Jump to content
drbubb

Something BIG may be coming... A Liberation ?

Recommended Posts

I agree.

It does sound like him.

If it is a spoof, as some on GLP think, it is well-constructed.

 

I shall watch the Olympics tonight, for the first time.

 

I read somewhere that "an event" was expected at 3pm GMT.

That's 11pm London time. So I shall be tuned in then

 

You're not really taking any of this nonsense in are you ?

 

I don't mean to be rude, but how many "false predictions" and non-starter "events" will it take for you to see it's all a pile of guff?

 

Just wondering if you have a limit?

 

As for 3pm GMT, the "event" is Murry Vs Robinson :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not really taking any of this nonsense in are you ?

 

I don't mean to be rude, but how many "false predictions" and non-starter "events" will it take for you to see it's all a pile of guff?

 

Just wondering if you have a limit?

 

As for 3pm GMT, the "event" is Murry Vs Robinson :D

Sure, there are many misses.

And I expect this will be one too - Hasn't that been clear in my comments?

Perhaps you are not reading carefully.

 

But some of these guys have had some amazing hits too - such as 9/11 and the 2011 Quake in Japan.

 

The hit rate is low, but it is far above zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, there are many misses.

And I expect this will be one too - Hasn't that been clear in my comments?

Perhaps you are not reading carefully.

 

But some of these guys have had some amazing hits too - such as 9/11 and the 2011 Quake in Japan.

 

The hit rate is low, but it is far above zero.

 

Yes, I have seen that nowadays you add a touch of doubt to many of these claims, which sort of raises the question as to why you’d put these things on the maim board and not the fringe.

 

However, as for the "amazing hits", even putting aside the legitimacy of some of these "psychics" claims to have predicted such things, even a broken clock is right twice a day, as the old saying goes, and the sheer amount of claims about this, that and the other, are bound to get a hit once in a while.

 

For example, it only takes 365 people, (each having one day in a given year) to claim that a quake will hit Japan on a certain day. Japan regularly gets hit by quakes, so one will likely nail the day each year.

 

It's even more interesting that the ones attributed with a successful "hit" never seem to manage it again, thereby adding more credence to the ascertain of a lucky hit first time.

 

But I guess my question is really, considering how (judging by your increasing use of caveats etc) you actually appear to becoming more sceptical yourself, is how many more of this endless stream of non-event proclamations and crazy claims do you need to see fail to deliver before considering the fact that it might all be a pile of baloney?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A PLEA FOR OPEN DISCUSSION

 

Yes, I have seen that nowadays you add a touch of doubt to many of these claims, which sort of raises the question as to why you’d put these things on the maim board and not the fringe.

 

However, as for the "amazing hits", even putting aside the legitimacy of some of these "psychics" claims to have predicted such things, even a broken clock is right twice a day...

 

There is something going on... change is afoot already.

Following is an example for the UK mainstream "broadsheet" press:

 

=== === ===

 

UF-Olympics? 'Alien spacecraft' caught on camera over the London 2012 opening ceremony

 

The saucer-shaped, metallic object has set tongues wagging after it was filmed hovering above the Olympic Stadium as the ceremony drew to a close around 12.30am

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbkYsIbM5rM : Eyewitness

UFO: The strange saucer-shaped object was spotted above the Olympic Stadium as the opening ceremony drew to a close

 

The Olympic opening ceremony was watched by around a billion people around the world… but were there spectators from even further afield?

 

As fireworks and light displays lit up the sky above the Olympic Stadium on Friday night, a UFO was spotted hovering above the action.

 

The saucer-shaped, metallic object has set tongues wagging after it was caught on camera as the ceremony drew to a close around 12.30am.

 

/source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ufo-spotted-at-olympic-games-opening-1193663

=== === ===

 

I am not imposing deadlines, but I have seen the real possibility of Contact going mainstream in 2012, for many months, and it was one of the 10 possible "Shocks" I identified for 2012.

 

Of course, I think the contacts happened years ago, and we are only awaiting the confirmantion, the public acknowledgement, so why not this year ?

 

But I guess my question is really, considering how (judging by your increasing use of caveats etc) you actually appear to becoming more sceptical yourself, is how many more of this endless stream of non-event proclamations and crazy claims do you need to see fail to deliver before considering the fact that it might all be a pile of baloney?

There have not been enough decent open, and respectful discussions of these matters here - or most anywhere else - and so I am left in the awkward position of being one of the few proponents here for taking these matters seriously. Once that attitude becomes more widespread, I will be able to more fully share my caveats and reservations.

 

So far, I have been working to create an environment of open-ness, but not wide-eyed belief. It is hard to get that right, especially when GEI started with so many sceptics, whose first reaction was to follow the pattern set by MSM idiots, of simply ridiculing everything that lies outside the little dream world TPTB want to impose on us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A PLEA FOR OPEN DISCUSSION

 

 

 

There is something going on... change is afoot already.

Following is an example for the UK mainstream "broadsheet" press:

 

=== === ===

 

UF-Olympics? 'Alien spacecraft' caught on camera over the London 2012 opening ceremony

 

The saucer-shaped, metallic object has set tongues wagging after it was filmed hovering above the Olympic Stadium as the ceremony drew to a close around 12.30am

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbkYsIbM5rM

UFO: The strange saucer-shaped object was spotted above the Olympic Stadium as the opening ceremony drew to a close

 

The Olympic opening ceremony was watched by around a billion people around the world… but were there spectators from even further afield?

 

As fireworks and light displays lit up the sky above the Olympic Stadium on Friday night, a UFO was spotted hovering above the action.

 

The saucer-shaped, metallic object has set tongues wagging after it was caught on camera as the ceremony drew to a close around 12.30am.

 

/source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ufo-spotted-at-olympic-games-opening-1193663

=== === ===

 

I am not imposing deadlines, but I have seen the real possibility of Contact going mainstream in 2012, for many months, and it was one of the 10 possible "Shocks" I identified for 2012.

 

Of course, I think the contacts happened years ago, and we are only awaiting the confirmantion, the public acknowledgement, so why not this year ?

 

 

There have not been enough decent open, and respectful discussions of these matters here - or most anywhere else - and so I am left in the awkward position of being one of the few proponents here for taking these matters seriously. Once that attitude becomes more widespread, I will be able to more fully share my caveats and reservations.

 

So far, I have been working to create an environment of open-ness, but not wide-eyed belief. It is hard to get that right, especially when GEI started with so many sceptics, whose first reaction was to follow the pattern set by MSM idiots, of simply ridiculing everything that lies outside the little dream world TPTB want to impose on us all.

 

Now that's just not fair. There have been numerous attempts to show such things to be real. Time and time again the so-called psychics’ have been, and still are, offered the chance to show they are not just charlatans trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes and trick the gullible.

 

They never do it though. Not once, ever.

 

Have a look at Randi for example and his million dollar prize for the demonstration of paranormal abilities. No-one has ever come near. They have never done it, and have never shown any of their many claims to hold up. Ever.

 

That's absolutely nothing to do with MSM or the PTB, in fact they probably love all the weirdo’s and their wild claims, as it attracts attention from the 1% and what they get up to.

 

If someone was to prove one of these claims, it would be the greatest discovery in modern times.

 

Surely, if someone actually had “the gift”, they’d be trying to show the world, taking the Randi challenge, going on live TV etc etc, not posting a blog from their mothers bedroom. Would they?

 

I mean, doesn’t it seem odd to you that not once, in the whole of history, have any of these things ever been shown to be true?

 

As for the alien spacecraft at the opening ceremony, you cannot be serious, surely. The most watched airspace, in the most watched event in the whole world, and only one guy with a camera caught the most momentous event in history, yeah right. Ever seen photoshop? Amazing what a 5 year old can do now.

 

No wonder it attracts ridicule. It’s ridiculous :D .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's just not fair. There have been numerous attempts to show such things to be real. Time and time again the so-called psychics’ have been, and still are, offered the chance to show they are not just charlatans trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes and trick the gullible.

 

They never do it though. Not once, ever.

???

Where have you been?

Do you consider Remote Viewing a "psychic skill"?

 

If so, scientists Russell Targ and Dr Courtney Brown, have released extensive evidence of its effectiveness.

And the US military has used it for decades.

 

Maybe you need to examine the evidence before making wild statements

 

Randi is an idiot who puts restrictions on his "tests" which are unrealistic.

 

And I have done my own work with RV which I found very convincing. Perhaps you need to try it yourself.

There's a brief discussion here:

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=16607

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

???

Where have you been?

Do you consider Remote Viewing a "psychic skill"?

 

If so, scientists Russell Targ and Dr Courtney Brown, have released extensive evidence of its effectiveness.

And the US military has used it for decades.

 

Maybe you need to examine the evidence before making wild statements

 

Randi is an idiot who puts restrictions on his "tests" which are unrealistic.

 

And I have done my own work with RV which I found very convincing. Perhaps you need to try it yourself.

There's a brief discussion here:

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=16607

 

 

OK, whatever you say.

 

The whole worlds scientific community has obviously had the wool pulled over its eyes. Silly them eh.

 

Are you seriously saying these "remote viewers" and psychics have abilities beyond any human comprehension and, armed with these amazing powers, are changing the world for the better.

 

Really? Well, thank goodness for that. Where would we be without them?

 

Come on. Randis "restrictions" are there to avoid cheating FFS. You know, double blind tests for example. Have you ever seen Derren Brown for example? Amazing, really truly amazing, mind blowing stuff, but it's NOT REAL. It's a trick!

 

A REAL psychic wouldn't worry about such restrictions would they? A person with REAL powers wouldn't give a s**t about ANY restrictions.

 

And one or two delusional ex-scientists write a few lines of misguided c**p for self gain and that makes it real? Really?

 

As I told you before, most scientific departments in most Universities throughout the world will have a crackpot or two that have gone over the edge. That does NOT mean that they are correct. Their crackpot theories have to meet strict criteria to be taken as truth, or near even truth. Testable evidence based hypothesis.

 

Where is the peer reviewed scientific evidence for your claims? (For that matter, any scientific evidence that would actually stand up to a real scientific review).

 

And by peer, I do not mean the just-described, self-proclaimed expert on hairy fairy theory, Dr Bubb of GEI.

 

Do you really have such an ego that you, a sole trader living in Hong Kong, with an investing based internet site, with no scientific training whatsoever, and seemingly no scientific understanding, has fully researched and scientifically tested all these crackpot theories and discovered that the whole worlds scientific community are fools, and that they are wrong, and you, on your own, has actually found the real truth?

 

WOW! What do you say to something like that?

 

Seriously, I think you're generally a good person, but for your own sanity, get real!

 

I tried to be fair, but TBH, there is obviously no point in continuing this.

 

 

Edit Pier to Peer :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, whatever you say.

 

The whole worlds scientific community has obviously had the wool pulled over its eyes. Silly them eh.

 

Are you seriously saying these "remote viewers" and psychics have abilities beyond any human comprehension and, armed with these amazing powers, are changing the world for the better.

 

Really? Well, thank goodness for that. Where would we be without them?

You obviously havent bothered to listen/watch recent videos I have posted on the Fringe with

Courtnay Brown or Russell Targ.

 

I think this is the one...

(searching for it)

THIS ONE will do, until I can find better

(Jump to 6 minutes in)

 

Where Dr Brown talks about how the scientific community is beginning to respond differently to his work on RV.

 

People, even scientists, aren't laughing any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously havent bothered to listen/watch recent videos I have posted on the Fringe with

Courtnay Brown or Russell Targ.

 

Where Dr Brown talks about how the scientific community is beginning to respond differently to his work on RV.

 

People, even scientists, aren't laughing any more.

 

Sorry but that is utter nonsense.

 

The ranting of a confused (or perhaps even worse, a conman) ex-scientist that has forgotten the scientific method does not mean the scientific community is taking this seriously.

 

For example, a two second search reveals ........

 

“ Among other assertions, Brown says he has remote viewed Jesus Christ”

Shermer, M (2001) The Borderlands of Science: Where Sense Meets Nonsense, Oxford University Press

 

FFS, remote viewing of a supernatural being? Talk about mixing it up. :blink:

 

That tells you all you need to know about this guy. Sadly, there are quite a few ex-scientists that go a bit do-lally :( . Newton was a very famous example.

 

The scientific community is not laughing, it never does, that's just individuals who are asked their opinion (much the same as if you were asked if a cow could jump over the moon).

 

The scientific community is actually responding as it always does, by waiting to see real evidence.

 

No convincing case has ever been presented; the odd one that tries has always been shown to be a lie and explained by everyday tricks and sleight of hand.

 

If proven, it would be one of the most amazing discoveries in history. However, to date, that just hasn’t happened. If it ever does, you’ll be reading it in Nature and Science, the R.Soc, AIP and every other scientific institution in the world will be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

Until then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but that is utter nonsense.

 

The ranting of a confused (or perhaps even worse, a conman) ex-scientist that has forgotten the scientific method does not mean the scientific community is taking this seriously.

 

For example, a two second search reveals ........

 

“ Among other assertions, Brown says he has remote viewed Jesus Christ”

Shermer, M (2001) The Borderlands of Science: Where Sense Meets Nonsense, Oxford University Press

 

FFS, remote viewing of a supernatural being? Talk about mixing it up. :blink:

 

That tells you all you need to know about this guy. Sadly, there are quite a few ex-scientists that go a bit do-lally :( . Newton was a very famous example.

 

The scientific community is not laughing, it never does, that's just individuals who are asked their opinion (much the same as if you were asked if a cow could jump over the moon).

 

The scientific community is actually responding as it always does, by waiting to see real evidence.

 

No convincing case has ever been presented; the odd one that tries has always been shown to be a lie and explained by everyday tricks and sleight of hand.

 

If proven, it would be one of the most amazing discoveries in history. However, to date, that just hasn’t happened. If it ever does, you’ll be reading it in Nature and Science, the R.Soc, AIP and every other scientific institution in the world will be shouting it from the rooftops.

 

Until then.

Perhaps some are right:

Science only advances, when the old foogies who were stuck on "the old truths" die off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between my shatty connection (which usully prevents me posting at length when the spontaneous urge takes me- usually losing all typing I laboured over)and my progressive laziness,I do enjoy John Doe and Dr Bubb sparring. Both present points and angles representing my usual examination of the actual topics. It is like a concrete reflection (uh?)of my current mental processes and muse on particular items/topics.

 

Sometimes you both get a bit heated it seems. This is ok;quite natural to me. That's the way my mental conversations go.

 

I would just like you both to know that I do enjoy your active 'chats'. Dr Bubb's desire to stimulate discussion is healthy I believe and also JD's responses have sometimes important merit and always lucid enough to see where he is 'coming from'. Even if I personally feel a point or two needs explaining/examining a little further from JD.It does seem JD is usually willing to consider further information that is presented to an area he feels done dusted and finished.

 

Just getting new improved DSL installed (again). If this does show to have some improvement on my net connection and I mitigate my lazy trends I hope I can join in a discussion or so with your good selves. (Typed very quickly)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes you both get a bit heated it seems. This is ok;quite natural to me. That's the way my mental conversations go.

 

I would just like you both to know that I do enjoy your active 'chats'. Dr Bubb's desire to stimulate discussion is healthy I believe and also JD's responses have sometimes important merit and always lucid enough to see where he is 'coming from'. Even if I personally feel a point or two needs explaining/examining a little further from JD.It does seem JD is usually willing to consider further information that is presented to an area he feels done dusted and finished.

Thanks for those comments, Mon Keyhanger.

 

JD is not afraid to disagree with me, but his comments are usually within the respectful range, and he avoids "ad hominem" attacks on those he disagrees with. I do my best to return comments within the same range, and that allows some useful discussion here. Over time, it could even help us to discover areas of agreement.

 

I don't think he takes as much time listening to Podcasts, or examining evidence as I would like him to do. Sometimes that creates a problem (for me), since it seems like he is reacted "with prejudice" rather than truly examining the facts. But there are a limited number of hours in the day, so perhaps he lacks the time to do that.

 

I am hoping for some sort of EVENT that is big enough, and public enough, that it will overturn some of the mainstream thinking on what is scientific Truth and also on how we perceive our own history and our place in the galaxy.

 

If we see such an Event, it will truly be a Momentous Year.

 

I would be very pleased if you could join the discussion here, and also the growing serious discussions in the Fringe Area. If you have time, I think you will find many of the podcasts and videos in the Fringe to be worth listening to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy these debates also. In general they both have useful information and opinions to share.

 

'If' there were people or a single person who had accomplished 'super' powers in any field outside of our accepted norms, would that person or persons be safe? Or become a target for all the negative forces to focus on?

The powers that be, regardless of who or what they are, would not 'allow' us underlings to have that information. Just in case we stretched ourselves and learnt how to accomplish these 'powers'. The balance of power would be destabilised. We would win. And that can not be 'allowed' promoted or encouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy these debates also. In general they both have useful information and opinions to share.

 

'If' there were people or a single person who had accomplished 'super' powers in any field outside of our accepted norms, would that person or persons be safe? Or become a target for all the negative forces to focus on?

The powers that be, regardless of who or what they are, would not 'allow' us underlings to have that information. Just in case we stretched ourselves and learnt how to accomplish these 'powers'. The balance of power would be destabilised. We would win. And that can not be 'allowed' promoted or encouraged.

Thanks for that post...

abd it is great to see your comment #1 here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously havent bothered to listen/watch recent videos I have posted on the Fringe with

Courtney Brown or Russell Targ.

 

I think this is the one...

(searching for it)

THIS ONE will do, until I can find better

(Jump to 6 minutes in)

 

Where Dr Brown talks about how the scientific community is beginning to respond differently to his work on RV.

People, even scientists, aren't laughing any more.

Okay, I found the podcast that I was searching for, where Dr Brown talks about how the academic community is reacting to his research on RV:

 

Courtney Brown - Hour 1 - Remote Viewing & Earth Changes Data For 2013

MP3 : (click on link, below)

 

"Never bet against an academic who will not back down... like a Galileo."

"They are not laughing any more... The who field is clear, and no one is opposing me any more...

They are holding their breath, wondering if it will go away. But no one is laughing anymore."

 

/see: http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2012/07/RIR-120719.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for those comments, Mon Keyhanger.

 

JD is not afraid to disagree with me, but his comments are usually within the respectful range, and he avoids "ad hominem" attacks on those he disagrees with. I do my best to return comments within the same range, and that allows some useful discussion here. Over time, it could even help us to discover areas of agreement.

 

 

Yes thanks MK and Neontetra.

 

I enjoy the debates with Dr. B and agree his posts are generally respectful (if somewhat misguided sometimes :rolleyes: ).

 

And while we've have had some heated moments over the years, there have been many tongue-in-cheek too, and I like to think that there’s a mutual respect for other people’s views here (even though he's always wrong :lol: ).

 

"Never bet against an academic who will not back down... like a Galileo.

Galileo had undeniable, testable proof for his claim :rolleyes: .

 

"They are not laughing any more... The who field is clear, and no one is opposing me any more...

They are holding their breath, wondering if it will go away. But no one is laughing anymore."

 

Erm, except perhaps his colleague at Emory?

 

Brown's remote viewing findings have been dismissed by some other scientists, such as his colleague at Emory University Scott O. Lilienfeld, who has claimed that he has refused to subject his ideas and his claimed psychic powers to independent scientific testing on what Lilienfeld describes as "curious" grounds.[1]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtney_Brown_%28researcher%29

 

Jees, if you can't even convince the guy you work with, you really are kidding yourself :unsure:

 

The scientific community does not accept these sort of claims because there has never been a successful demonstration under proper lab conditions. Ever.

 

Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

 

And just why is it that these so called "gifted" people can never produce the goods under controlled conditions, indeed, many won't even be tested at all? What do they have to hide?

 

If there were such a successful demonstration under proper conditions, the whole world would be in awe.

 

So, in the spirit of open-mindedness and respectful debate (as always :rolleyes: ), if you really think that there is some merit in these claims, then may I suggest that perhaps you start a campaign to get one of these people to submit to a proper test, which you could witness yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scientific community does not accept these sort of claims because there has never been a successful demonstration under proper lab conditions. Ever.

 

Why is that so difficult for people to understand?

 

And just why is it that these so called "gifted" people can never produce the goods under controlled conditions, indeed, many won't even be tested at all? What do they have to hide?

 

If there were such a successful demonstration under proper conditions, the whole world would be in awe.

 

So, in the spirit of open-mindedness and respectful debate (as always :rolleyes: ), if you really think that there is some merit in these claims, then may I suggest that perhaps you start a campaign to get one of these people to submit to a proper test, which you could witness yourself?

I am not sure what that means.

 

The US Defense department hired these guys, and trained more, and used their information for years. (And many think they are still using it.) Others, like police departments, have used the RV information for finding missing children and solving all sorts of crimes.

 

Are they doing that on a lark? Or do they think that they have received the evidence that they needed to use this important tool.

 

As I have said, I have run "experiments" of my own, and am convinced that there is something of real value in RV. Why don't you read more. Get a copy of Dr Brown's book, or if you don't want to spend money: borrow one from a Library, or just read his website.

 

You will find some history there, and in Russell Targ's book and interviews, about how sceptics in the CIA and the military came to be convinced.

 

This video (and its series), will also help to fill in the background:

 

 

Who is Hal Putoff? This is from Wikipedia:

"In the 70s and 80s he directed a CIA/DIA-funded program at SRI International to investigate paranormal abilities, collaborating with Russell Targ in a study of the purported psychic abilities of Uri Geller, Ingo Swann, Pat Price, Joseph McMoneagle and others, as part of the Stargate Project. Both Puthoff and Russell Targ became convinced Geller and Swann had genuine psychic powers"

 

/Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff

 

Brown*, Targ, Putoff, and their employers are serious people.

I regard their work more highly than James Randi and his challenge, of which has been said:

 

"Many Randi critics have labeled the Challenge "biased" and "unscientific." Randi often refers to paranormal proponents as "frauds," and/or "self-deluded fools," and inspite of Randi's stated basis, it is JREF which ultimately must approve all testing protocols. Unfortunately, in many ways, the Challenge remains too much of an unknown to come under any real scrutiny, as JREF asserts that numerous applicants, after failing the mandatory "preliminary testing," have asked that their identities be kept secret. It is also JREF's assertion that no applicant to date has ever passed the preliminary testing.

 

We can argue over the competency and/or impartiality of the JREF organization, but the issue of the Challenge's credibility is affected far more by the words and behavior of Randi himself. Repeatedly, Randi has shown himself to be not only contradictory and hypocritical but eminently illogical in his defense of the Challenge's application process."

 

/see: http://rense.com/general50/james.htm

/comments on Randi's review of Targ/Putoff claims:

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Examskeptics/Prescott_Randi.html

 

*From the same link you provided:

"Brown's research has received notable positive reviews from other advocates of psi phenomena such as Fred Alan Wolf, William A. Tiller, and Daryl Bem."

His critic, Scott O. Lilienfeld, wrote a negative comment back in 1996 (apparently):

http://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/1996/September/ERsept.9/9_9_96first_person.html

I believe from Brown's own comment about "the field being cleared", that the negative comment has now been withdrawn, or retracted.

 

But if you like, we can still treat SOL's comment are un-retracted (since I cannot proved, yet, that it has been withdrawn). Here's what SOL himself wrote about what happened when he asked Brown to submit himself to tests:

"But Brown categorically refused. His reasoning was curious: In his e-mail response to me, he asserted that "tests of the type you have talked about are very old hat" and that the current status of remote viewing "goes light years beyond that which your letter suggests." But if Brown's psychic powers are as advanced as he claims, shouldn't he be able to pass an elementary test of these powers with flying colors?"

 

I totally understand Dr.Brown's reaction. Why should you "submit" yourself to tests of someone else's design? What SOL should be doing IMHO is this:

OFFERING to work with Brown to design a test that they will both be happy with.

(Brown might welcome a chance to demonstrate the power of RV, under conditions that he himself helped to design.)

 

I think people have "proven" that bumblebees cannot flight, yet they fly. Obviously there was something wrong with the form of proof.

=== ===

 

By the way, I have now bothered to read and comment on your critic, and think you should return the same courtesy. I suggest you watch a few videos of Hal Putoff, and comment on what you see. His talk and the story he tells is fascinating, so I do not think you will be wasting your time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debunking the Debunkers

 

 

The author agreed: "Randi makes things up."

"His claim about a cameraman debunking Targ/Putoff... was fabricated."

 

YT Comment:

====

For the record, I am a fan of Randi; that being said, Robert's book is very well written and researched. Anyone who is "hating on him", probably did not read the book. The title is very provocative, yes. But Robert does raise an important question; should we not also question the claims of prominent skeptics, in addition to "the woos"? It is balanced, for the most part, and is certainly worth reading. I don't agree with Robert on everything, though he is right about a great many things. Read it!

429Cage 5 months ago

 

41515_100001784876547_4257763_n.jpg

Robert McLuhan

 

(From Amazon)

A fascinating story of the author's search for the scientifc truth behind "psychic" phenomena, January 1, 2011

By Sun Dog

I greatly enjoyed Robert McLuhan's fine new book "Randi's Prize" ...

 

If you haven't investigated the scientific research regarding psychic (now generally called "psi") phenomena objectively and are curious, I assure you it's an amazing adventure and "Randi's Prize" is an excellent place to start...

 

As it happens, I have a strong background in science (PhD Geophysics, 20 years in research with teams of nuclear physicists and other highly-qualified scientists), so I understand science and, like you no doubt, I also recognize hot air and hype when I see them. I didn't know anything about the scientific study of psi phenomena until I stumbled onto some of the scientific research three or four years ago. To my total astonishment, I learned that psi phenomena do appear to be an actual part of our reality...

 

Yes, psi effects are elusive but, as the book "Randi's Prize" makes clear, they HAVE been studied in painstaking detail for 150 years by highly qualified scientists...

 

/more: http://www.amazon.com/RANDIS-PRIZE-sceptics-paranormal-matters/product-reviews/1848764944/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(From another Review of McLuhan's book)

 

A skeptic's review: This is as solid as parapsychology gets,

April 6, 2012

By Avery Morrow "Namu Tokoyokuni Omuya Amematsur... (USA)

 

All the reviews are five stars for a reason: this is a fact-filled and well-written investigation of what "skeptics" say is already a done deal. Some things you'll learn from reading this book:

 

300px-James_Randi_crop.jpg

 

1. James Randi is not the hero of skepticism that modern New Atheists make him out to be. He makes a living by looking for the biggest names in the spiritualist world (obvious frauds who soak up celebrity, and preexisting celebrities who "feel" spiritual) and going after them to promote his own brand. But his work has barely even touched real parapsychology. Its actual skeptic heroes, Frank Podmore etc. go unsung.

 

2. There's a reason for that: the more people investigate parapsychology, the more convinced they become. No joke! Randi and the news media feel comforted by stories that confirm their materialist views-- but the plural of anecdote is not materialism. Even by reading the preview of this book (check it out!) you will start to understand what parapsychologists really deal with.

 

3. When debunkers do look at the evidence, they get mad. They wall themselves off from anything that might legitimately suggest a non-materialist conclusion, and fall back on anything that could reduce a psychic to a clever hoaxer. McLuhan quotes several instances were debunkers purposefully misrepresent their primary sources to make an unambiguous success look like a failure.

 

This book serves many purposes, but I think the most important one is to separate debunkers like Randi, who was an idol of mine in my teenage years, from real skeptics who don't let their emotions cloud their thinking. I feel ready to read more carefully after this book. Bravo!

 

(Amazon): http://www.amazon.com/RANDIS-PRIZE-sceptics-paranormal-matters/product-reviews/1848764944/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

 

LOL: "When debunkers do look at the evidence, they get mad"

Is Randi mad? Maybe. A charlatan? Probably, at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you’ve managed to find a group of people (conmen perhaps?) with vested interests. What else would they say?

If it were EA’s talking, you would know the slant.

 

But the fact remains that the links you give are just anecdotal, there is no proof in any of them and that’s the difference.

 

Proof is required. It’s as simple as that. If someone claims that they can do these things, then let them prove it in real test conditions. It shouldn’t matter what the test conditions are, surely?

 

If they have a real “ability/gift”, then how on earth can ANY test conditions stop that “ability/gift”?

No-one ever explains that very simple concept.

 

And we can all find lists, so here is a list of some of the prizes (no, not just Randi**), that have been offered for proof of such skills/abilities.

 

**as to that latest attack on him in your last post, what was that old phrase from Ghandi? "then they fight you, then they lose" ;)

 

Date Moderator(s) Prize Details Unclaimed 1963 Abraham Kovoor 100,000 LKR (US$901 approx) Kovoor initiated the Abraham Kovoor's challenge starting in 1963. Yes N/A Alfredo Barrago's Bet €50,000 (US$67,922 approx) "... shown at least a "phenomenon" produced by "medium, seers, sensitive etc." of paranormal nature."[3] Yes N/A Association for Skeptical Enquiry £13,000 (US$20,942 approx) Yes N/A Australian Skeptics AU$100,000 (US$101,374 approx) For proof the existence of extrasensory perception, telepathy, or telekinesis. Yes N/A Basava Premanand 100,000 INR (US$2,190 approx) Yes N/A Center for Inquiry West US$50,000 For "a demonstration of so-called paranormal ability scientifically tested onstage".[4] Yes 2000 Independent Investigations Group US$50,000 Contact www.info@iigwest.org for more information. Challenge rules located at http://www.iigwest.org/challenge.html. Yes N/A Fayetteville Freethinkers US$1,000 Yes 1989-present Skepsis ry (Finnish Association of Skeptics) €10,000 (US$13,584 approx) For anybody in Finland who can produce paranormal phenomena under satisfactory observing conditions or prove that she/he/it is an extraterrestrial by providing a DNA sample for investigation. Money partially from Hannu Karttunen and Iiro Seppänen. Yes N/A Indian Skeptic 100,000 Paranormal Challenge 100,000 INR (US$2,190 approx) Yes 1968–present James Randi Educational Foundation US$1,000,000 Largest prize money in US dollars. (Also see the Sima Nan prize.) Yes N/A Kazakhstan Commission for the Investigation of Anomalous Phenomena US$1,000 Yes N/A Les Sceptiques du Quebec CA$10,000 (US$10,132 approx) Yes N/A New York Area Skeptics US$2,000 Awarded to the successful completion of the James Randi Educational Foundation prize winner. Yes N/A North Texas Skeptics US$12,000 Yes N/A Philip J. Klass (deceased) US$10,000 For proof of an extraterrestrial visit to the Earth. Yes N/A Science and Rationalists' Association of India 2,500,000 INR (US$54,758) Prabir Ghosh will pay Rs. 2,000,000 to anyone can demonstrate a supernatural power in his presence.[5] Yes N/A Scientific American US$2,500 Two US$2,500 offers: (1) for the first authentic spirit photograph made under test conditions, and (2) for the first psychic to produce a "visible psychic manifestation." From 1922. Yes 1999-present Sima Nan 10,000,000 CNY (US$1,524,157 approx) Can be won in conjunction with the James Randi Educational Foundation prize.[6] Yes N/A SKEPP €10,500 (US$14,263 approx) In association with the Sisyphus project. Yes N/A Stuart Landsborough's Puzzling World NZ$100,000 (US$76,989 approx) Yes N/A Swedish Humanist Association 100,000 SEK (US$15,421 approx) Yes N/A Eesti Skeptik 1000 EUR (US$1,300 approx) Yes N/A Raul Jaanson 6,000 EUR (US$8,000 approx) Yes N/A Eng. Sanad Rashed and Dr.Ahmed Khaled US$5,000 For proof ouija boards function as claimed. Yes 1987–2002 Henri Broch, Jacques Theodor, Gérard Majax €200,000 International Zetetic Challenge Yes 2011–present Daniel Zepeda MX$20,000 Challenge rules and information at http://papaesceptico.com/reto-paranormal-de-papa-esceptico/ Yes 2004-present Gesellschaft zur wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften 10,000 EUR (US$13,000 approx) Yes

 

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

 

Can you guess how many have been claimed? Ever? That’s right. None, not one, ever! Interesting huh? :rolleyes:

 

 

As for books and blogs, here are a few that maybe you'd be interested in.

 

The Skeptic's Guide to the Paranormal

 

Speaking directly to the reader, and always with respect for those who believe, Kelly gives us a bite-size, nonacademic approach to debunking hugely popular superstitions and mysteries. Did you know that you, too, can bend spoons and read minds? This book will show you how.

 

There you go, you could bend spoons and read peoples minds too! :D (Of course, we all really know that "There is no spoon" ;) )

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Skeptics-Guide-Paranormal-Lynne-Kelly/dp/1560257113

 

Top 25 Paranormal Skeptic Blogs

January 25th, 2011

 

Do you believe? Whether you’ve had a firsthand experience with the paranormal or seldom believe the ghost stories you heard as a kid, these are the blogs to turn to when you want a major myth or paranormal experience debunked. Some paranormal historians have made a career out of this and now blog on the topic to prevent folks from being spooked by events and reports that can be explained with pure logic.

 

http://www.pharmacydegrees.net/top-25-paranormal-skeptic-blogs/

 

Can you not see that if it were real, there would be, for example, no more missing persons, no military secrets, (nowhere to hide :ph34r: ), it would be easy to make billions by looking into company secrets, there would be no more government secrets........ I could go on, but I'm sure you can think of many yourself.

 

Have you not seen the amazing tricks of people like Derren Brown and the likes? Absolutely fantastic, logic defying, mind bending stuff, and if they wanted they could make fortunes ripping off people, just like many of the charlatans do on a smaller scale.

 

However, Derren Brown and those like him admit it’s all just tricks, smoke and mirrors. They don’t pretend it’s real, yet still make a very good living.

 

So, for all those you mention that think they have the "gift" and who still want people to believe it’s really a paranormal ability, then let them prove it.

 

There are loads of prizes on offer for such things, so perhaps they should get out there and start winning them. I mean, they'd be stupid not to wouldn't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you’ve managed to find a group of people (conmen perhaps?) with vested interests. What else would they say?

If it were EA’s talking, you would know the slant.

 

But the fact remains that the links you give are just anecdotal, there is no proof in any of them and that’s the difference.

Do you actually BOTHER TO READ what I post, and follow the links?

 

As far as I am concerned, the Video Interview with Robert McLuhan fully supports my points,

and I think anyone who watches it and reads the review of his book will say:

"Game, Set and Match to Dr Bubb!"

 

You show yet again, that you just deny or wave away anything that you do not want to consider.

 

If that's your version of Science, I don't want any of it !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×