XPost: sci.psychology.psychotherapy, alt.consciousness, talk.origins   
   From: earle.jones@comcast.net   
      
   In article <4134BA9F.15BE@aol.com>, stevefct  wrote:   
      
   > sweetnes_n_light@yahoo.com wrote:   
   > >   
   > > >But the need for testing with positive bonding between   
   > > >people has yet to be done. Randi? Is he the one who   
   > > >changes the standards when h is ready to lose his money?   
   > > >I don't know much about him.   
   > >   
   > > If you don't know much about him, why are you slandering him? I am   
   > > unaware of any case where he "changed his standards", although there   
   > > are many people on the internet who keep repeating it.   
   > >   
   > > The deal is very simple. You show some supernatural ability, you get a   
   > > million bucks. It is a very good deal for Randi, too - a piece of   
   > > evidence of any paranormal phenomenon would be the news of the   
   > > century, and it is well worth a million bucks just to be involved in   
   > > the original experiment that showed it to the world. He *wants* to   
   > > give the money away, the opportunity to do so is worth far more then   
   > > the cash.   
   > >   
   > > Alas, nobody so far has demonstrated him/herself capable of   
   > > demonstrating *any* paranormal phenomenon. It mirrors the "science" of   
   > > parapsychology: after a century of research, they have no results.   
   > >   
   > > Do correct me if I am wrong about anything here.   
   > >   
   > > >I'm more interested in the testing they conducted   
   > > >at Princeton.   
   > >   
   > > ? Details? The only study of ESP at Princeton I am aware of was the   
   > > one that ended with complete embarassment when the initial "ESP   
   > > successes" turned out to be cheap magical tricks and sleight-of-hand.   
   > >   
   > > >And how some former CIA agents claim they were   
   > > >trained to remote view.   
   > >   
   > > Yes, they were trained. But the training failed, and none of them was   
   > > ever able to "remote view" anything. Which, again, is the reason the   
   > > whole thing was discontinued (after first wasting $20M). CIA   
   > > eventually admitted that "no useful information" was ever produced by   
   > > the project.   
   > >   
   > > Some of the people involved went on to tell tall stories on the   
   > > internet, occasionally making absurdly wrong "predictions" and   
   > > "viewings" to prove their abilities.   
   > >   
   > > Do you have a different story? Any evidence for remote viewing?   
   > >   
   > > >But cognitive science, the nature of information,   
   > > >how SPACE might communicate information, the nature   
   > > >of awareness, the nature of perception, oh   
   > > >pleaseeeeeeeeee keep the man home.   
   > >   
   > > Why?   
   > >   
   > > As you say, he can spot hustlers. Scientists can be taken in by   
   > > con-men as easily as anyone else. So bring Randy to look for   
   > > tricksters, and bring scientists to check for scientific validity. If   
   > > someone has a genuine ability, Randi's presence won't affect it at   
   > > all.   
   > >   
   > > Also, your idea of cognitive science seems to be somewhat peculiar.   
   > > There are some things known (neuroscience is making huge advances),   
   > > but there is a lot more that is not known. However, at this point and   
   > > as far as I am aware of, there is zero evidence for "space   
   > > communcating information", or any type of extrasensory perception   
   > > (which seems to be what you're talking about here). Everyone who ever   
   > > claimed to have such an ability either refuses to be take even the   
   > > simplest tests, or takes the tests and fails them miserably.   
   > >   
   > > Again, if you have *any* evidence of *any* extrasensory or paranormal   
   > > ability, please do tell. I am most interested in hearing it.   
   > >   
   > > M.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > Boy, when you're wrong you're wrong.   
   >   
   >   
   > One of the biggest problems in physics is the non-local problem. Its   
   > finally been proved, what Einstein called 'spooky action at a distance'   
   > that small particles  do exchange infromation faster than the speed of   
   > light. The upper limit to how fast information should be able to be   
   > exchanged in the physical universe. They know somehow Space is   
   > responsible, but they can't get to the answer.   
   >   
   > I see Space as a set of relationships, like Eisntein did. But I go   
   > further. I see it as a border between the physical, but non-corporeal,   
   > and the metapphysical. Such as ideas, relationships, patterns, spirit,   
   > even music if you like.   
   >   
   > Also, this is crap because its wrong. 'Everyone who ever claimed to have   
   > such an ability either refuses to be take even the simplest tests, or   
   > takes the tests and fails them miserably.'   
   >   
   >   
   > Princeton did a good job in finding some proof for it. And the miltary   
   > actually learned how to use remote viewing for spy missions. Before you   
   > jump into your simple minded conclusions, try researching the topic a   
   > bit better. You sound very high school. Very naive. I was just like you   
   > once. My NDE started me on a road to change, and the questioning of so   
   > called experts. The more I learned, thought, the more I realized what   
   > some knew, and how far others would go to hide the truth. There is a lot   
   > of hidden politics involved in the field.   
   >   
   > When I was naive, my thinking was simple. First I doubted, smug in my   
   > college science training. Smug in what I thought I knew. And the world   
   > of science in my mind was mostly divorced from political reality. Even   
   > if ESP could be proven to be true then wow...what does it mean about the   
   > nature of information, and the way our minds gather information? Can   
   > information travel back in time? If so, then is the future set? Or   
   > what.....blah blah blah. Simple minded because the political   
   > implications were sort of there in my mind, but hazy, didn't focus on   
   > what others would worry about.   
   >   
   > Like, if the public learns to harness this ability how will they keep   
   > military secrets? Attack plans? Or real public policies towards certain   
   > groups behind closed doors, not the fake face they put on it to win   
   > votes. What if the public catches on to the fact both parties in America   
   > really are controlled from a distance by the same rich groups? Or that   
   > there are hidden policies to change the types of people who occupy   
   > America over the next 200 hundred years. Because those in power behind   
   > closed doors actually do believe in average differences between racial   
   > groups. Or lets get wilder. Some know the big secret. God is actually a   
   > hidden composite mind in Mankind of all the left brains in Mankind. His   
   > rival, what we normally called Satan, is another group mind of right   
   > brains.   
   > As your brain cells add their activities up to one overall   
   > consciousness, YOU. They also add up to something greater then   
   > ourselves, but still, nevertheless, exist within Mankind. And they kept   
   > themselves and their war to control mankind's destiny hidden from people   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)