Telepathy: Thoughts & questions.

With all due respect, it is not the scientific method that determines whether or not a claim is extraordinary. It merely observes what it observes.
I observe a fly landing on my shoulder at exactly 12.30pm. The scientific method can not be employed except by myself regarding this single unrepeatable incident. Whether or not it is extraordinary is a matter of opinion and not science.
I could not have predicted the moment the fly landed,
I am the only witness
I have no evidence other than personal testimony.
I come to a forum like this one and claim a fly landed on my shoulder at 12.30 pm

According to your logic as posted, I would be considered as hallucinating, and the testimony of a lunatic. [being un-extraordinary has no bearing on the use of the scientific method]

Example:
I witness a fork flying through the air with out any apparent means to do so apparently caused by something a patient at a psychiatric facility manifested [psychic-aly]
I am one of two witnesses,
I have no evidence other than personal testimony,
I came to a forum like this one and claim what I witnessed.

Accordingly I and the patient are both considered as lunatics that are sharing the same hallucination.

This is not science, this is scientism.

Essentially what I am saying is that the "scientific method" is incapable of dealing with spontaneous, non-predictable, and unrepeatable events.
Does this mean those events do not happen? Who exactly is hallucinating here?

If I was expecting you to believe me with out you having appropriate reason to do so then YES I would be considered as deluded.
This I can thoroughly agree with as it is the need of the rational mind to determine properly what it believes and what it doesn't. To believe something with out the appropriate evidence is indeed a state of delusion. However this does not imply that the events mentioned did not happen , it merely implies that belief is suspended until evidence of an appropriate caliber is presented.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A good real case situation to exemplify my point.

"About 15 years ago, I was approached by a young lady who talks to me about being raped at the age of 14 by a man who was more than 2 kilometers away at the time. She reports the rape to police, police approach the man and accuse him of an alleged rape. The mans has eyewitnesses to the fact that he did not leave his location during the time the rape was supposed to have occurred. The police are totally puzzled and leave."

There is no evidence of a "psychic rape". None that can stand in court. The girls testimony is treated as one of neurosis or unsound mind by the police. [ to be expected yes?] However upon hearing the details from her I know with out question that the man did indeed rape her psychically and in a way that suggests culpability because I also know the man in question psychically and physically. And he has also admitted to the situation knowing that he could never be convicted. [bragging]

No evidence that the courts could use would convict the man of rape or even allow the notion to be held as valid.
Yet;
We have a hysterically traumatized young woman and a man bragging about what he did.

But this does not mean the rape did not occur. It just means that society is ill-equipped to deal with such incidents.

@Dinosaur, do you believe that I am expecting you to believe me with out providing appropriate evidence?
I could write about literally hundreds of similar incidences that have been experienced by myself and sometimes by others in a shared way, But what would be the point of it if there is no way to evidence it according to the scientific method?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As soon as you put your hand out the dog could have understood your body language.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The issue for me is exactly this:

From what I have personally experienced over many years is that the inter-relationships between people, animals etc is normally a passive non deliberate one. It exists as it does as part of the web of connectivity that underpins normal function. It is often an "ego centric" claim that states that one is "Now" in control of such a reflexive and instinctively passive state.

Suffice to say that the passive state is now subject to volition which can have the capacity of leading to sever dysfunction due to over managing ones own existence/life.

It is typical that the ego will claim control as in deed it is but normally in a passive state and not a proactive state. hence people often mistake control for "co-incidence" of instinctive inter reactions.

The most common symptom of "Paranoid Schizophrenia" [NPD] is the ego centric claim to the power of influence when in fact all it is is the witnessing of your own instinctive and passive connectivity and claiming to control it when you actually can't in away that is of any real value other than causing dysfunction of your passive instinctive psychic self..

This is why when you go to deliberately perform the function for others to witness [ thus validating your egoistic claim] you are not able to do so in a way that can be held as valid according to society.] which is why Randi will never loose his 1 million dollar prize and psychic pheno remains unproven.


just an opinion based on experience... I am not asking you to believe me.. I am merely throwing an opinion onto the table for you to consider ...

 

entirely well founded and socially acceptable IMO...however KX000 has indicated insight into other deeper issues possibly underpinning that recognition by the dog.

 

Explain this one in terms of telepathy. You might have to have a very obedient dog before it would take any notice of a telepathic message. It will be subtle at the best of times.
"UK teenager mauled to death by dogs"
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/8478038/UK-teenager-eaten-alive-by-dogs

That eaten alive headline may be a bit exaggerated. I wonder if we will hear more about the circumstances. The instinct to fight over the pie would have overwhelmed any telepathic thoughts the teenager was giving out.

 

My take on this is as follows:

• 4 dogs, that have probably been subjected to abuse training are hypersensitive to abuse. Therefore potentially hyper aggressive. [ guard dog, attack dogs etc.]
• Abuse training typically involves intense emotional abuse of the dog(s) being trained.
• Dogs witness young girl eating food. [dogs are envious - the envy is heightened by abuse training]
• Girl sees dogs interested in food and thinks "you are not going to get this pie" [taunt by thought]
• Dogs are aware of her attitude and attack to prove her wrong.
• Girl tries to plead with the dogs "internally" and "externally" but this only further enrages the dogs as they feel she is yet another abuser trying to control them.
• Dogs are by this stage totally out of control and enraged, the death of the girl in this case would be inevitable unless someone else managed to tear the dogs off of her. [Which as you probably know would have meant the "hero" getting mauled as well.]
• It was more about the abuse the dogs have been trained with, than the meat pie.

Premise:
Both breeds, whilst have a tendency to be aggressive are generally well behaved if treated correctly. [the breeds are normally highly sensitive to being controlled which make them ideal for "attack" training] However as is most often the case the dogs would have probably been subjected to intense emotional and physical abuse as part of training them. [ this is indicated by the fact that they mauled the girl not for the pie but to kill her for what the dogs probably felt was further abuse]
The telepathic connection meant that when the girl pleaded for the dogs to stop [ internally and no doubt externally ] the dogs would have felt even more attempts to oppress their freedom in a way that would have been similar to what they received under an abusive training routine and it was probably the girls "praying internally for them to stop" that enraged them enough to "loose it" and maul her to death instead of staying focused on the meat pie.

The pressure she was psychic-ally applying for them to stop being interpreted as a controlling influence and not just a plea for them to stop.

This is evident in violent crimes especially against women, where by the typically male aggressor "looses it" and ends up killing his victim due to his uncontrolled rage instead of just hurting her. The aggressor "male" has usually had a life of severe abuse from childhood as well and is hyper sensitive telepathically to any attempts to control him [ even as a plea for mercy ] Any psychic attempt [in ignorance of psychic connectivity] to change his behavior would be met with intense and uncontrollable intolerance and rage therefore escalating a violent act to unintended homicide. [psychopathic behavior - as was the case with the dogs] In fact the more a victim pleads for her life the more likely she will be killed.

Ironically, the sooner the world stops "praying" for peace, the sooner the world will find peace.

any ways that's the gist of my take on it...

The key word here is "obedient" which indicates the oppression of the dogs freewill by use of fear and intimidation, and food extortion.

Obedience is an artificial state and involves only fear and no useful love or affection is possible.

This is why a family pet which may appear to be loving and gentle can suddenly turn and maul a child to death because the dog is intolerant of having it's freewill oppressed and will seek, as humans often do, the death of the "perceived" oppressor to end the oppression. [usually in an uncontrollable venting of frustration and anger - or coup, revolution/war - insurrection - deception - assassination - suicide bombing etc where by the leader being outed is always inevitably exterminated]
Useful telepathic communication is impossible in these circumstances as trust must be involved to facilitate it.
No trust = no useful deliberate telepathic communication.

Example : child molestation typically involves a breach of trust. However the crime against the child has already been committed by a trust deception. [e.g. Priest and altar boy scenario]

 

Now I have had others read the above post and all in all it makes good reading sense to them. [ they don't have to believe a word of it and neither do you.]

If you can not read it properly or you feel it to be nothing but "word salad" it is because you are feeling a non-deliberate psychic pressure from me that you are intolerant of.
Anger and frustration would normally follow and the post will be discounted as "utter" nonsense.

I am quite open to justifiable criticism as well....as I know the post is far from perfect in describing what I think about the case in question and is subject to incredulous reactions.

 

Earlier on you said you said I wasn't capable of been objective. Do you know what objectivity is ?

Objectivity; Judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices (wordweb)

And do you know what subjectivity is ?

Subjectivity; Judgment based on individual personal impressions and feelings and opinions rather than external facts

So it seem I am MOST objective and you are most subjective. Not that I'm comparing one to the other to assert some superiority of one over the other, but you got yo get your words right, and not chop and change their meaning as it suits you.

Moot. Could also be the result of orange juice yet to be understood.

The Blink article suggested NO psychic nature. It was suggesting the opposite, ie, subtle and excellent human perception and figuring.

Uhuh ..

Ah ..

I think the 10% thing is BS. It could also be said we use 100% of our brain. I don't know that for a fact, I just thing that the 10% thing is more a euphemism than anything .. or can you prove it ?

TV is extra sensory perception too.

Finally, please understand this; I am NOT doubting the possibility of psychic phenomenon. But I think your propensity to lable just about everything as 'psychic' is a bit of a stretch.

 

Nah .. they don't need psychic stuff to control your mind and keep you docile. They have normal means to do that quite well.

 

You dog gave you a ball ??? Extraordinary (not) !

 

... see ? This is what I mean. You are ready to jump into woo woo land at the drop of a hat. Dogs are smart creatures for &%#$s sake. Have you ever had one ? I had 9 once. They spend most their time looking forward to contact with their owner, and jump at any opportunity. They are MASTERS at reading your body language - your slightest twitch .. your most minute facial exression .. even your eye movement .. even PREDICTING the pattern of your actions before you perform them.

 

so how does witnessing a fork flying through the air unassisted by conventional means be considered as a subjective observation?
or a significant statistical aberration leading up to a homicide?

 

hey read the post I am not jumping to any conclusions at all.
I am presuming that the poster KX000 is telling what he believes to be the truth.... you know benefit of the doubt and all that and asking him to elucidate a little...

who is jumping to conclusions?

 

and I notice that you still have not come to terms with what that Earthquake trend graph means....
deal with that first and let us see how objective you are....or can be...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

maybe it is just another one of those necessary statistical aberrations you refer to....

 

You are mixing things up again. If read back, you will see that I said that if that (flying fork) actually happened, then it's a psychic event.

Statistical aberrations make up statistics. Without them, it would be flatlining.

 

uhm...what has orange juice got to do with it?
My comment I believe was quite reasonable where as your's about orange juice I would think may not be.

 

It is NOT a psychic event.. It is an event that is referred to as a psychic event. It was a real physical event requiring a fork to fly by unconventional means across the room for 10 meters or so.
It has physics involved that is yet to be understood and not orange juice.
Can't you understand that their is no such thing as woo woo....there is only ignorance of the physics involved.

 

It may or may not be - the pun was that it was as unknown (and possibly as stupid) as your unknown.

Your earthquake thingies ? I'll put it on the list. Just below my desire and need to watch paint dry.

 

Well, here's the thing. You could have discerned that I meant that it was a physical event caused by a psychic event, (if you are to be believed about it of course) and yet you chose the trivial path.

Can't say much more.