10,000
Benefactor .... $5,000
Sponsor ........ $2,500
Supporter ..... $1,000
Friend ............. $250
Individual ........ $100
Introductory* .... $50
Student ............ $25
Boy, that $10,000 package sure seems a bit more than what they were charging for the remote viewing package?

Well, it looks to me like the Randi Foundation is pretty well set up here. Sorry, but I don't buy into it! Hey, I'm willing to let the whole thing go right now but, since you seem to have the inherent need to defend that which, for all intents and purposes can't be defended (or judged any differently than some of these other claims), then I feel obliged to respond. Forgive me for being skeptical!

P.S. I probably will let it go at this point, as I don't feel there's much else for me to say.

[FZ+]

It's not a "business". The membership fees enter the foundation's funds, as do the things sold from the shop. Hence the non-profit making tag. Maybe the words sponsorship, or donation would be a clue? Giving member's free mugs somehow doesn't qualify for "Randi's raking it in". And you still haven't shown how any profit making would affect the carrying out of the tests. Compare the price of the items in the shop with the membership fees. Is PF skewed because Greg offers PF T-shirts? You are grabbing at air here...

Look at all these other heinous money grabbers:
http://www.macmillan.org.uk/catalogue/
http://amnestyusa.org/join/participate.html
https://www.greenpeace.com/forms/gpicontr.html
http://www.dvou.org/makeadonation.html
[insert pointless wry comments as neccessary]

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
It's not a "business". The membership fees enter the foundation's funds, as do the things sold from the shop. Hence the non-profit making (ie. charity) tag. Maybe the words sponsorship, or donation would be a clue? Giving member's free mugs somehow doesn't qualify for "Randi's raking it in". And you still haven't shown how any profit making would affect the carrying out of the tests. Compare the price of the items in the shop with the membership fees. Is PF skewed because Greg offers PF T-shirts? You are grabbing at air here... Would you care to read about one of my own "psychic events?" In fact I think if Randi happened to be there when it happened I could have very easily qualified for the $1,000,000. And yet that's not the nature of how it works, not for me anyway, as it's more a matter of going through process, with an open mind, while taking heed of the signs, and waiting to see what happens. Very rarely do I know what's going to happen beforehand. And yet if you read the page you would have to acknowledge that what I'm alluding to is paranormal.

http://www.dionysus.org/x0901.html

[FZ+]

The all too obvious question is:
How do you know it wasn't a dream brought on by your encounter with the bag of potatos, which triggered a previous memory of the big chief Joseph event. Or perhaps how did you know, this long after the actual vision (15 years and all) that your mind has not in fact changed your memory to something more extraordinary than it was?

Which almost brings one back to the point of the thread. [;)] The failing with all these fishbowl things is that one can never realise whether you are in the fishbowl looking out, or outside the fishbowl looking in, or if this fishbowl exists at all. If you insist on an open mind, can you truly say whether or not your mind is simply closed in a way that you think of as open, and those you find closed minded are simply open in a different direction to you?

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
The all too obvious question is:
How do you know it wasn't a dream brought on by your encounter with the bag of potatos, which triggered a previous memory of the big chief Joseph event. Or perhaps how did you know, this long after the actual vision (15 years and all) that your mind has not in fact changed your memory to something more extraordinary than it was?This is the typical kind of response you would expect from James Randi. You obviously didn't read it very closely. I didn't just write the whole thing down yesterday, as you seem to suggest. And, although it wasn't unil 1991 that I did write it down, I do have a good method of recall, nor am I the one to embellish things (i.e., embellishment = no credibility). Of course the dream was related to the bag of potatoes, as was everything else related (to American Indians) over this period of a few days. Neither did I know who Chief Joseph was at the time, nor had I seen the movie before. Do you understand that everything led up to the phone-call which occurred during the movie?

Hey, it either happended the way I said I did or it didn't, if you can't accept that, so be it! But don't come preaching to me that such things aren't possible ... and then try backing it up by some self-proclaimed moron who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about!

Which almost brings one back to the point of the thread. [;)] The failing with all these fishbowl things is that one can never realise whether you are in the fishbowl looking out, or outside the fishbowl looking in, or if this fishbowl exists at all. If you insist on an open mind, can you truly say whether or not your mind is simply closed in a way that you think of as open, and those you find closed minded are simply open in a different direction to you? Hogwash! ... You really must refrain from speaking about those things which you don't comprehend.

[FZ+]

This is the typical kind of response you would expect from James Randi.
How many responses have you seen from James Randi?

And, although it wasn't unil 1991 that I did write it down, I do have a good method of recall, nor am I the one to embellish things (i.e., embellishment = no credibility).
What is your method of recall?

Neither did I know who Chief Joseph was at the time, nor had I seen the movie before.
No, but the bag of potatos was inspired by General Joseph's story, and you can easily have remembered it subconsciously. (It is very hard to remember NOT remembering something, as studies have shown)

But don't come preaching to me that such things aren't possible ... and then try backing it up by some self-proclaimed moron who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about!
I did not notice the section where I preached that such things aren't possible. Maybe you might point that out? I am saying simply that:
"And yet if you read the page you would have to acknowledge that what I'm alluding to is paranormal." is untrue, and there are many other explanations that are not paranormal.
Mayhaps you are reading too much into what I write?

Hogwash! ... You really must refrain from speaking about those things which you don't comprehend.
Oh? So you say that you are in direct contact with the truth and know for certain about the limitations of everyone else's knowledge while being certain in the absolute nature of your own? It is a matter of common sense that no one know everything.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by FZ+
How many responses have you seen from James Randi?I've seen the Nova program twice, in 1994 and possibly 1997? Have also been to his website a couple of times, and even corresponded with him by e-mail once shortly after I set up my webpage in 1997. It was more out of curiousity and, when I told him about my webpage, he replied with a couple of snide remarks, as if to say, "I'm not prepared to give you the time of day."


What is your method of recall?Actually I don't make it much of point to remember anything, except when something like this occurs, at which point I stop, take everything in, highlight the key points, and begin the process of reciting it periodically while focusing on the key points (in conjunction with something else that might possibly be related}.


No, but the bag of potatos was inspired by General Joseph's story, and you can easily have remembered it subconsciously. (It is very hard to remember NOT remembering something, as studies have shown)That's Chief Joseph by the way. And no, the bag of potatoes (1) was the first thing that occurred and, since I had never seen a bag of potatoes with an Indian on it (fully blown I might add), it just stuck out in mind. Therefore it just kind of set the tone (or theme) for the dream (2) which happened a couple of nights later which, no doubt inspired me to work with American Indians in my mediation a day or two later, wherein I had the vision of an Indian pulling a knife on a settler (3), and later that same day the movie came on about Chief Joseph (4), before I got the phone-call from Nez Perce, Idaho (5) during the movie ... So it's like I said it's all related. Whereas I think the correct term here would be "synchronicity."

http://www.dionysus.org/


I did not notice the section where I preached that such things aren't possible. Maybe you might point that out? I am saying simply that:
"And yet if you read the page you would have to acknowledge that what I'm alluding to is paranormal." is untrue, and there are many other explanations that are not paranormal.
Mayhaps you are reading too much into what I write?Excuse me? Were you there? And what were you just saying about this whole "fish bowl" thing? And yet we are speaking of something that I've studied and become familiar with over the past 25 years. So you may wish to consider the possibility that I do know what I'm talking about.


Oh? So you say that you are in direct contact with the truth and know for certain about the limitations of everyone else's knowledge while being certain in the absolute nature of your own? It is a matter of common sense that no one know everything. And yet if you were to consider it from the standpoint that I am telling you the truth, then obviously, the truth is not being cultivated here. In which case I would have to argue, "What's the point?"

[FZ+]

Actually I don't make it much of point to remember anything, except when something like this occurs, at which point I stop, take everything in, highlight the key points, and begin the process of reciting it periodically while focusing on the key points (in conjunction with something else that might possibly be related}.
I would repeat - it is hard to remember not knowing about something.
Excuse me? Were you there? And what were you just saying about this whole "fish bowl" thing? And yet we are speaking of something that I've studied and become familiar with over the past 25 years. So you may wish to consider the possibility that I do know what I'm talking about.
And you may need to consider the possibility you are wrong. Notice that I have not yet said at all that what you state is wrong, or that it is impossible etc. So please don't be so hostile.

I would like you to try to see it from my perspective - I have NOT experienced it. I do not know how you in that much detail. I have no evidence, but to trust in the complete accuracy of your words. I have not studied any of the probabilities involved. And I do not know if there is any bias which may have skewed your retelling. To me, several mundane possibilities have not been eliminated, in that it may not be a psychic event, but a mere co-incidence. To me, it is uncertain. If I have experienced it as you have, maybe I'll feel differently. If you lived life as I have, maybe you'll see things differently.

And yet if you were to consider it from the standpoint that I am telling you the truth, then obviously, the truth is not being cultivated here. In which case I would have to argue, "What's the point?"
The fishbowl came from the title of the thread, and the initial suggestion by TENYEARS that we (except him of course) are all living in the analogical fishbowl, which we consider to be the universe despite the realities out there. My philosophy is the following - this is wrong because for all others it is similarly possible to see others as being in the fishbowl and us without, and to use his analogy, it is impossible to determine whether one is outside the fishbowl looking in, or inside the fishbowl looking out. But a barrier exists in the difference between our experiences - as the above demonstrated. I propose that we each construct the barrier of mind, and in the end this barrier does not distinguish discrete bowls but that we each see what is partially true in a different way, and that to pretend there is no fishbowl and that an absolutely open perspective is possible is unrealistic.

[Zero]

Originally posted by FZ+


I would like you to try to see it from my perspective - I have NOT experienced it. I do not know how you in that much detail. I have no evidence, but to trust in the complete accuracy of your words. I have not studied any of the probabilities involved. And I do not know if there is any bias which may have skewed your retelling. To me, several mundane possibilities have not been eliminated, in that it may not be a psychic event, but a mere co-incidence. To me, it is uncertain. If I have experienced it as you have, maybe I'll feel differently. If you lived life as I have, maybe you'll see things differently.



I agree wth all of this, and would add that the rest of us have a right to ask for some confirmation or proof before we take you seriously. Like FZ+ said, there are more mundane explanations that need to be eliminated before some of us willl believe a fantasical story.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
I agree wth all of this, and would add that the rest of us have a right to ask for some confirmation or proof before we take you seriously. Like FZ+ said, there are more mundane explanations that need to be eliminated before some of us willl believe a fantasical story. Actually, the only way you're going to believe any of this is if you can establish a basis by which to accept it for yourself. Meaning you have to have some sort of working idea of it your mind and understand how it works ... in other words by working with it.

This is something Randi needs to know as well, that you just can't come out point blank and say prove to me that it works, not without understanding what it means to get from point A to point B, and why things occur the way they do. And no, you may not be able to reproduce the results (which isn't to say it's not impossible), but at least you'll understand what the results mean.

Indeed it's very much like trying to predict which way the wind blows. You may not understand "from whence it comes and whence it goes," similar to what it says about being born of the spirit in John 3:5-8, but that doesn't change the fact that the wind doesn't exist. And yet if we learn how to construct a sail, and put it on a boat (regarding "our lives"), then it doesn't matter, because we can now harness the wind from whichever direction it blows.

If you would like to read about an experience which was the pivotal point of my life, that's even more significant than the Chief Joseph account, then please follow the link ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Actually, the only way you're going to believe any of this is if you can establish a basis by which to accept it for yourself. Meaning you have to have some sort of working idea of it your mind and understand how it works ... in other words by working with it.

This is something Randi needs to know as well, that you just can't come out point blank and say prove to me that it works, not without understanding what it means to get from point A to point B, and why things occur the way they do. And no, you may not be able to reproduce the results (which isn't to say it's not impossible), but at least you'll understand what the results mean.

Indeed it's very much like trying to predict which way the wind blows. You may not understand "from whence it comes and whence it goes," similar to what it says about being born of the spirit in John 3:5-8, but that doesn't change the fact that the wind doesn't exist. And yet if we learn how to construct a sail, and put it on a boat (regarding "our lives"), then it doesn't matter, because we can now harness the wind from whichever direction it blows.

If you would like to read about an experience which was the pivotal point of my life, that's even more significant than the Chief Joseph account, then please follow the link ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html

Nevertheless, I seen to suggest that I have to brainwash myself to accept delusion as evidence, and it simply won't fly for me.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by Zero
Nevertheless, I seen to suggest that I have to brainwash myself to accept delusion as evidence, and it simply won't fly for me. And what does the word "delusion" suggest, if not outright bias? It's like I said, there's no need to carry this any further. Some people, if not the vast majority, will never get it.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And what does the word "delusion" suggest, if not outright bias? It's like I said, there's no need to carry this any further. Some people, if not the vast majority, will never get it.

Ever consider that you don't actually present anything for us to 'get'? Open your mind to THAT possibility.

[TENYEARS]

Zero, Iacchus32 and anyone who wishes to partake, think of a method proof which would be considered valid to you. What is needed is a brainstorm list of what would be considered valid proof or a method or methods of proving beyond the shadow of a doubt. I already have one that I have been speaking about for years. I think in the right manner it can be turned in upon itself to create a circle of unbroken proof as good as anything else which is considered proof of anything else by someone else. I can now not post for a few days. I will be back.

[Zero]

Originally posted by TENYEARS
Zero, Iacchus32 and anyone who wishes to partake, think of a method proof which would be considered valid to you. What is needed is a brainstorm list of what would be considered valid proof or a method or methods of proving beyond the shadow of a doubt. I already have one that I have been speaking about for years. I think in the right manner it can be turned in upon itself to create a circle of unbroken proof as good as anything else which is considered proof of anything else by someone else. I can now not post for a few days. I will be back.

Sounds like a plan, doesn't it?

[appleseed]

I dub this thread a matrixism.

As one who subscribes to its beliefs I have to take exception to the use of the word Matrixism. Matrixism is a genuine religion spawned in part from the movie The Matrix but with a greater history. It is no big whoop but I figured that I should point this out.

If you are curious about just what Matrixism is you can peruse a short description of it at http://www.geocities.com/matrixism :smile:

[balkan]

"Originally posted by Iacchus32
Actually, the only way you're going to believe any of this is if you can establish a basis by which to accept it for yourself. Meaning you have to have some sort of working idea of it your mind and understand how it works ... in other words by working with it.

This is something Randi needs to know as well, that you just can't come out point blank and say prove to me that it works, not without understanding what it means to get from point A to point B, and why things occur the way they do. And no, you may not be able to reproduce the results (which isn't to say it's not impossible), but at least you'll understand what the results mean.

Indeed it's very much like trying to predict which way the wind blows. You may not understand "from whence it comes and whence it goes," similar to what it says about being born of the spirit in John 3:5-8, but that doesn't change the fact that the wind doesn't exist. And yet if we learn how to construct a sail, and put it on a boat (regarding "our lives"), then it doesn't matter, because we can now harness the wind from whichever direction it blows.

If you would like to read about an experience which was the pivotal point of my life, that's even more significant than the Chief Joseph account, then please follow the link ...

http://www.dionysus.org/x0501.html "


hahahahahahahhahahahahahaha! :D bwaaaaahahahahaaaa! :D:D:D :rofl: :rofl:
this is great... i'm almost soory i put this guy on my ignore list... this is amazingly good entertainment :D

"but that doesn't change the fact that the wind doesn't exist. And yet if we learn how to construct a sail, and put it on a boat (regarding "our lives"), then it doesn't matter, because we can now harness the wind from whichever direction it blows."
HEEEEEHEHEHEHEHEHE! :D:D :rofl: :rofl: