Thoughts are external not internal

I have no opinion regarding 'feeling' you are being stared at, I don't have enough experience of it to comment either way. You want to 'test' it fine, thats your area of interest. I am interested in any results you achieve or lack thereof, but otherwise not interested.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This interests me:

http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/air2.html#7.

"AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FOR P SYCHIC FUNCTIONING

Professor Jessica Utts
Division of Statistics
University of California, Davis"


"7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and has been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria. The phenomenon has been replicated in a number of forms across laboratories and cultures. The various experiments in which it has been observed have been different enough that if some subtle methodological problems can explain the results, then there would have to be a different explanation for each type of experiment, yet the impact would have to be similar across experiments and laboratories. If fraud were responsible, similarly, it would require an equivalent amount of fraud on the part of a large number of experimenters or an even larger number of subjects.

What is not so clear is that we have progressed very far in understanding the mechanism for anomalous cognition. Senders do not appear to be necessary at all; feedback of the correct answer may or may not be necessary. Distance in time and space do not seem to be an impediment. Beyond those conclusions, we know very little.

I believe that it would be wasteful of valuable resources to continue to look for proof. No one who has examined all of the data across laboratories, taken as a collective whole, has been able to suggest methodological or statistical problems to explain the ever-increasing and consistent results to date. Resources should be directed to the pertinent questions about how this ability works. I am confident that the questions are no more elusive than any other questions in science dealing with small to medium sized effects, and that if appropriate resources are targeted to appropriate questions, we can have answers within the next decade"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's your area of interest. Mine is evo-devo

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No its not my area of interest. I am not interested in any 'spurious' claim ('scuse the pun) only what I have observed myself.

Your skeptisism would be more understandable if it were not for the fact that YOU have heightened awareness yourself and you know it.

 

Brain waves are a crock of shit? Did you know that the government has brainwave scanners? Are you saying that the US government spends it's money on crackpot pseudo-science that does not work?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_waves
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_MRI
http://www.biocrawler.com/encyclopedia/Mirror_neuron

It's called FMRI, and this is the technology that is declassified and in the general public, who knows what exists out there in the world.

The brain really is a sensor device, very much like a radio. Thought's are not simply generated from the brain, awareness is generated from the brain, but thoughts are beamed into the brain through perception. The brain is just a brain, and without eyes, ears, hands, and perception your brain is very limited. This is why a person can be in a coma or be brain dead. As perception is enhanced, so to are your senses, and each individual has his or her own perception capability.

The government, and neuro-scientists alike, rely on the EEG, and the brainwave devices because they actually work, there are at least several types of waves, and your brain goes into different states while awake or asleep. It's not difficult to understand that some brains have different frequencies than others, and this may be due to the physical design of the brain itself, but it does not change the fact that the brain is a sensor organ like the eye, and without perception, the brain itself would cease to exist.

 

If you want to understand what the brain is, it's like an antennae, very much like what bugs have, a sensory device, allowing you to interpret perception. That's all it is. It's exactly like an antennae on your TV, or Radio, it's a reciever, it recieves information and translates it into something YOU can understand, and thats all. Telepathy is not only possible, but it's highly likely on the physical level. In fact maybe it's not called telepathy, but if you manipulate brainwaves, or if you meet someone on your frequency, it is sorta like telepathy because of the side effects.

Do I know this for a fact? I can't prove it, but it's very likely that the brain works on waves and electricity just like a machine does, unless you want to believe the universe is the brain.

So if the brain is the reciever, if any of you are open minded enough to accept this possibility. Reality is not real, it's our collective perceptions, sometimes recorded on paper, or in books, but it's all just perception, all your science, all that junk, none of it had anything to do with your specific brain, it was the collective brains of all living entities that gathered or sensed the environment and recorded it so you wouldnt have to, very much like a giant hive collecting mind that stores information in books so that each individual mind can have a head start, and each individual brain, improves physically to store more information very much like upgrading the harddrive or the ram on the computer to keep up with all the data on the internet. We accept that the internet is whats real and not the box right? We accept that there are waves of light, waves of sound and yes there are likely brain waves too, as machines can scan your brain so there must be a reason why.

What you see, isnt real!

http://www.pfizer.com/brain/etour7.html

The waves are real.

Science is just the art of combining realities and coming to an objective conclusion on what is real. The only way we can do this is to stop functioning as such strict materialists, otherwise we miss out on all the immaterial sciences, such as quantum mechanics which you can't see but which we can prove is there, or DNA which again you can't see but which is proven to be there(even darwin thought so), or microwaves, which you can't see but you know is there. You cannot see a wave, but we know waves exist, we know there are entire spectrums of invisible waves, and visble waves, sound you cannot see, but you know it's there only becaue you evolved ears to hear it, brain waves you cannot see, but you know it's there because some people can sense them using either technology, or some other type of perception that we may not have figured out. The waves are the true projections of the brain, the immaterial projections, and a liar emits specific waves, just as someone telling the truth, and you have the subconscious waves and the hyperconcious waves, and these waves are used in music and in commercials to aid in the hypnotic effect. Final bit of evidence, what makes people dance?

If you can answer why people dance, without a theory of brain waves, you will have punched a hole in my arguement, but if you cannot explain why it happens that sound waves can do this, then you can admit we have more to study on waves and how they influence people.

Not only this, but the brain also has a magnetic field(Like a thought field), as does everything. The brain generates electricity just as a computer CPU does, and a magnetic field can screw with the brain just like an electro-magnetic pulse can screw with computer systems.

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache...rain magnetic field&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10

I hope this answers the technical questions, if you still want to believe that the is no immaterial universe it's your choice.

 

A complete waste of time, resources and monies.

"Over more than two decades, some $20 million were spent on STARGATE and related activities, with $11 million of that budgeted from the mid-1980's to the early 1990's. More than 40 personnel were employed over that period, including about 23 "remote viewers." At its peak during the mid-1980s the program included as many as seven full-time "viewers"sitting in deep thought and scribbling on pads, and as many analytical and support personnel. Three of the viewers reportedly worked at Fort Meade for the CIA from 1990 through July 1995, and were made available to other government agencies which requested their services.

The program was sustained through the support of Senator Claiborne Pell and Representative Charles Rose, who are known to be devout believers in the powers of Uri Geller and other such fantasies. However, by the early 1990s, investigations showed divisiveness within the group, poor performance, and few accurate results. The program was tossed back to the CIA, with instructions to conduct a review of the program. In 1995 the American Institutes for Research (AIR) evaluated it for the CIA, and their final report contained rather dramatic difference in opinions between statistician Jessica Utts and psychologist Dr. Ray Hyman, Utts raving over its effectiveness, and Hyman cooly pointing out the blatant faults. The final recommendation was to terminate STAR GATE, and it was abandoned. "

http://www.randi.org/jr/112301.html


"Next they'll throw our tax money in a big pile and burn it as a sacrifice to the gods."

 

So, anyone care to comment on this explanation? Sounds reasonable to me.

 

You need to stop being so gullible. Things are not real because they sound reasonable to you. It is total woo woo what he is saying.

False.
The brain is very much like the ganglia of the 'bugs'. Concentrations of neurons processing sensory and generating/coordinating an output.

Your eyes are like the antennae on your TV. The sensory neurons in your skin are like antennae on your TV.

The receiver is actually located inside the TV. It receives the signals gathered by the antennae and generates an output of the tube. Our brain also uses sensory information to generate an output or not, depending on the input.

What is a brainwave? There is no theory supporting the existence of a brainwave. It cannot be detected. It's just something someone said. Not based on anything we know to exist.

The brain does not work on electricity as such. The brain works with neurotransmitters and receptors to make contact between neurons and propagates the signal within the neuron by changes in electropotential of the membranes. Well, if we keep matters really simple. This is not electricity and waves.

None of this statement actually indicates telepathy.

No it is not likely that there are brain waves. The reason why machines can scan your brain is not unknown. It is also not a secret. See for instance MRI.

random link.

Shame there is no proof except your belief.

Actually it is really easy to see DNA. Just add a high concentration salt to your DNA solution and the DNA turns into a jelly-like mass. You can spin it down to a white lump. DNA. Seen without the aid of technology. Polytene chromosomes can be seen with a simple microscope.

So far nothing but ranting.

They dance to have sex. They dance to reach a translike state. They dance to socialize. I can come up with many explanations but i cannot come up with any explanations why brainwaves would make people dance. It's just absurd.

Magnetism is easily detected. Fits within all current scientific theories. And there is nothing difficult about proving the existence of magnetism. Because it is actually real. The existence to magnetism does not prove the existence of 'brainwaves'.

 

Did you try a full-frontal nudity control group?

 

according to wikipedia

"Jessica Utts is a statistics professor at the University of California, Davis.

In 1995, the American Institutes for Research (AIR) appointed a panel consisting primarily of Utts and Dr. Ray Hyman to evaluate a project investigating remote viewing for espionage applications, which was funded by the Central Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency, and carried out initially by Stanford Research Institute and subsequently by SAIC. The two reports opposed each other, with the Utts report saying the evidence was strong and that future research should focus on how to apply remote viewing, gifted subjects scored 2% above chance, while the Hyman report stated that while there were definite results achieved, it was unclear what the mechanism was. Funding for the project was stopped after this report was issued.

"

 

'catching the eye' is done by remote viewing?

Obviously. I include a full frontal nudity control group in every experiment i do.

 

lol

 

From the horse mouth:

"When we examine the basis of Utts's strong claim for the existence of psi, we find that it relies on a handful of experiments that have been shown to have serious weaknesses after undergoing careful scrutiny, and another handful of experiments that have yet to undergo scrutiny or be successfully replicated. What seems clear is that the scientific community is not going to abandon its fundamental ideas about causality, time, and other principles on the basis of a handful of experiments whose findings have yet to be shown to be replicable and lawful.

Utts does assert that the findings from parapsychological experiments can be replicated with well-controlled experiments given adequate resources. But this is a hope or promise. Before we abandon relativity and quantum mechanics in their current formulations, we will require more than a promissory note. We will want, as is the case in other areas of science, solid evidence that these findings can, indeed, be produced under specified conditions.

Again, I do not have time to develop another part of this story. Because even if Utts and her colleagues are correct and we were to find that we could reproduce the findings under specified conditions, this would still be a far cry from concluding that psychic functioning has been demonstrated. This is because the current claim is based entirely upon a negative outcome -- the sole basis for arguing for ESP is that extra-chance results can be obtained that apparently cannot be explained by normal means. But an infinite variety of normal possibilities exist and it is not clear than one can control for all of them in a single experiment. You need a positive theory to guide you as to what needs to be controlled, and what can be ignored. Parapsychologists have not come close to this as yet."

http://www.csicop.org/si/9603/claims.html

 

thank you for doing my homework

 

Should we make a thread now with the title:

Should we take anything ToR says seriously?

 

lol, you can do. Do I mind if you don't take me seriously?

You do warlock

 

So you believe in magnetism, would you like to call the brain a giant magnet? What is your theory?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain

 

Thats all? one URL?