Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Edgar Mitchell on the unexplained

  1. May 21, 2005 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

  2. jcsd
  3. May 21, 2005 #2
    He says a friend "teleported" some lost tie pins to him. Mitchel ought to get the friend to do that in a lab while being videotaped, etc. I think, though, the friend would decline the invitation.
  4. May 22, 2005 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yep, that's a strange one alright.
  5. May 22, 2005 #4
    he is propably still on government mission to get people hooked on some nonsense, so people don't see this mess we live in.
    just my theory :redface:
  6. May 22, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Mitchell is a hard study. He obviously has credentials. You don't get selected for a moon mission if you can't jump through the training hoops. But something happened to him. Maybe he got hit by a stray mind control beam while on the moon. He turned into a head case after leaving NASA. He was a Uri Geller apostle for a long time - how weird is that?
  7. May 22, 2005 #6
    That pretty much diagnoses Mitchell as highly gullible.

    As far as I know Nasa does a fair amount of psychological testing on potential astronauts. The point of that testing would be to make sure the person isn't going to break down easily under stress and become desperate and sloppy as a first resort. As long as a person can stay calm and do what mission control tells them to do next, they could pass this kind of test, even if, inside, they're praying to the ascended masters of the holy church of the weird, purple jellyfish.
  8. May 22, 2005 #7
    My first question when I read something like this is to wonder what suggested this idea to you. What is it you have in mind that suggests the government would mount a deliberate effort of that kind? I can't think of any such plan that had ever come to light.
  9. May 22, 2005 #8
    The article says:

    "He founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences to sponser the study of unconventional scientific models, such as intuition and feeling..."

    noetic means: of, relating to, or based on the intellect

    So, substituting:

    "He founded the Institute of Intellectual Sciences to sponser the study of unconventional scientific models, such as intuition and feeling..."

    First off, "intuition and feeling" aren't unconventional scientific models, they are unconventional scientific methods. Secondly, he has misnamed his intsitute based on what he says their focus is. He should have called it "The Institute of Intuitional Sciences." The purpose of which would be "to sponser the study of unconventional scientific methods, such as intuition and feeling..."

    Or, did the reporter garble it in translating his words into the story?
  10. May 22, 2005 #9
    Intuition and feeling are very important to the scientific process. These two items are messengers from the information gathering process, that communicate with the information gatherer, by non verbal means. The presence of intuition and feeling indicate that the human computer is still sorting data, and is not ready to provide hard data or judgement; but is still processing important information. Intuition and feeling usually call the Scientist to look more closely at one aspect or another of the problem, in order to access information that is not stored in the brain area of the immediate inquiry. Sometimes this is because the information comes from a different time frame, or information set, or entire other discipline, or from personal history or experience. Intuition and feeling are very important search engines for lack of a better term.
  11. May 22, 2005 #10
    I agree, Dayle Record. There are many stories in the history of science that show intuition can play an important part in discovery and understanding.
  12. May 22, 2005 #11
    He is a man with authority and scientific knowledge, so apparently to many he must be telling the truth. That is manipulation of masses best example.
  13. May 23, 2005 #12

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It seems that one of the following is true in many such cases:

    1). He is lying

    2). He believes what he says albeit a misguided belief. Perhaps some coincidence fooled him into accepting exotic explanations for what he experienced.

    3). He was tricked

    4). Something very strange happened that may or may not be what he believes happened.

    The thing is, IMO, if a person truly believes that he or she has witnessed or experienced the inexplicable, then one may be less guarded, or more gullible if you like, in the future. There is certainly a slippery slope issue here. And no doubt, if he is being completely truthful then he was strongly affected by his experience in space. He states explicitly that the trip back from the moon changed him forever; that he had some sort of life changing "transcendental" experience.
  14. May 23, 2005 #13
    This is what he experienced (it is written in the book 'The Field'):

  15. May 24, 2005 #14
    I agree with this.

    My objection to what he's doing is that he seems to have founded this "Noetic Intitute" upon some very muddy thinking. I wouldn't point him out to anyone as an example of scientific rigor.
  16. May 24, 2005 #15

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Could you be more specific?
  17. May 24, 2005 #16
    "It isn't science, but personal experience, that stimulates you to do good science."

    Muddy thinking.
  18. May 24, 2005 #17
    I really cant see what the fuss is about, if he wants to understand the universe around him via methods outside of science goodluck to him.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook