Thoughts are external not internal

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Theoryofrelativity, Sep 22, 2006.

  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Sure all granted.

    There are people studying mind-body connections, the psychological effects of placebos are well documented, neuropsychobiology is a small little known field and psychosomatic illnesses are very real.

    The mind is powerful and as spurious said designed to process your version of reality. It's just interesting to think of possibilities. No one is going ga-ga here (except maybe you

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    Refusing to discuss something as a theory is not very scientific either.

    One never knows what may come of it.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    What? Every "seriously gifted" PSI person has faild to demonstrate a damned thing (except their own lies and/or delusions) under rigorously controlled circumstances. If radio waves never "transmitted" while a team of scientists were watching the alleged "transmitter", we'd all have a bit of a problem with it, wouldn't we?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    ToR is going pretty ga-ga. And we are discussing it. But it's also far from scientific to let speculation run wild and let the nutjobs who, for some reason have convinced themselves that this stuff exists, go unchecked.

    Did I mention that I really hate uncritical thinking? Bah. Not to mention that this whole arena is FULL of liars and charlatans.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    She's not trained as a scientist.

    You have to make allowances for that, since she's really interested in the questions.

    And don't be such a damn elitist.

    If you have arguments, present them as a scientist; she will appreciate that and we will all learn something.

    Personal ad homs should be restricted to those who come here only to amuse themselves at the expense of others.

    It's fun to have someone who thinks differently.

    Think of it as a challenge.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    I have absolutely no problem with that. But she's been presented with certain facts, observations, and analyses and apparently refuses to accept them.

    Who, me? That's just you slapping me for yelling at ToR.

    I thought we already did that throughout the course of this thread.

    Yes, O highly restrained and oh-so-professional one.

    Sure it is.

    Are you implying that ToR is being stubborn and willful in the face of an overwhelming lack of convincing evidence for PSI abilities of any kind? Shame on you.
     
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I'm glad you agree with me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. glaucon tending tangentially Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502

    LOL

    Thanks superluminal,

    finally something in this thread worthwhile...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Why? Just because he notes the rare gems in a sea of mindless static? You're just jealous.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    TOO LATE SAMMY! Your ad hom is now burned into sciforums history! See post above^^^
     
  14. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Huh? What?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    You can run. You can hide. But....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. imaplanck. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,237
    You of course could have made it up.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Look what Sam said about me then deleted:


     
  17. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Of course I didn't make it up, you poopy head!
     
  18. imaplanck. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,237

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    OK i believe you sup.
     
  19. superluminal I am MalcomR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    LOL!!! Whad a sh... I mean, poopy head!
     
  20. imaplanck. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,237
  21. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,595
    Superluminous

    you cant argue about this till you read jessica Utts work, she has studied this for yrs, she is credible and her conclusion is:

    'it occurs, they don't know how, let's stop wasting money trying to show it works and now spend money finding out how'

    No good you commenting on disreputable studies when you completely disregard the one credible link I provided.

    Read the link, read J Utts CV and her list of achievements and I defy you to tell me she is going 'ga ga.'

    Super, I respect skeptics, it is 100% healthy, I am skeptical myself of things not within my realm of experience. BUT I remain open minded and do not dismiss things I simply have no clue about and no experience of. There are others here healthily skeptical but open minded. THAT is the natural order of things. CLOSED minds would not have advanced us very far would they? The possibility exists in a smaller part that the word implies, but possible it is.

    No more form you until you check out J utts and her work and that goes for youraplank and Q to.
     
  22. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    I repeated the 'catch someone's eye' experiment today.

    0% success when looking at backs of heads.
    100% when looking from semi-frontal angle.
     
  23. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,595
    re 100% result, what distance were you away from them and were there people in front of you etc that may help obscure their vision, or were you clearly in their range of vision?
     

Share This Page