How would you go about testing?

[HeyJupiter]

This is just a bit of curiosity and may be a bit rambling, so I apologise in advance.

I'm fascinated by the idea of testing Psychic abilities and things such as Crystals and Reiki Therapy... But I'm curious as to how you would go about doing such a thing - I know the JREF have set up several tests for various people and I've heard quite a few people say that they need to "double-blind" experiments.

I can see how you could test someone claiming to be a Medium, for instance, as they should be able to give you very specific information about the dead person that they are conversing with (i.e. something that only that person would know) and a Dowser would have very definite Yes or No answers... But how would you test, say, a Tarot Reader or a Psychic? Is it possible?

[Mojo]

But how would you test, say, a Tarot Reader or a Psychic? Is it possible?
How you would test them would depend on exactly what they claimed to be able to do, and any teat would have to be designed around their particular claim. But as long as they claim to do something, it should be possible to design a test for it.

For example, recent preliminary tests for the JREF challenge have involved people who claimed that they could tell the sex of someone from their diary (without actually opening the diary and reading the contents), and someone who claimed that they could identify someone's location on an A-Z streetmap.

[Admin]

Yes, it really comes down to what it is such people actually claim and then a test is designed to to see if they can do it under controlled conditions.

To design a test we'd normally need something like:

What it is they claim to be able to do;
Under which conditions they claim they can do it;
What accuracy do they claim to achieve.Testing things like astrology can be difficult as individual readings don't lend themselves to statistical scoring as they tend to be interpreted.

The way to do it is to get, say, a dozen people's birthdays and other information required by the astrologer, get the astrologer to create a chart for each individual, and then get the individuals to choose the chart which they think most closely matches themselves.

Of course the astrologers would be blind as to who the individuals are and the individuals will be choosing their chart from the entire batch.

If astrology works then people should be picking out their own charts.

That's one way to turn these interpretive tests into statistically measurable ones.

It depends what they're claiming but there's usually a way to create a test.

[HeyJupiter]

If astrology works then people should be picking out their own charts.

Thanks for that, Mojo & John... I saw an episode of Jane Goldman Investigates (not the most scientific of programmes, I'll grant you!) where they did a similar test to the one John describes for Astrology.

They did a series of Rune readings for a group of 15 people, based on their own personal questions and then just put the answers on pieces of paper and asked them to choose the one they thought was theirs... I can't remember the exact figure but it equated to the same that chance would produce! Very few of them chose the right one for their reading.

I would really like to have a go at testing a friend of mine, if she is willing, but I was curious as to how I would go about it. The explanations from both of you were very helpful - thanks! :smiley:

[Zaira]

John,

First let me assure you that this is not a wind-up.

I was just trying to imagine how you could test what happens to me and this is what I came up with.

You would have to drive into a car park with me a few hundred time to see how many time I find a parking space while other drivers appear to be going around in circles looking for one.

I'm not sure how you would smell what I smell. For example, I smell roses when there are no roses around just before I come up with the answer to a problem as if 'someone' helped me out, the smell of nappies just before someone arrives with the news that they are pregnant etc.

I don't know how you would test how other people's conversations help me out. For example, I was waiting for a friend to join me for dinner and he was late, I was sitting in the restaurant bar on my own, feeling conspicuous and becoming quite agitated when I heard someone at the bar next to me say, "He'll be here. He just got caught up with some Christmas shopping." It wasn't the first time it had happened, and it helped me to relax because I knew he was coming, I wasn't getting stood up. Sure enough he turned up and that was the reason he gave me. Not sure how we could test that one either.

Going to take a short cut and post some stories I have already posted on the psychic site -

When we ‘ask’ for something, I've experienced and felt that it doesn't matter where it comes from, sometimes we just get it!

It, whatever 'It' is, also enjoys a joke.

Short stories -

1) The very short version. Hubby in army, boys in boarding school, army pays half the school fees, money goes from paymaster to school direct, had a short cash month and 'asked' for some money, just happened to check the bank and got the surprise of my life, loads of money, went to check it out and discovered that the school fees had been sent to the bank instead of straight to the school! Had to be redirected of course, so I was still skint.

2) The very short version. Sitting in the garden with the kids on lovely sunny day, chatting about where we wanted to go on holiday, one of them comes up with some exotic place and I said we would need to win the pools (the football pools) to afford that one, then the door went and while the kids argued about who should get it, as usual I went and answered the door, a delivery guy held out a box and asked me to take it in for my neighbour, I took it and closed the door, there was a picture on the box, it was the picture of a large paddling pool! I thought, "s**t! Need to be more precise next time!"

3) The very short version. Kids were on summer holidays from school, I fixed Sunday lunch but had forgotten to get gravy granules, one son kept on about not having any gravy, I got annoyed and told him if I could get him some gravy I would but I couldn't so shut up and eat your lunch, next day while I was clearing up, the letter box went, I went to check for mail, what came through the letter box was a free sample of gravy granules! I walked up to my son and held it out to him and said, "There's your gravy." The kids began to whistle the Twilight Zone tune.

4) The very short version. Grandkids visiting with playstations, I had two TVs, one in sitting room and one in the bedroom, I was watching a movie, kids were arguing about whose playstation should be plugged into the other TV, Trying to distract then I said, "What we need is another TV." Then the door went, My neighbour asked if I could use a spare TV, said he was just going to dump it.

I don't know what this is. Some would say it is coincidence but after so many years coincidence just doesn't cut it anymore. :smiley:

[Melanie]

Some lovely stories there - looks like the Cosmic Joker really is your friend!

[Zaira]

Melanie,

I did the Visualisation thing some time ago. But going with the way things turned out in my 'short story' post above, I'm not very good at it. Have to keep reminding myself to -

Be More Precise! Be More Precise!

Anyway, the kids used to get a good laugh out of it.

Not sure what the connection is though with the other stuff that happens.

And I'm rather a serious person so wonder too where the humour comes from.

Actually with all this going on from time to time, I hope the ‘Cosmic Joker’ stays my friend. I would truly freak out otherwise. :smiley:

[Araneus]

I was just trying to imagine how you could test what happens to me and this is what I came up with.

Obviously anecdotes from the past cannot be tested. What probably could be tested is the statistical frequency with which you experience these events, compared to the general population. Since nothing in your list appears to me to be particularly unusual or out-of-the-ordinary, you might be surprised to find that a large number of people report very similar "amazing coincidences" thoughout their lives.

[Zaira]

Araneus,

Thanks for that. I don't seriously expect to be tested. I was just making light. I'm sure you’re right about coincidence but there's no getting away from the fact that it feels like something else..... A combination of positive thinking and visualisation, perhaps. I've work with both in order to over come abusive childhood fallout. I don't think that's the whole answer but never mind. I'm older and wiser and getting along just fine these days. ;)

[Araneus]

I'm sure you’re right about coincidence but there's no getting away from the fact that it feels like something else..... A combination of positive thinking and visualisation, perhaps.

Yes, such things can certainly feel very odd at the time. I remember at college when I used to play the chapel organ for a while, I once had a dream that all of the stops (the knobs you pull out to make different sets of pipes play) had been cut off. The next day when I went to practice, I found a note listing a whole load of stops which weren't working.

If I had been "psychically inclined" I might well have interpreted it as a premonition, but in reality most dreams I have about equipment involves it being broken or malfunctioning in some way, so in fact there was nothing unexpected at all (it was also the only "coincidence dream" that I can remember in my life, making it fall well within the bounds of ordinary probability).

[Zaira]

Araneus,

I'm glad you experienced even one dream like that because it means you have some idea of what I'm talking about. But dreams are only one aspect of it. When younger I thought I may be 'psychically inclined' but I couldn't accept that explanation for some reason. So I went in search of answers and began to read everything I could get my hands on. There is something going on but I don't believe it to be mystical or paranormal, nor do I believe it to be a brain abnormality. My best theory so far is that something may have been triggered in the brain accidently or otherwise. :smiley:

[Admin]

Zaira,

Have you heard of Apophenia?

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

http://skepdic.com/apophenia.html

It's where people have a propensity to see meaning in coincidence or random events.

It could explain why you see meaning in events that others would see as coincidental.

Worth a look anyway.

[Zaira]

Thanks, John. I'll go have a look.
But I warn you if I disagree - I'll Be Back!! :cheesy:

I'll be back anyway to let you know what I think. :smiley:

[Zaira]

John,

I'm still checking it out but I'm having a eureka moment. I have had many of them when I thought I had answers before, so I'm not getting too excited. But I am going to check it out.

I find this hugely reassuring.

"Conrad originally described this phenomenon in relation to the distortion of reality present in psychosis, but it has become more widely used to describe this tendency in healthy individuals without necessarily implying the presence of neurological or mental illness."

Thanks for that. I'm off to check it out some more. :smiley:

[Zaira]

In statistics, apophenia is called a Type I error, seeing patterns where none, in fact, exist. It is highly probable that the apparent significance of many unusual experiences and phenomena are due to apophenia, e.g., ghosts and hauntings, EVP, numerology, the Bible code, anomalous cognition, ganzfeld "hits", most forms of divination, the prophecies of Nostradamus, remote viewing, and a host of other paranormal and supernatural experiences and phenomena.


Peter Brugger of the Department of Neurology, University Hospital, Zurich, gives examples of apophenia from August Strindberg's Occult Diary, the playwright's own account of his psychotic break:

He saw "two insignia of witches, the goat's horn and the besom" in a rock and wondered "what demon it was who had put [them] ... just there and in my way on this particular morning." A building then looked like an oven and he thought of Dante's Inferno. He sees sticks on the ground and sees them as forming Greek letters which he interprets to be the abbreviation of a man's name and feels he now knows that this man is the one who is persecuting him. He sees sticks on the bottom of a chest and is sure they form a pentagram. He sees tiny hands in prayer when he looks at a walnut under a microscope and it "filled me with horror." His crumpled pillow looks "like a marble head in the style of Michaelangelo." Strindberg comments that "these occurrences could not be regarded as accidental, for on some days the pillow presented the appearance of horrible monsters, of gothic gargoyles, of dragons, and one night ... I was greeted by the Evil One himself...."


I don't experience anything like this. All my 'patterns' for want of a better word are simple every day experiences which seem to be slightly enhanced and seem to connect to something that happened or was said before hand. Like wanting some gravy when I had none only to have a free sample come through the letter box the next day. Above they are talking about things he imagined seeing in ordinary objects like his pillow. I don't see crazy stuff in pillows and patterns of things. I 'get' and 'see' things that are useful, things I might have been talking about before hand. Example; shopping on Friday I saw a young girl who looked like my niece, I was about to say hello when i realised it wasn't her. Then I walked into a store and my niece was there. I don't think I'm talking about 'patterns' in objects, like he is above. I think I'm referring more to patterns of events.

Still reading. I'll be back. ;)

[HeyJupiter]

You would have to drive into a car park with me a few hundred time to see how many time I find a parking space while other drivers appear to be going around in circles looking for one.

Haha! This happens to me all the time... ;D If you're doing that as a test, you would probably need several different car parks? The other stories you shared are remarkably similar to what happens in my everyday life. I'm not sure how to explain it, but it sure is fascinating!

[Zaira]

HeyJupiter,

Oh! You sweet person. Welcome to the forum. It's cool!
Don't jump to conclusions about the people around here. I have found them very helpful. I hope you stick around and share some of your experiences. :smiley:

[Admin]

I don't experience anything like this. All my 'patterns' for want of a better word are simple every day experiences which seem to be slightly enhanced and seem to connect to something that happened or was said before hand.

Well you don't have to be seeing goat heads in your custard!

It's about seeing patterns that aren't there. That's what you seem to be describing with many of your examples.

You keep saying you're here to ask questions and learn things but as far as I can tell you never take anything on board.

[Zaira]

Oh, John! How wrong you are. You're definitely not psychic then? I came here with my head ready to explode with ideas and theories got from books and the net. I came here originally from the David Icke forum. Of course I've taken stuff on board. I have put aside many of my wilder ideas. I have check out all the links people have left, and I've made many notes. I checked out the link you gave me and then I commented on it with some humour. I'm truly sorry you feel that way.

[MRT]

I don't think apophenia is a very useful word and I never use it (apart from just then:smiley:). It is an over-general term covering a host of phenomena, many with very different explanations.

The problem with using such general terms is that they tend to stop us looking for specific explanations. For instance, I think there are completely different causes for hearing 'voices' in speech-like sounds and seeing a 'face' in a random pattern of shapes. By using a very general term we are labelling such phenomena but not specifically explaining them.

[Melanie]

[quote=John Jackson;18074]
It's about seeing patterns that aren't there. That's what you seem to be describing with many of your examples.
quote]


John - have you never had this experience yourself? When you do, it's great fun and should be savoured. That's why Zaira's post made me smile - it's happened to me many times. I don't like it when people dismiss it as 'seeing patterns that aren't there' - because the patterns are there, on a personal level. Synchronicity, meaningful coincidence, is something which, when experienced, is just that - a coincidence or string of coincidences, which are meaningful to the experiencer. I really enjoy it when it starts to play out in my life - often this seems to occur around spring. Maybe next spring I'll start a thread and list them as they happen.

Once one starts to spot coincidences in everyday life, one starts to see them everywhere. It's great fun. I agree that I do start to look for them - once I spot one, they become plentiful.

There's no harm in this particular kind of magical thinking - as long as one doesn't start to think such coincidences are 'messages from the spirit world'. That way lies madness.


I once met a very nice American man. His first comment to me that he had spent a lovely fortnight in my part of the world, and named the town. This struck me as coincidental, because I had recently been heavily dumped by someone and our last weekend away (a few weeks before) had been in this very town. He then added the name of the precise area of the town where he had stayed. It was the precise area where my ex and myself had stayed. Noting that I was a bookseller and avid reader, he then added that his email address was the name and birthdate of his favourite poet. I happened to be reading a biography of that very poet at that time. My email address is also the name of my favourite poet.

This was just the beginning of a long chain of coincidences which occurred every time this man and I interacted. We spent a day in London. A few weeks later we spent a day at the Johnson Space centre in Houston. (Both places become romantically important to us.) That evening we were in a bar where the TV showed a news piece about the Space Centre. He commented on that to me. A moment later, that piece ended and was directly followed by an image of London featuring the art gallery where we'd had lunch.

Romantically, this was very meaningful to both of us.


When I was looking for a house to buy 7 years ago, I viewed many. Finally I walked into one which 'felt' right. Despite the current owner's appalling decor (truly horrible), it just felt like it was My house - particularly the attic room, which was large and light and airy. It was sight of that room which sold the house to me. A couple of weeks after I moved in the previous owner called to collect some mail. She asked if I was settling in and I mentioned the several hundred books I had finally managed to get onto shelves, freeing up space to sort everything else out. I used to be a bookseller, I told her. "What a coincidence," she said. "The woman I bought the house from was the Manager at Waterstones! When she lived here, that top room was absolutely full of books."


I don't agree that we should place too much importance on such coincidences - it could be that following these coincidences as 'signs' might lead one down the wrong life-path entirely. But to dismiss them as meaningless is sad, I think. They're fun - enjoy them.

[Admin]

I don't think apophenia is a very useful word and I never use it (apart from just then:smiley:). It is an over-general term covering a host of phenomena, many with very different explanations.

Well yes, it's a bit like referring to people claiming to be mediums/spoon benders/clairvoyants etc. all as 'psychics'.

I just think it's a useful shortcut to explain how people apply meaning to coincidence etc.

[Melanie]

Recently I was organising some marketing for a book about Jane Austen. I wandered out into the warehouse to track down my colleague, who was doing a totally unrelated task. I found him, and suggested that we mailshot all bookshops in the counties associated with Jane. He listened, then looked at the book he was holding... we have around 30.000 different titles in our warehouse, and the one in his hand at that moment was 'Jane Austen Country'.

Wooo!

(The book came in useful for research...)

[Admin]

It's about seeing patterns that aren't there. That's what you seem to be describing with many of your examples.



John - have you never had this experience yourself? When you do, it's great fun and should be savoured. That's why Zaira's post made me smile - it's happened to me many times. I don't like it when people dismiss it as 'seeing patterns that aren't there' - because the patterns are there, on a personal level.

Actually, I should have said that it's about applying meaning to what is in essence, random coincidence.

Yes, things like that happen to me but I don't attach any meaning to it.

If I'd ran out of shampoo and a free sample popped through my letterbox the next morning I'd just think of it as being a handy coincidence. That's because I would see that the free sample would have arrived whether I'd ran out of shampoo or not - it wasn't some cosmic intervention reacting to my lack of shampoo!

Guess I'm just cursed with a logical brain! ;D

[Melanie]

Guess I'm just cursed with a logical brain! ;D

Poor you! :smiley:

[MRT]

I just think it's a useful shortcut to explain how people apply meaning to coincidence etc.

That's really my point, it isn't an explanation so much as a label. It is effectively a statement: 'people apply meaning to coincidence'. However, this says nothing about how it occurs.

[Dr B]

....cough......ahem.....

Just found this discussion. oddly, I have been thinking about this over the last few months and generally concur with most of what is said - but would like to add one or two extra points.

Firslty, researchers seem confused over whether certain people see patterns where the rest of us do not, or whether we all see them but some people place more meaning on them than others. These are not the same explanations.

My hunch is the latter is more likely to be the best framework.

As a perceptual scientist I never use the term 'apophrenia'. Originally terms like pattern-matching and grouping were used - and perceptual grouping (i.e, gestalt grouping etc) may give use an insight here.

However, apophenia has been used extensively in paranormal circles so it makes sense to use the term when referring people to that debate.

The problem with the arguments as I see them are as follows. We as humans are hard-wired to see such patterns. So if we are all hard-wired - why do some seem to see them more than others? Are we saying that some are more hard-wired than others (which I think goes against the notion of hard-wired)? No. I think, as hinted at above, we may all see the patterns under most circumstances, but people differ in terms of their emotional response to them.

This means that far from being a low-level perceptual issue, it might well be the case that it is a far higher level cognitive bias.

I do not know for sure, but the confusion I outline above is in the literature (they seem confused over what they are actually arguing for). Maybe both factors are important - but if they are we need to know alot more about how they interact.

Maurice seems to be hinting at the analysis I used on the ASSAP forum where i fostered a dicussion over the difference between explanation and description. Obviously, I agree...eerrrr....with myself....:cheesy:

[Melanie]

I would agree whole-heartedly with the 'emotional response' angle. At times of emotional stress in my life, coincidences crop up. I.E. at times when I (if I were religious) would be looking for a signpost from god, the cosmic joker, the other side or whoever, telling me what the heck I should do now. Lo! Signs appear.

My emotional make-up also is one which likes the odd bit of magical thinking in my life. Hence my reaction when I spot a coincidence, of looking for more.

[Melanie]

Woo alert! Was just reading this post...


http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: New acupuncture evidence
I think one of the problems with acupuncture is that there are actually two different treatments referred to as "acupuncture": there is the traditional Chinese stuff based on Chi and energy lines, which is nonsense, but there also the physiotherapists' version based on stimulating soft tissue with needles to alleviate muscle pain, which as far as I am aware is an effective medical technique unrelated to oriental woo.

I have not had either form of acupuncture, but I have had "acupressure" from a physiotherapist to combat muscle pain, which is based on the same idea (restricting the blood flow causes the tight muscles to relax, IIRC).


and Lo! On radio 2, an acupuncturist was saying exactly the same thing!

:smiley:

[Zaira]

Melanie,

"I really enjoy it when it starts to play out in my life - often this seems to occur around spring. Maybe next spring I'll start a thread and list them as they happen."

I for one will be looking forward to that. :smiley:

[Admin]

Woo alert! Was just reading this post...


http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: New acupuncture evidence
I think one of the problems with acupuncture is that there are actually two different treatments referred to as "acupuncture": there is the traditional Chinese stuff based on Chi and energy lines, which is nonsense, but there also the physiotherapists' version based on stimulating soft tissue with needles to alleviate muscle pain, which as far as I am aware is an effective medical technique unrelated to oriental woo.

I have not had either form of acupuncture, but I have had "acupressure" from a physiotherapist to combat muscle pain, which is based on the same idea (restricting the blood flow causes the tight muscles to relax, IIRC).


and Lo! On radio 2, an acupuncturist was saying exactly the same thing!

:smiley:

;D

Yes but.....

It's a topical news story (the media love positive alt. med. stories) as the finding has just been announced.

Is it spooky, coincidence, or actually highly likely that this story is going to appear in several media today?

Mystery solved! :cheesy:

For me anyway!! ;D

[Melanie]

spoilsport :tongue:

[Zaira]

He is isn't he. ;)

Melanie,

"I don't agree that we should place too much importance on such coincidences - it could be that following these coincidences as 'signs' might lead one down the wrong life-path entirely. But to dismiss them as meaningless is sad, I think. They're fun - enjoy them."

Truth be known, while being really curious about it all, I read some books written by people experiencing what I was experiencing and they did make more of it, going as far as to say that they didn't believe in coincidences. I, hungry for answers, believed these explanation and decided that I didn't believe in coincidences either and that it had to be something more.

Thankfully, I let go of the more serious assumptions when my children began to be aware of these little happenings. I didn't want them thinking their mother was a crazy lady. I began making light of it, using humour. I'm glad I did or who knows what path I might have gone down.

Your explanation made so much sense to me that I take back - seriously - saying that I don't believe in coincidences.

;)

[Melanie]

I have known people of a spiritual persuasion who believe such coincidences are truly signs from ‘that lot upstairs’ as one lady described them. The trouble with that outlook was that this lady hardly did anything if she didn’t first receive a confirmatory ‘sign’. She believed she was living a pure life, directed by spirit, protected by spirit, cared for by spirit. She was a lovely, caring, kind lady, but she failed to see her life the way her non-spiritual friends did – it was, in fact, a disorganised mess, because she had stopped taking any responsibility for it. Not healthy.

[Zaira]

Dr B

"Firslty, researchers seem confused over whether certain people see patterns where the rest of us do not, or whether we all see them but some people place more meaning on them than others. These are not the same explanations."

My kids saw them and found them funny, like it was a joke. I guess I put more meaning into it than they did. They just stood around whistling the Twilight Zone tune.

"We as humans are hard-wired to see such patterns. So if we are all hard-wired - why do some seem to see them more than others? Are we saying that some are more hard-wired than others (which I think goes against the notion of hard-wired)? No. I think, as hinted at above, we may all see the patterns under most circumstances, but people differ in terms of their emotional response to them."

I go along with that. And I would like to add something that may or may not be relevant. I was an abused child. My father had an awful temper and the least little thing could set him off. I believe I developed some kind of 'extra awareness' while looking out for and trying to be aware of anything that might set him off so that I could get to hell out of there before all hell let lose. Could that have made me more aware of 'patterns of events'?

[Zaira]

Melanie,

"I have known people of a spiritual persuasion who believe such coincidences are truly signs from ‘that lot upstairs’ as one lady described them. The trouble with that outlook was that this lady hardly did anything if she didn’t first receive a confirmatory ‘sign’. She believed she was living a pure life, directed by spirit, protected by spirit, cared for by spirit. She was a lovely, caring, kind lady, but she failed to see her life the way her non-spiritual friends did – it was, in fact, a disorganised mess, because she had stopped taking any responsibility for it. Not healthy."

I am very fortunate in that respect. I am the oldest of five born and brought up in Glasgow. I married and moved south because my guy joined the army. Over the next few years all my siblings joined me down south. I was married twenty years and brought up three children. Divorced now but very good friends. Through it all; dealing with crappy childhood fallout, my father's suicide, and my other stuff - my strange and wonderful beliefs - my guy stood by me and let me heal and find my own way. I can honestly say that I am here today because of that man. He took care of me until I could take care of myself, and I love him for his love and for his patience. Today, my siblings and I all live within an hours drive from each other, we all have children and our children have children. My doorbell and my phone never seems to stop ringing. I got here not because of my beliefs but in spite of them. There were times in the past where they almost drove me over the edge. Today, I'm just curious about any new information on this stuff that I have been dealing with for over fifty years. End of story.

Your posts have been amazingly helpful, Melanie. ;)

[Melanie]

Your posts have been amazingly helpful, Melanie. ;)

Thank you!

[Araneus]

And I would like to add something that may or may not be relevant. I was an abused child. My father had an awful temper and the least little thing could set him off. I believe I developed some kind of 'extra awareness' while looking out for and trying to be aware of anything that might set him off so that I could get to hell out of there before all hell let lose. Could that have made me more aware of 'patterns of events'?

Yes. Abused children are well-known for being highly tuned to nuances of emotion from other people that would in the past have indicated impending abusive behaviour from others.

I'm not sure if it would affect the tendency to see patterns in completely unrelated areas, but it would certainly make you sensitive to patterns in human behaviour and expression.

[Tin Lizzie]

Yes. Abused children are well-known for being highly tuned to nuances of emotion from other people that would in the past have indicated impending abusive behaviour from others.

I'm not sure if it would affect the tendency to see patterns in completely unrelated areas, but it would certainly make you sensitive to patterns in human behaviour and expression.

Where are your back-up links or other evidence, Araneus?

[Araneus]

Where are your back-up links or other evidence, Araneus?

I think I first came across it in the book Blink by Malcolm Gladwell. A quick Google reveals a couple of relevant links.

http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.cfm?DocID=131


Based on further research, Pollak suspects that these children's brains actually become more responsive to tiny glimmers of hostility.http://www.unisci.com/stories/20022/0618025.htm

Pollak's latest finding confirms the results of one of the psychologist's earlier studies, which found that children who were abused exhibited more brain electrical activity than non-abused children when shown angry faces, as opposed to other facial expressions. "It may be the case that physically abused children develop a broader category of anger because it's adaptive for them to notice when adults are angry," he says.Perhaps my statement was too broad: it seems that the abused children are only more sensitive to anger and hostility, rather than being more sensitive to emotion in general.

[Tin Lizzie]

Perhaps my statement was too broad: it seems that the abused children are only more sensitive to anger and hostility, rather than being more sensitive to emotion in general.

Perhaps so. Genuine Psychics / mediums rely on their sensitivity to emotions and other energies - it would be interesting to see how many of them had suffered traumatic childhoods.

[Araneus]

Psychics / mediums rely on their sensitivity to emotions

Yep.


and other energiesDamn, and you were so close.

[HeyJupiter]

HeyJupiter,


Oh! You sweet person. Welcome to the forum. It's cool!
Don't jump to conclusions about the people around here. I have found them very helpful. I hope you stick around and share some of your experiences. :smiley:

Thank you Zaira :smiley:
I am happy to stake my claim as a "believer" but I am open-minded on both fronts and am intrigued by the sceptical point of view, as well as the idea of being able to test psychic abilities. I have only been around the boards for a little while but I find it very interesting already. I have always had a questioning mind and I think it's important to question why we believe the things we believe... It's been a great journey so far!

[Zaira]

HeyJupiter,

You seem to be managing okay. :smiley:

[Tin Lizzie]

Yep.

Damn, and you were so close.


Arrrrhhhh...those 'other energies'....mystifying, aren't they? ;)

[Cuddles]

Arrrrhhhh...those 'other energies'....mystifying, aren't they? ;)

No. Not until you actually define what they are and show that they exist.

[Tin Lizzie]

No. Not until you actually define what they are and show that they exist.

The 'spirit world' exists in the same space as ourselves but on a different energetic level, just like particles of some materials vibrate at a higher frequency than others. When communicating with spirit I have only rarely heard clear audial messages. More often i receive sensations, 'feelings' of presence, sudden changes in temperature, and sometimes visual images (i am not a medium by the way, but I do enjoy communication with certain guides).

As you know, energy can not be create or destroyed, but it can be changed from one form to another. The energy of spiritual existence is at a frequency beyond our comprehension. This is why time and space have no meaning in their 'world' and as such premonitive messages are possible. In order for spirits to literally get on the same wavelength as us, there must be somewhere for all that extra energy to go. This explains sudden changes in temperature, the presence of light and auras, and why mediums often feel physically and mentally drained after communication.

[Admin]

The 'spirit world' exists in the same space as ourselves but on a different energetic level

How do you know that? (!)


When communicating with spirit I have only rarely heard clear audial messages. More often i receive sensations, 'feelings' of presence, sudden changes in temperature, and sometimes visual images (i am not a medium by the way, but I do enjoy communication with certain guides).

Such experiences can also be induced by applying magnetic fields to the right temporal lobe and even more powerfully by using drugs.

This suggests that these feelings and experiences are a result of brain activity in individuals rather than contact with external 'entities'.

I'm not saying that you and others like you don't experience these things - just that you're attributing the wrong cause to the effect.


The energy of spiritual existence is at a frequency beyond our comprehension. This is why time and space have no meaning in their 'world' and as such premonitive messages are possible. In order for spirits to literally get on the same wavelength as us, there must be somewhere for all that extra energy to go. This explains sudden changes in temperature, the presence of light and auras, and why mediums often feel physically and mentally drained after communication.

How do you know this? (!)

You know, one of the most annoying things about 'debating' with believers is that they come out with the most outrageous assertions and expect people to take these 'facts' at face value.

The truth is: you don't know anything about 'spirit'. You have absolutely no idea whatsoever what their properties, motivations, frequencies or vibrations (meaningless terms here), etc. are because you've never shown that they exist.

They are an internal representation of your experiences: not an external reality.

You should only make factual statements if you can back them up!!!

[Tin Lizzie]

The truth is: you don't know anything about 'spirit'. You have absolutely no idea whatsoever what their properties, motivations, frequencies or vibrations (meaningless terms here), etc. are because you've never shown that they exist.

They are an internal representation of your experiences: not an external reality.

You should only make factual statements if you can back them up!!!

Thanks for the skeptic viewpoint, but i am very able to distinguish between knowledge and belief, and my experiences have brought knowledge, not just belief. Again, we are spinning around the stumbling stone of what is 'evidence' and how people choose to interpret it.

I fail to see how an internal representation of my own experiences can have any relevance to future events in the outside world

Unless, of course, i imagined that these events actually happened and in reality i was sitting on a hammock on a palm beach in Hawaii, drinking milk from a coconut with Jimi Hendrix!

[Admin]

Thanks for the skeptic viewpoint, but i am very able to distinguish between knowledge and belief

Clearly you are not!

Posting something like: "The 'spirit world' exists in the same space as ourselves but on a different energetic level, just like particles of some materials vibrate at a higher frequency than others." looks like a positive assertion to me!

Beliefs can be true or false and justified or unjustified. To me, your statement looks rather like a belief that is both untrue and unjustified.

There's no way you can know such a thing and there's no evidence you could provide to back the statement up.

[Tin Lizzie]

Clearly you are not!

Posting something like: "The 'spirit world' exists in the same space as ourselves but on a different energetic level, just like particles of some materials vibrate at a higher frequency than others." looks like a positive assertion to me!

Beliefs can be true or false and justified or unjustified. To me, your statement looks rather like a belief that is both untrue and unjustified.

There's no way you can know such a thing and there's no evidence you could provide to back the statement up.

I fail to see if any progress is being made in this discussion, as entertaining and thought-provoking (for myself, at least) as it may be.

What I have said regarding the spirit plane and frequencies etc. is of course completely unsopported by what you would accept as evidence.

I have merely given a possible avenue for the 'earthly' mechanism by which spirit communication is possible. Of course I do not know this. When I referred to knowledge I meant knowledge of the existence of the spirit world, which is another debate altogether..

Apologies for getting my wires crossed; it's not a simple matter and I am still very much learning how to put it into a scientific context.

[Dr B]

What I have said regarding the spirit plane and frequencies etc. is of course completely unsopported by what you would accept as evidence.


We know, glad you agree O0



I have merely given a possible avenue for the 'earthly' mechanism by which spirit communication is possible.

I missed this mechanism.......

[Tin Lizzie]

I missed this mechanism.......

it's in one of those posts somewhere O0

[Cuddles]

The 'spirit world' exists in the same space as ourselves but on a different energetic level, just like particles of some materials vibrate at a higher frequency than others. When communicating with spirit I have only rarely heard clear audial messages. More often i receive sensations, 'feelings' of presence, sudden changes in temperature, and sometimes visual images (i am not a medium by the way, but I do enjoy communication with certain guides).

As you know, energy can not be create or destroyed, but it can be changed from one form to another. The energy of spiritual existence is at a frequency beyond our comprehension. This is why time and space have no meaning in their 'world' and as such premonitive messages are possible. In order for spirits to literally get on the same wavelength as us, there must be somewhere for all that extra energy to go. This explains sudden changes in temperature, the presence of light and auras, and why mediums often feel physically and mentally drained after communication.

Define "space". Define "energy". Define "vibration". Define "frequency". Define "world". Define " wavelength". Define "time".

You are not using any of those words in the accepted scientific sense. Until you define what the terms you are using actually mean, your entire explanation is utterly meaningless. Talking about energies and vibrations is a popular pasttime among woos because it makes it sound all sciency, but simply sounding sciency is not enough. You have not given any kind of possible mechanism, as you claim, because you have not actually said anything at all.

[Tin Lizzie]

Define "space". Define "energy". Define "vibration". Define "frequency". Define "world". Define " wavelength". Define "time".

You are not using any of those words in the accepted scientific sense. Until you define what the terms you are using actually mean, your entire explanation is utterly meaningless. Talking about energies and vibrations is a popular pasttime among woos because it makes it sound all sciency, but simply sounding sciency is not enough. You have not given any kind of possible mechanism, as you claim, because you have not actually said anything at all.

I refer you to the posts above, between myself and Mr. Jackson.

Being a little slow today are we? ;)

[Cuddles]

I refer you to the posts above, between myself and Mr. Jackson.

I read them. They didn't say anything. You claim to have provided a possible mechanism, but all you have done is spout some sciency-sounding words without any apparent understanding of what they mean or how they would apply to your argument.


Being a little slow today are we? ;)

No. Care to actually answer my post?

[Dr B]

i still see no mechanism?

[Tin Lizzie]

Lordy....

if i actually knew the mechanism, i would no doubt have a nobel prize in something or other and i wouldn't be feeling the urge to discuss it on this forum.

What i am saying is that there must be a mechanism, and that the ooh-so scientific terms i have mentioned before are a likely basis. For example, when i am walking in the country and i catch a whiff of Taurus Excretum, there must be an external input which activates whatever neurosensory goings-on occur inside of me to cause the sensation of this smell. obviously the smell has a source, but what is it that carries the smell from the source and into my body?
The mechanism of spirit apparition does, i believe, have something to do with the frequency at which their being vibrates, which is far above anything on our scale. for them to slow down requires a lot of energy, which has to come from somewhere, hence sudden changes in temperature, light and auras, smells, sounds, and the draining of energy from a medium.
As i've said before i don't believe we have the means to scientifically prove the existence of spirit, even though there is much evidence to suggest telepathic ability - i believe the mechanisms here may be similar to those involved with spirit communication.

:smiley:

[Cuddles]

and that the ooh-so scientific terms i have mentioned before are a likely basis.

No they aren't. You clearly have no idea what those terms mean or how they would be applied in this instance. Just saying sciency words does not make your words science.


The mechanism of spirit apparition does, i believe, have something to do with the frequency at which their being vibrates,

This is just the same crap that believers always come out with. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[Tin Lizzie]

No they aren't. You clearly have no idea what those terms mean or how they would be applied in this instance. Just saying sciency words does not make your words science.



This is just the same crap that believers always come out with. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

You are saying such things because yoou have no relevant knowledge or experience, in the same sense that someone talking in russian to me would sound like crap because i can't translate it.

Again, i refer you to the 'chi' from eastern philosophy and the benefits it has been shown to bring. links to follow once i've woken up properly, had some breakfast, a coffee and a ciggy. :smiley:

[Cuddles]

You are saying such things because yoou have no relevant knowledge or experience, in the same sense that someone talking in russian to me would sound like crap because i can't translate it.

As a professional physicist I actually have an awful lot of relevant knowledge of what "energy", "frequency", "vibration" and so on are. The way you use them has no resemblence to what they actually mean. The problem is that you are trying to talk Russian to a native Russian speaker without any knowledge of the language yourself.

[Tin Lizzie]

As a professional physicist I actually have an awful lot of relevant knowledge of what "energy", "frequency", "vibration" and so on are. The way you use them has no resemblence to what they actually mean. The problem is that you are trying to talk Russian to a native Russian speaker without any knowledge of the language yourself.

Oops. You made a mistake there.

The difference between you and I is that I appreciate that there must be a mechanism and that it must surely involve, to some extent, certain aspects of nature of which we are aware.

[brianp]

You are saying such things because yoou have no relevant knowledge or experience, in the same sense that someone talking in russian to me would sound like crap because i can't translate it.

You have no relevant knowledge or experience either - you can't even define the terms you use. Stringing a series of underfined terms together will always result in claptrap and gobbledegook no matter who is writing or speaking it. Not even another woo could glean meaning from it because the terms are undefined - it would be claptrap and gobbledegook to anyone reading or listening to it.

What a silly comparison. Someone speaking in Russian would, presumably, be talking about objects, events etc they understood using terms they could define.

[brianp]

The difference between you and I is that I appreciate that there must be a mechanism ...

If there is an effect there there must be a mechanism - but the effect has never been established. It's like me asking why is there a dragon in my garage. We could discuss rival theories for weeks but it could be pointless because I haven't established that there is a dragon in my garage. And that's tricky because it's an invisible dragon and it always stays really quiet when anyone's around - but why bother with proof when I *know* it's there?


... that it must surely involve, to some extent, certain aspects of nature of which we are aware.


Why am I not surprised? More woo-ly language from a woo. "Must surely involve", "to some extent", "certain aspects" - not only do you fail to define your terms, you fail to say anything about them.

[Tin Lizzie]

You have no relevant knowledge or experience either

I would like to give you the opportunity to prove that I have no knowledge or experience of spirit, so go for it...

- you can't even define the terms you use.

As I've said before, I am simply trying to bridge the missing link between science and spirit. Obviously the only material you have read on this matter has been written by sceptics. To those who actually have their own experience in this and therefore do not need to rely on 'logic', your words are, equally, claptrap

[Tin Lizzie]

If there is an effect there there must be a mechanism - but the effect has never been established. It's like me asking why is there a dragon in my garage. We could discuss rival theories for weeks but it could be pointless because I haven't established that there is a dragon in my garage. And that's tricky because it's an invisible dragon and it always stays really quiet when anyone's around - but why bother with proof when I *know* it's there?

What a load of gobbledegook. Nobody has ever seen a 'dragon' in their garage. There are quite a few people who see spirit on a regular basis.

Why am I not surprised? More woo-ly language from a woo. "Must surely involve", "to some extent", "certain aspects" - not only do you fail to define your terms, you fail to say anything about them

More claptrap from a so-called 'objective sceptic'.

[brianp]

What a load of gobbledegook. Nobody has ever seen a 'dragon' in their garage.

Of course they have. The late, great Carl Sagan had one exactly like mine in his garage:

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm


There are quite a few people who see spirit on a regular basis.

There are quite a few who see pink elephants on a regular basis too.


More claptrap from a so-called 'objective sceptic'.

General ad homs carry no weight whatsoever. I don't mind being told I'm writing rubbish, but I do expect to be told what particular words you're referring to.

And as for being an "objective sceptic", I seriously doubt that you even know what that means.

[brianp]

You have no relevant knowledge or experience either

I would like to give you the opportunity to prove that I have no knowledge or experience of spirit, so go for it...

As we've repeatedly told you - and it should be obvious anyway - it is impossible to prove a negative. You claim to have knowledge and experience of spirit so I take it for granted that you have substantial evidence that spirit exists. Please share that evidence - and remember: anecdotes aren't evidence. "Feelings" aren't evidence. We need something we can examine, measure and record - without that your spirit has no more substance than my dragon. As Carl Sagan wrote "... what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all?"


- you can't even define the terms you use.

As I've said before, I am simply trying to bridge the missing link between science and spirit.

How do you imagine that you can provide a bridge between science and its very antithesis?


Obviously the only material you have read on this matter has been written by sceptics. To those who actually have their own experience in this and therefore do not need to rely on 'logic', your words are, equally, claptrapMore ad homs. What I have read or otherwise is immaterial - I'd be very surprised, however, if you've actually read more about "spirit" and related matters written by believers than I have. There was a time when I actually believed in spirit and a sky fairy - and then I grew up.

But to get back to the discussion. If you are going to challenge someone's ideas then please be specific about what it is you are challenging.

[Tin Lizzie]

As we've repeatedly told you - and it should be obvious anyway - it is impossible to prove a negative.


In that case you may wish to refrain from making negative assertions


You claim to have knowledge and experience of spirit so I take it for granted that you have substantial evidence that spirit exists. Please share that evidence - and remember: anecdotes aren't evidence. "Feelings" aren't evidence. We need something we can examine, measure and record - without that your spirit has no more substance than my dragon.


Have you ever felt a raw emotion such as love? If you know how to bottle this up, examine, measure and record it please tell me how and it might make this discussion actually get somewhere.
This point has been dragged about a bit lately.


How do you imagine that you can provide a bridge between science and its very antithesis?


How is survival after death the antithesis of science?
What is the purpose of science, please?

Quote Faraday: 'nothing is too wonderful to be true, as long as it obeys the laws of nature.'

Note the emphasis on nature, not science. The laws of science change with time; the laws of nature do not.

More ad homs. What I have read or otherwise is immaterial - I'd be very surprised, however, if you've actually read more about "spirit" and related matters written by believers than I have.

Please define 'ad homs'.
I really think it is experience that counts more than reading. Do not take this to mean that I do not question things; I do.

But to get back to the discussion. If you are going to challenge someone's ideas then please be specific about what it is you are challenging.

Okay, let's start afresh? Present your ideas (as in the skeptic you) and I shall present my case. On another thread if you wish.

[brianp]

Okay, let's start afresh? Present your ideas (as in the skeptic you) and I shall present my case. On another thread if you wish.

No thank you. Trying to discuss anything with you is a complete waste of time. You claim to be a science teacher but show a complete and utter disdain for science and the scientific method. You make fantastic claims without any evidence and when anyone points this out your only response is abuse. Sorry - bullshit is bullshit and I've had quite enough of yours.

[brianp]

In that case you may wish to refrain from making negative assertions Like?


Have you ever felt a raw emotion such as love? If you know how to bottle this up, examine, measure and record it please tell me how and it might make this discussion actually get somewhere.
This point has been dragged about a bit lately.Love has many aspects some of which would be difficult to quantify let alone measure. But I think psychologists could probably devise some crude measures of many aspects of what is normally called "love - physical attraction, altruism, feeling of kinship etc etc. and thus examine, measure and record particular examples of this thing called love.

But "love" is an emotion, a construct of the human brain - with "spirit" you are claiming that it has an objective reality. If you were merely claiming that "spirit" is a construct of the human brain, I would agree with you.


How is survival after death the antithesis of science?Because there is no evidence of the survival of death, nothing that science can even examine let alone explain.


What is the purpose of science, please?To explore, understand and explain all aspects of existence.


Quote Faraday: 'nothing is too wonderful to be true, as long as it obeys the laws of nature.'

Note the emphasis on nature, not science. The laws of science change with time; the laws of nature do not.What on earth are "laws of science" if not "laws of nature"? The terms are absolutely synonymous.


Please define 'ad homs'.An "ad hom" is an attack on the messenger not the message. Instead of dealing with my arguments you say that I only believe what I believe because I've read the wrong books.

I really think it is experience that counts more than reading. Do not take this to mean that I do not question things; I do.But you don't question the reality of your entirely subjective experience of "spirit".

[Tin Lizzie]

Firstly, if you want to whinge about ad-homs, hold your thoughts before saying things like this:

You have no relevant knowledge or experience either

This Particular exchange is amusing:


How is survival after death the antithesis of science?
1.) Because there is no evidence of the survival of death, nothing that science can even examine let alone explain.

Apart from those accounts which you have the nerve to call bullshit. How convenient, you've just ruled out a multitude of key witness statements. Not a policeman are you? Thank God.


What is the purpose of science, please?
2.)To explore, understand and explain all aspects of existence.


So why have you omitted 'explore' in statement 1? For if you are to step out of your nice cosy comfort zone, and take the first step towards understanding, you need to explore. You know, get out more. This, as you see, involves the risk of taking the wrong route. Furthermore by dismissing the spirit world on the basis that anecdotes are bullshit, you are serving to undermine the purpose of science; you are just making things more difficult by closing off routes.


3.)What on earth are "laws of science" if not "laws of nature"? The terms are absolutely synonymous.

No they are not. Not quite. The laws of nature have been around since time began and are infinitely more reliable! O0
Somehow i have a feeling that one is beyond your understanding.

So, now that you've worked yourself into the quagmire of your own shite, I frankly don't care about your opinions of science, spirit, myself, or anything else for that matter. You mock my ability as a science teacher (ooooh another ad-hom) without being able to provide evidence - quite frankly your 'message' bears a striking resemblance to the message from an anus; some of my year 10 pupils have displayed a better understanding of science, or anything else, than you have.

Perhaps it would be better for humanity if you were to see for yourself what happens when you cross over, sooner rather than later.

You mock psychics and mediums, ridiculing the work of some wonderful, good people who have natural gifts and who often save others' lives. For this, you are cowardly and pathetic.

Either respond with objective, open-minded reason and without contradicting yourself, or fuck off.

[brianp]

Apart from those accounts which you have the nerve to call bullshit. How convenient, you've just ruled out a multitude of key witness statements. Not a policeman are you? Thank God.Anecdotes are not evidence, because - shock, horror - humans lie to further their own agendas, humans are easily misled by optical illusions, human memory is imperfect etc. If all you've got is anecdotal - and it is - you've got nothing!


So why have you omitted 'explore' in statement 1? For if you are to step out of your nice cosy comfort zone, and take the first step towards understanding, you need to explore. You know, get out more. This, as you see, involves the risk of taking the wrong route. Furthermore by dismissing the spirit world on the basis that anecdotes are bullshit, you are serving to undermine the purpose of science; you are just making things more difficult by closing off routes.I close off nothing. I welcome scientific exploration of all things woo - real investigation under controlled conditions with precautions to avoid cheating and bias. So far all such investigation has failed to demonstrate that any psychic phenomena exist.


No they are not. Not quite. The laws of nature have been around since time began and are infinitely more reliable! O0
Somehow i have a feeling that one is beyond your understanding.Yes, precisely the same. The laws of science have been around since time began - though there were no humans around with the tools, skill and mathematical ability to reveal and record any of them until the 18th century. I've no doubt that there are many more laws yet to be revealed when our tools and knowledge reach the necessary sophistication.


So, now that you've worked yourself into the quagmire of your own shite, I frankly don't care about your opinions of science, spirit, myself, or anything else for that matter. You mock my ability as a science teacher (ooooh another ad-hom) without being able to provide evidence - quite frankly your 'message' bears a striking resemblance to the message from an anus; some of my year 10 pupils have displayed a better understanding of science, or anything else, than you have.I know nothing of your abilities as a teacher, it's just that you claim to be a science teacher while demonstrating a disdain for and a complete lack of understanding of the scientific method. Normally I would expect that anyone teaching a subject should at least understand and accept its basic tenets.


Perhaps it would be better for humanity if you were to see for yourself what happens when you cross over, sooner rather than later.I trust that the mods will take note of that disgusting comment - and from a professed Christian too.


You mock psychics and mediums, ridiculing the work of some wonderful, good people who have natural gifts and who often save others' lives.On the contrary I admire the tremendous skill shown by psychics and mediums. Their skill at cold-reading and their ability to utter such crap with a straight face just has to be admired.

Save lives? You are joking.


For this, you are cowardly and pathetic.Amazing how low believers will sink when they run out of arguments.


Either respond with objective, open-minded reason and without contradicting yourself, To you "objective" and "open-minded" apparently mean unthinking, uncritical acceptance of incredible concepts for which there is no evidence whatsoever. To me and all thinking people they mean following the evidence wherever it goes. Show us *evidence* of woo and we'll accept it - that is objectivity and open-mindedness.


or fuck off.From the gutter to the sewer - you really can't sink much lower.

[Tin Lizzie]

Rather, from the shite unto the light.

The mods can say what they like. You have reverted to personal attacks and so I shall not refrain from doing likewise.

I fail to see how you can dismiss the work of gifted psychics and mediums so calluosly. I have more respect for these people than I will ever have for the likes of yourself who, lacking in any kind of creative or exploratary thought, are reduced to relying on the observations, measurements and theories of others.

You have repeatedly ignored my statement that love is something which can not be recorded (unless you are so shallow to consider physical attraction as essential - are you an inbred? ;D)
and you believe your 'theory' to be true because all anecdotes are bullshit. That is not 'objective, open-minded research'.

I challenge you to make your accusations to the face of any medium. They have more sensitivity when dealing with distressing spirit messages than you are capable of.

You fail to appreciate that, seeing as scientific method is completely unevolved in comparison to nature and by extension, the spirit world, it is not as yet a worthy tool for challenging spiritual existence.

No doubt if you were alive at the time that the earth was first purported to be spherical, you would be one of those saying 'but how?', jumping on the coward's bandwagon of popular ridicule and delaying further progress by your own restricted thinking ability.

You are most welcome to come and witness me teaching science. You will not see the person you expect to meet and you would probably learn something just by talking to some of the pupils. It may even be enlightening for you, but I doubt you would acknowledge it.

Your 'message' smacks of dogmatism, cowardice and a distinct lack of independent creative thought. As for the 'christian' slant, you have just made yet another misinterpretation of the related evidence that has been presented to you.

Until you can come up with a reasonable, non-assumptive discussion without resorting to ad-homs, then once again, I urge you, and you alone, to fuck off.

(note: I am forced to use this terminology, just so you have no cause to dispute my great contempt for your cowardly, self-serving comments)

[fruitfly]

Edited Lowlights:


The laws of nature have been around since time began and are infinitely more reliable! O0
Somehow i have a feeling that one is beyond your understanding.

So, now that you've worked yourself into the quagmire of your own shite, I frankly don't care about your opinions of science, spirit, myself, or anything else for that matter.

quite frankly your 'message' bears a striking resemblance to the message from an anus; some of my year 10 pupils have displayed a better understanding of science, or anything else, than you have.

Perhaps it would be better for humanity if you were to see for yourself what happens when you cross over, sooner rather than later.

For this, you are cowardly and pathetic.

Either respond with objective, open-minded reason and without contradicting yourself, or fuck off.


Rather, from the shite unto the light.

You have repeatedly ignored my statement that love is something which can not be recorded (unless you are so shallow to consider physical attraction as essential - are you an inbred? ;D)

No doubt if you were alive at the time that the earth was first purported to be spherical, you would be one of those saying 'but how?', jumping on the coward's bandwagon of popular ridicule and delaying further progress by your own restricted thinking ability.

Until you can come up with a reasonable, non-assumptive discussion without resorting to ad-homs, then once again, I urge you, and you alone, to fuck off.

(note: I am forced to use this terminology, just so you have no cause to dispute my great contempt for your cowardly, self-serving comments)

Pathetic! The worst replies I have ever seen on this site. Brian responded to your statements point for point and your only response is to ignore his replies and resort to personal abuse. You lost the argument and now you have lost the plot!

[Tin Lizzie]

Edited Lowlights:




Pathetic! The worst replies I have ever seen on this site. Brian responded to your statements point for point and your only response is to ignore his replies and resort to personal abuse. You lost the argument and now you have lost the plot!

Seems like your opinion and bias is encroaching there. I did not start with 'ad-homs' or foul language, nor did I question anyone's professional ability, which has nothing to do with my discussion. If you so-called 'skeptics' can not acknowledge viewpoints other than your own without resorting to abuse, then your 'logic' is of no relevance to me. I prefer the knowledge of people whose work serves a greater purpose than their own fragile 'logic'.

[Tin Lizzie]

On the contrary I admire the tremendous skill shown by psychics and mediums. Their skill at cold-reading and their ability to utter such crap with a straight face just has to be admired.

Save lives? You are joking.

Amazing how low believers will sink when they run out of arguments.




Well, seeing as Brian P answered all my points, point-for-point, but on a selective basis, I'll do the same here.

To prove that you are no coward, come forth on to psychic forums and repeat your first point. They have psychic and spiritual skills beyond the ability of you false skeptics.

Go to 'spiritwhisperers' and read the thread 'I am an Australian medium' - then tell me that people have not been saved.

Amazing how people claim to be 'skeptics' and have the nerve to coin their own terms for 'evidence'.

I am indeed no longer concerned with the plot of any discussion here. Having seen enough of your selective 'logic', I would like to see you have the same nerve when 'discussing' things with the mediums themselves.

I have already acknowledged the presence of charlatans and 'bullshitters', you are simply showing disdain for anything that doesn't adhere to your own way of thinking. Hence, I repeat, you can either bring forward your 'intelligent' remarks and show them to the people you accuse of lying, or you can fuck off back into your own self-serving little world.

Want another ad-hom? Here: until you do confront real mediums with your accusations, you are nothing but cowards. You serve no purpose to anything other than yourselves. You make me sick.

[fruitfly]

Seems like your opinion and bias is encroaching there. I did not start with 'ad-homs' or foul language, nor did I question anyone's professional ability, which has nothing to do with my discussion. If you so-called 'skeptics' can not acknowledge viewpoints other than your own without resorting to abuse, then your 'logic' is of no relevance to me. I prefer the knowledge of people whose work serves a greater purpose than their own fragile 'logic'.

My opinion may well be encroaching. My opinion on how you have conducted yourself in this exchange is that you resorted to personal insults and foul language which in no way answered any of the points put to you. This opinion has nothing to do with my position on the validity or otherwise of your argument, but is based on the evidence of your posts.

As to bias, I am a sceptic, not a Skeptic, if you know what I mean. I don't blindly accept everything I'm told but prefer to rely on a mix of evidence (I've never been to New York but the evidence I have convinces me the place exists), facts (2+2=4), and personal experience (I have been to Moscow and I can verify it exists). I am willing to accept any challenge to these and other “truths” and will consider them accordingly. I like a good debate and that, to me, involves a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal. Sure, things can get heated from time to time, but you left behind any rational defence of your position and directly attacked your opponent in a personal way - without answering his points or putting forward any evidence to support your own position.

I don't come on to this forum to see people being told to "fuck off" when someone disagrees with them. I can see that level of argument any day in the pub. I expect better on here but that is the level to which you have taken this particular thread.

[Tin Lizzie]

I don't come on to this forum to see people being told to "fuck off" when someone disagrees with them. I can see that level of argument any day in the pub. I expect better on here but that is the level to which you have taken this particular thread.

No, after having my most simple statements ignored - i mean, what is so difficult to understand about the law of conservation of energy? - and listening to good people being 'ad-hommed' i don't care what these 'skeptics' think.

[lara123]

tinlizzy came here respectful.most decent people would see that.a lot of you are not worthy of the title of sceptic,bullies fit fine.

you mocked and taunted and didnt stop,him,me,all psychics.You spend most of your energy slagging them off.some are worthy of that but not all.

no wonder he became angry,we expect debate,strong disagreements but not this!

your moderators should not allow this to happen,you make statements also you dont back up.this site is horrific-and you claim we talk shit!

as gordons says-yep,the truth is unbelievable
im outta here- more victims will come you will rid off

i'd rather talk to the dead than you lot of abusive people here.

no bloody wonder they dont want to talk to you

[Admin]

I have pointed out on several occasions that there's little point in 'believers' coming here and trying to convince skeptics of anything when all they can do is to back up their claims with things like "I know it's real".

They are tied into an emotionally-based belief system. That's all it is (!)

They cannot and dare not look at the issue from any angle other than their own otherwise they'd realise that their belief is false and that takes away their reason for believing as they do.

Any challenge to their belief is usually met with derision, anger and abuse. True to form, we're seeing that again here.

So I suggest that you believers go back to your own forum where you have an insular group of like-minded people who all share the same delusion. Then you can give each other the emotional comfort you need: love 'n' light, and {{{Hugs}}} etc.

Should you ever reach emotional maturity and manage to face reality without the need to create a fairytale world where magic exists and people don't really die, then come back and we can perhaps have an adult conversation on matters.

Or, of course, should you ever find that ever-elusive 'evidence', you will let us know. Yes? ;)

[HeyJupiter]

This thread has completely shot off the rails... I just started it out of curiousity as I wondered how you would go about testing psychic abilities.

As I said in one of my other posts, I think it is important that we question everything in life, without which, we would not gain knowledge or experience. Healthy debate with those of opposing view is a big part of that, but I think this needs to include respect from both sides, or at least a cut-off point where you can agree to walk away, even if neither side has convinced the other 8)

[fruitfly]

I have pointed out on several occasions that there's little point in 'believers' coming here and trying to convince skeptics of anything when all they can do is to back up their claims with things like "I know it's real".

They are tied into an emotionally-based belief system. That's all it is (!)

They cannot and dare not look at the issue from any angle other than their own otherwise they'd realise that their belief is false and that takes away their reason for believing as they do.

Any challenge to their belief is usually met with derision, anger and abuse. True to form, we're seeing that again here.

So I suggest that you believers go back to your own forum where you have an insular group of like-minded people who all share the same delusion. Then you can give each other the emotional comfort you need: love 'n' light, and {{{Hugs}}} etc.

Should you ever reach emotional maturity and manage to face reality without the need to create a fairytale world where magic exists and people don't really die, then come back and we can perhaps have an adult conversation on matters.

Or, of course, should you ever find that ever-elusive 'evidence', you will let us know. Yes? ;)

Don't you think, though, that by coming on here and having their arguments challenged and debunked, that this forum may be providing a service to potential 'woos' who may otherwise be drawn into the world of irrational beliefs? Using the example of Psychic Sarah, I noticed this site being quoted elsewhere to point out her lies and inconsistencies. When she posted on the Mirror site and was challenged on the logic, veracity and morality of her pronouncements (sometimes with reference to UKS), I personally witnessed people's attitudes towards her and psychics in general changing. Incidentally, that led to debunking of Brian Ladd via your very own exposé of his lottery predictions.

As to the derision, anger and abuse they resort to when challenged, I would imagine that would work to the advantage of the Skeptic. Any objective reader would see that as the last resort of a person whose argument has been well and truly demolished. It may well lead to people who would otherwise accept such things as 'spiritual energy', 'predictive dreams' and 'psychic visions' seeking alternative (and more realistic) explanations.

I like this forum as it has helped me to express my innate scepticism in a more structured manner and because it supplies the terminology for me to do so. An example being the ubiquitous response of the believer to the atheist who questions his or her faith: “prove God does not exist.” I used to point out that the burden of proof was with person making the claim and that by using that argument you could claim anything exists just because no one can prove it doesn't. That is, of course, a perfectly sound line of reasoning and one used often by the Skeptic. Since coming on this site I now have the terminology (argumentum ad ignorantiam, in this case) and reading about this has helped me recognise various other logical fallacies and has broadened my understanding of the ways reason can be applied when faced with them. I mention this because it is often the case that we see these lines of reasoning being used most effectively in a debate situation with the “irrational ones”. The arguments put forward and the links supplied in these situations are invaluable to the development of critical thinking. A lively debate allows theory to be put into practice far more effectively than does a general discussion between like-minded people.

Anyway, that's my take on the matter.

BIG {{{((((((HUGS))))))}}}

ff

[Zaira]

HeyJupiter,

"This thread has completely shot off the rails... I just started it out of curiousity as I wondered how you would go about testing psychic abilities.

As I said in one of my other posts, I think it is important that we question everything in life, without which, we would not gain knowledge or experience. Healthy debate with those of opposing view is a big part of that, but I think this needs to include respect from both sides, or at least a cut-off point where you can agree to walk away, even if neither side has convinced the other."

I thought yours was a very good question and I'm sorry and shocked at the turn it took. I hope it doesn't put you off asking other questions.

[Tin Lizzie]

I have pointed out on several occasions that there's little point in 'believers' coming here and trying to convince skeptics of anything when all they can do is to back up their claims with things like "I know it's real".

They are tied into an emotionally-based belief system. That's all it is (!)

They cannot and dare not look at the issue from any angle other than their own otherwise they'd realise that their belief is false and that takes away their reason for believing as they do.

Any challenge to their belief is usually met with derision, anger and abuse. True to form, we're seeing that again here.

So I suggest that you believers go back to your own forum where you have an insular group of like-minded people who all share the same delusion. Then you can give each other the emotional comfort you need: love 'n' light, and {{{Hugs}}} etc.

Should you ever reach emotional maturity and manage to face reality without the need to create a fairytale world where magic exists and people don't really die, then come back and we can perhaps have an adult conversation on matters.

Or, of course, should you ever find that ever-elusive 'evidence', you will let us know. Yes? ;)

John

I have seen on another post how you took pleasure from seeing others 'rocking the boat' on 'believer' websites, so I know just how objective you are. It gives me equal pleasure to return the favour and I find it laughable that you so-called 'skeptics' are so hypocritical - you don't like it up you, do you? ;)

Well, all I did was to present a simple possible scientific explanation, which was then met with ridicule and abuse. At this point, I prefer to fight fire with fire O0

I mean, what is so difficult for so-called 'scientists' to understand what I said about energy transfer in spirit apparition/messages? Ask any 14-year old pupil to explain the law of conservation of energy and they will give you the answer in one sentence. You have mocked my 'claim' to be a science teacher, yet it is you who can not understand such a simple fact? This is yet more evidence that 'skeptics' (I refer to those who claim to be skeptics but are in fact nothing but dogmatic 'scientists') will not even acknowledge the possibilty of things that go against their 'logic'.

Yes, one of the purposes of our forums is to provide a place where people in grief, trauma or general suffering can come to find comfort. They can also find people who have a natural ability to connect with spirit. When you find yourself having lost your entire family and are on the brink of taking your own life, there are people there who provide inspiration. I have more respect for them than I will ever have for any of you who call the spirit world 'fantasy' or worse.

The principle of what you call evidence is your downfall; if the police were to adopt this attitude that everything everybody says can be regarded as lies, then we would have a lot more innocent people behind bars and a lot more criminals walking free. Thankfully the world does not work in the same way as you 'skeptics', which is just as well because it is clear from the attitudes on here that skepticism is the antithesis of progress. May you continue to wallow in your gloating, self-serving 'logic'.

[Admin]

Tim,

You've provided nothing but personal anecdote and zero in the way of anything scientific that can be taken seriously.

Yes your credentials as a science teacher (something you introduced BTW) have been called into question but that's simply because you have displayed a complete lack of understanding of science and the scientific method.

And it's quite clear from your comments above where the abuse on here is coming from. ;)

Conservation of energy?

That's normally used by credophiles who state that energy cannot be created or destroyed therefore when we die the energy that was our 'mind' cannot be destroyed so must go somewhere else - i.e. the afterlife.

As a science teacher, I'm sure that you're aware that energy cannot be created or destroyed but it can transform from one state to another. When we die, the energy that we had in life transforms to heat.

So there's an example of the naivety of your 'scientific' argument - and why you're not being taken seriously on here.

We expect such nonsense arguments from the credulous, but a science teacher should know better.

[lara123]

biggg sighhhhhh

yes,we went off track and no doubt the same will occur again,but your question ought to be answered by sceptics and believers alike,but we get the door slammed in our face.

I've never claimed to know all the answers but do find it distasteful i am called names.

So i am trying to answer the original question here.One way would be to have a psychic give a reading to you without seeing you[to avoid cold reading],telephone reading,or blindfold the psychic in another room.Have the reading recorded and see what actual statements are true,but here lies a problem also in this,if a psychic even makes a true statement,it could then be assumed as guesswork and some is bound to be right etc,but future events predicted more easily to a distinct yes and no.

In mediumship,often the info coming through is not profound,but usually,for me,some detail is included,some connections are weak,some stronger,some info can be misunterpreted by us.I certainly say look into the reading you've been given.

I dont give many readings,but before i start i always offer a full money back and urge them to say before they leave if they are not happy.Now,although im doing free readings currently,people still need to listen carefully and judge wisely,i like people to understand my process,it is based on energy reading of the spirit and them imposing their feelings to me.It is far from perfect a process and if people are unsatified I want nothing.

I will not back down that i am capable of spirit contact.

I can also feel human body energy well and have helped ailments,i make no claim to cure anything because i dont know what i can do exactly with this until results come in so im experimenting on this also.

I hope i am tested by an open-minded person one day.help me to explore futher myself.

one thing i cant seem to do is tune in to one particular issue alone,say if someone wanted one answer on something.I only can sit back and see what comes through for a person generally so although i receive spirit,other abitilies are at work also,my ability to read the sitters energy sometimes.






This thread has completely shot off the rails... I just started it out of curiousity as I wondered how you would go about testing psychic abilities.

As I said in one of my other posts, I think it is important that we question everything in life, without which, we would not gain knowledge or experience. Healthy debate with those of opposing view is a big part of that, but I think this needs to include respect from both sides, or at least a cut-off point where you can agree to walk away, even if neither side has convinced the other 8)

[Tin Lizzie]

Tim,

You've provided nothing but personal anecdote and zero in the way of anything scientific that can be taken seriously.

Yes your credentials as a science teacher (something you introduced BTW) have been called into question but that's simply because you have displayed a complete lack of understanding of science and the scientific method.

And it's quite clear from your comments above where the abuse on here is coming from. ;)

Conservation of energy?

That's normally used by credophiles who state that energy cannot be created or destroyed therefore when we die the energy that was our 'mind' cannot be destroyed so must go somewhere else - i.e. the afterlife.

As a science teacher, I'm sure that you're aware that energy cannot be created or destroyed but it can transform from one state to another. When we die, the energy that we had in life transforms to heat.

So there's an example of the naivety of your 'scientific' argument - and why you're not being taken seriously on here.

We expect such nonsense arguments from the credulous, but a science teacher should know better.

My comments regarding the suitability of science and scientific method in proving the existence of spirit have been ignored several times already here, so I am not goint to bite the bait of your opinions on my understanding of science once again.

I was referring to conservation of energy as a means towards explaining the different sensations that are felt by mediums during spirit contact, not as a means for explaining what happens when we cross over. Spirit energy is not the same as heat energy, although it may manifest itself as such.

[Admin]

I will not back down that i am capable of spirit contact.

I thought you had an 'open-mind'?

So no amount of failure would convince you that you're not a psychic then.

I'm afraid your idea of a test is not really suitable as it wouldn't prove anything one way or another. It's all down to interpretation.

Skeptics, like me for example, have posed as psychics and given readings which sitters have thought were highly accurate! How can we conclude that psychics have a special ability when skeptics can do exactly the same thing?


I can also feel human body energy well and have helped ailments,i make no claim to cure anything because i dont know what i can do exactly with this until results come in so im experimenting on this also.

If you can sense ailments then that is a much stronger claim you're making as it can be tested empirically.

If, for example, there were 20 people, 10 of whom were healthy and 10 of whom had a specific ailment, do you feel confident that you could tell the difference between them?

If you can do that above the level of statistical chance then you would have a strong claim to be psychic.

[Admin]

Spirit energy is not the same as heat energy

Then can you tell us exactly what 'spirit energy' is?

[Tin Lizzie]

Skeptics, like me for example, have posed as psychics and given readings which sitters have thought were highly accurate! How can we conclude that psychics have a special ability when skeptics can do exactly the same thing?



Out of interest, what conditions/controls were placed on these experiments and how was feedback assessed? Did you claim to pass on specific and precise messages from spirit?




Then can you tell us exactly what 'spirit energy' is?



Is it not possible that it is an energy of its own kind? Spirit messages can be received in various forms including emotion, heat/cold, touch, smell, a certain sense of a presence - spirit energy is not one of these alone.

[lara123]

I thought you had an 'open-mind'?

So no amount of failure would convince you that you're not a psychic then.

I'm afraid your idea of a test is not really suitable as it wouldn't prove anything one way or another. It's all down to interpretation.

Skeptics, like me for example, have posed as psychics and given readings which sitters have thought were highly accurate! How can we conclude that psychics have a special ability when skeptics can do exactly the same thing?



If you can sense ailments then that is a much stronger claim you're making as it can be tested empirically.

If, for example, there were 20 people, 10 of whom were healthy and 10 of whom had a specific ailment, do you feel confident that you could tell the difference between them?

If you can do that above the level of statistical chance then you would have a strong claim to be psychic.

I do have an open-mind.yes,enough failure would conclude me a fraud,once failure and success are in agreement.You say you can do the same thing as psychics,have you and a psychic read someone you've never met before and you cant even see them,they are in another room or another country.

regarding the 20 people with ailments,i would pick up things on every single one of them,not just 10.I can feel when energy is depleted and can feel energy full-stop.but i know what you mean,could i specifically pick out the ailments.not necessarily but i can usually feel a difference in the energy there to suggest an illness is there,operation has been there,aches there,and strongs differences in parts where an illness,or minor ailment will come out and also food digestion,periods.

People usually tell me the ailment then i work on it.

Taking all this into account,do i believe statistically it will go in my favour? I would miss some im sure,as for me im still learning on it and my main emphasis has been just to help aid ailments.but my answer is yes.

People would have to put their past,present health problems written down first.[and hid from me of course]

20 people would take a while and have to be done over approx 4 days.Takes a good hour or more on one person. And my way is if i find something ,i try to help it,that would be part of my rules,because my senses are urging me to do that and i wouldnt be able to concentrate on the next one,and my hands hurt like hell if i dont.I appreciate this sounds bizarre so if we can start communicating ethically i would be more inclined to work with you and happy to set-up arrangements in the future and someone to gather 20 people and talk further on how we do this.