Page: ...
The Tea FairySILVER Member
old hand
853 posts
Location: Behind you...


Posted:
Hi all

I've been studying the use of complementary therapies in palliative care for a research project at Uni. I've been looking at how these often clinically unproven therapies are being integrated into conventional medical care for the dying, the reasons for it and the benefits of it e.t.c.

One of the things I've been up to is watching a therapist give reiki treatments to patients. I started talking to the therapist afterwards about the 'energy body' and if she can see it. She says she just feels the energy, but cannot see it.

I personally would like to believe that we each have an aura or 'energy body', but at the same time I don't like buying into things without a healthy dose of scepticism also. So I was wondering what you guys all think...

If anyone also wants to argue for or against auras, or give their personal experiences with 'energy', I'm interested in whatever you guys have to say.

Cheers.

Idolized by Aurinoko

Take me disappearing through the smoke rings of my mind....

Bob Dylan


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
 Written by: The Tea Fairy



Hey Jeff, I'm not implying that the technique works but the experiment is serious! It might even give us some scientific proof that the technique is indeed BS, then we can all stop arguing. The guy who is conducting the research is



Paul Dobson BSc PhD AFBPsS C.Psychol

Senior Lecturer in Organisational Behaviour



He worked hard to get all those letters after his name, I don't think he'd waste his time if he didn't think it was significant, even if it does just prove the technique is false. I'm not mocking the science until I've seen the full report, maybe you should wait to see the methodology and analysis before you proclaim it as invalid? smile



Check it out, seriously, it's a con.



It's not certain yet if they are seriously appraising the technique, but it's quite doubtful given the rather dubious nature of the subject matter.



It is possible Dr. Dobson's been taken in. All the letters in the world after your name don't change the fact that humans are capable of being tricked.



The other possibility is that he is looking to deliver a smack-down to these con artists, but I wouldn't hold out much hope.



EDIT: Looked up some info on Paul Dobson. He's a psychologist with some rather strange publications-



Dobson Paul and O'Keffe Elena. Investigations into Stress and it's Management using the Gas Discharge Visualisation Technique. International J of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. June 2000.



Looks like he's been taken in. No serious scientist would publish in the IJACM, it's a sham journal. frown



EDIT:The plot thickens...

Link

Apparently in 2005 he has concluded the GDV can't be used to diagnose illness, but holds out hope for detecting stress.



It's looking slightly better for a reasonable display from the good doctor. smile
EDITED_BY: jeff(fake) (1169656515)

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


The Tea FairySILVER Member
old hand
853 posts
Location: Behind you...


Posted:
OMG the shirts really are awful! ubblol

Yeah he may have been tricked, equally he could be trying to de-bunk the whole thing, I really don't know enough about the study to say what it's all about. I've met the guy and he doesn't seem to be just buying into it all blindly, he's just interested (but again, I don't know enough about him to be able to judge). I would still be interested to find out what the hypothesis is, methodology etc and what literature or previous research the study is based on. I will post links when it's all finished, then as far as this study is concerned we'll know for sure.

Idolized by Aurinoko

Take me disappearing through the smoke rings of my mind....

Bob Dylan


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Just a suggestion, but I think this GSV business reminds me of something...




Non-Https Image Link

Non-Https Image Link

Non-Https Image Link




Entertaining my crazy hypothesis for a moment, since stress increases perspiration, that would give a clear difference if the GSV device were a glorified plasma ball. This, if true, would explain the results obtained by Dr. Dobson. (Curiously, I note that the Doctor's more recent publications refuting the possibility of being able to detect illness haven't been publicised on the GSV websites...)



EDIT: Shirt image, for mockage purposes.


Non-Https Image Link

EDITED_BY: jeff(fake) (1169662101)

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


DominoSILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK


Posted:
Anyone here played Episode 2 of Sam & Max 2? I can't help think of Prismatology when I see those shirts.

Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.


shen shuiSILVER Member
no excuses. no apologies.
1,799 posts
Location: aotearoa, New Zealand


Posted:
hypothetically...

.. say 1% of the population were blind, and 99% could see. the blind people would surely take the word of the 99% that THEY could see trees and birds and houses and cars and things, right..?

but what if 1% of the world could see, and 99% couldnt? now, objectively, you and i both know that there are still things to be seen, even though the majority of ppl cant see them..

and that doesnt mean that its not real, or not there.

but surely the 99% who could not see the trees etc would question the sight of the 1% who cuold see.

(yeah, i know, an analogy)

i think that because, throughout the ages, various peoples of various locations have had similar experiences in relation to the non-physical world (where you are Confined to 5 senses) (i am sorry, i am unable to provide any references for any of the knowledge that i have of this matter. if you are so interested in the proof of these things i am sure you wouldnt mind spending time conducting your own research), there is a lot of validity to things like the aura and energetic medicine (ie acupuncture, homeopathy), and that just because a larger percetage dont spend their time developing their awareness of their non-physical environment and actually experiencing these states of being (which Everybody is capable of doing - coz, just as once i was unable to see peoples aura's or work with their energy, i was once unable to walk (just like you). and i learnt how to walk (just like you). Over time, i have also learnt how to feel and see my own energy (which almost somehow looks like that great tshirt), other peoples energy, and be able to direct it in certain ways for healing, theraupetic means. just because a larger percentage dont have access to these other states of being (call them frequencies of vibration, if you like.. (ie, everything is energy vibrating at a certain frequency...)) does not mean they are not there amd are unable to be experienced.

these are real, valid states of being for me, just as what you experience in your every day life is to you. just because not many people perceive these states does not mean they are not real.

i can understand people wanting to have proof, and that is fine. i find it interesting that all people have a different amount of proof that they need for them to believe something.

i wonder why people question other peoples experiences so much when they could perform their own experiment and delve into their non-physical body's themselves and come up with their own conclusions.

smile

but then, at the end of the day, you always find what you look for.

peace.

those that know, dont say. those that say, dont know.


SkattoGOLD Member
Walking on whims...
687 posts
Location: Eastbourne, UK


Posted:
Oh wow that shirt.. just... wow. umm
meditate

Skatto

"Fly like a mouse,
Run like a cushion,
Be the small bookcase."

For goodness sake, don't aggravate the otters!!!


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
 Written by: shen shui

just because a larger percentage dont have access to these other states of being (call them frequencies of vibration, if you like.. (ie, everything is energy vibrating at a certain frequency...)) does not mean they are not there amd are unable to be experienced.


This is a commonly stated postition shen, it's been answered earlier, but I'd like to address it again now the situation is less hostile.

Firsly, I'd like to make an admission. I am red/green colour blind. A fairly obvious corrolary of that is that I percieve the world differently for most people. In essence you already have a sense that I lack, being able to visually differentiate between red and green. If I ever felt any real doubt that the red/green sense existed then it would be a simple matter to construct a simple experiment to test the ability.

For example: Take a group of alledged red/green seers and expose them independantly to a selection of coloured objects selected by a red/green seer to be diffinitively red/green. If the ability was real, they should all concur. If they fell about in disagreement, became defensive and aggressive about being "doubted" and generally could not adequately perform the test, then perhaps I would have good reason to doubt the ability. Numbers and proportions would have nothing to do with it.

Like myself, there will be people have a slightly different manner of perception, or differ in the way their brain makes sense of it. A good potential explaination of why some people believe they can see emotions visually is a varient of synaesthesia. Other may simply be flat out dishonest, and others simply honestly deluded. These explainations, coupled with the confrimation-bias (emphasise hits, ignore misses) inherant in human memory, give a powerful reason to consider any claim of super- or preternatural perception sceptically. If we do not then we risk becoming fodder for frauds, such as Sylvia Browne (to use an example of a someone claiming powers for money).

There is no reason why any claimed supernatural ability could not in theory be test for validity. Despite this no-one has been able to demonstrate any powers in a rigourusly scientific test. This doesn't prove that they aren't there (but then, the absence of Santa's workshop on GoogleEarth doesn't disprove Santa's existance), but it at least suggests that we should not believe a person claiming powers until they are able to give at least a reasonable standard of evidence that they can do the things they claim they can do.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


The Tea FairySILVER Member
old hand
853 posts
Location: Behind you...


Posted:
hug for Shen and Jeff; thanks for posting such articulate, interesting and non-aggressive replies! Was a pleasure to read both your views.

Yeah, I find Sylvia Browne really annoying! I remember reading a few chapters of one of her books when I was about 12 or something, even then I was raising my eyebrows about her views of 'heaven'... I can't remember exactly what they were, but it was basically that heaven is exactly like earth except the people are nicer, so you'll still have your house, car, pets etc waiting for you. umm

The idea of heaven being a very materialistic place just didn't sit with me, so i've never held Sylvia in high regard!

Idolized by Aurinoko

Take me disappearing through the smoke rings of my mind....

Bob Dylan


shen shuiSILVER Member
no excuses. no apologies.
1,799 posts
Location: aotearoa, New Zealand


Posted:
..something that i've noticed is that people tend to find what they are looking for. ie, if you think that 2,3,5 is symbolic and powerful then your subconscious will look for instances of this sequence appearing in your every-day life, and you will consciously notice it. as in, quantum chaos or particle theory or whatever its called where the viewer observing the experiment cant help but influence it.



(and this could lead me on to why acupuncture is so difficult to double-blind randomize control trial for validities sake - every variable is important, not just the needles penetrating the skin at certain locations. but thats another story)



and i know that this influences my ability to see aura's and manipulate energy, and i am fine with that (manipulate, unfortunately, has negative connotations).



but what i am getting at, is that people who do not believe until they have overwhelming evidence sometimes will not find the evidence they are looking for, because they start off by doubting.



another way of saying it is, have an open mind. to me, the fact that many people experience these states, and are able to objectively describe these states, is a very strong indicator of their validity. (check the work of barbara brennan if you are really very keen on western explanations, because this lovely lady has been on the cutting edge of the western frontiers push into research of the HEF (or human energetic field) for the past 20 years thats right, they have been doing research for 20 years already. so much so that there is an internationally recognized course in energetic healing working from three separate countries. check this out)



disclaimer: i am not saying that anyone who has posted on this thread is close minded, or distrustful, or anything. i hope i left my statements broad, generalized and vague enough to leave much room for movement for all people to not feel threatened by my statements. smile



its my personal opinion that everybody is capable of everything, and we are predominantly restricted by our belief that we can or cannot do something. so im going to believe i can do everything, which potentially opens me up to far many more exciting experiences than people who doubt that something can occur, and doubt that they could do it IF it was real.



its like the old adage about the athiest: how can you have a belief that something is not? to disbelieve in something, it must first be in existence. if its not in existence, the thought would never come to mind to doubt its validity.



also, something does not have to fit into the predominant western science thought-paradigm for it to work, or be valid. i guess its a bit unfortunate that so many people have been unconsciously swayed by their society into needing so much tangible, physical evidence before believing something. but then, thats not my loss, and i dont mind too much. smile all im saying here is that there ARE other ways of understanding these things, and the best way that i can think of is this: if you really are that keen on seeing the validitiy of these states of being, then you should conduct your own research, upon yourself...



and to whoever said that they tried for years but couldnt get anything, perhaps you were being shown the wrong methods. perhaps you were shown the right methods but didnt do them right. perhaps you DID do them right, but didnt do them for long enough.



there is never a 100% absolute hard-n-fast explanation for Anything. EVERYTHING is subjective and relative. (even this statement)



peace.

those that know, dont say. those that say, dont know.


Chronofracture333Hobo Gaylord
329 posts
Location: I am worldwide and lush


Posted:
Hmm... When I was studying prosthetics & orthotics (false legs and back braces) we spent a lot of time investigating walking patterns. Now, while we did a lot of testing on pressure plates and video we were always taught to watch a patient when they weren't being tested as they would be walking un-selfconciously and often totally differently. It made the testing very difficult and I often found I'd ignore the video and computer, and got better results (ie. a false leg that worked) from just watching the patient in the waiting room.

With regards to this thread I'm just not sure I could trust the results from a scientific setting, They mess with peoples heads too much for useful results.

ubbrollsmile

*no moves there are no moves there are no moves there are no moves there are no moves there are no*

"Oooh, what a shiny new move!"


PsyriSILVER Member
artisan
1,576 posts
Location: Berkshire, UK


Posted:
I know that kirlian photography is the only way atm to show auras. They even tried this on plants (they cut a branch off and it took a while for the plant to realise it had lost its limb)....

I would just like to say after this point.... plants have feelings too. I don't want to get into another meat/veggie debate.....

I think everything has auric tendencies depending on what they do.

WooktasticBRONZE Member
the kicker of elves
371 posts
Location: Dublin, Ireland


Posted:
From my understanding the electricity passing through the nervous system generates a weak electrical field surrounding the body. This has always been what I believed auras to be.

Man is no more than a conduit for excrement to pass through.- daVinci

Jointly owned by BurdA and Tinypixie

Wielder of the voice of Patrick Stewart


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Hi Shen, you are making a whole boatload of different points in you post. This post will be quite wordy, but will encapsulate the mainstream scientific position on such matters.

 Written by: shen shui


..something that i've noticed is that people tend to find what they are looking for. ie, if you think that 2,3,5 is symbolic and powerful then your subconscious will look for instances of this sequence appearing in your every-day life, and you will consciously notice it.


This phenomenon is a varient of confirmation-bias. You correctly comment that it is simply an effect of looking out for it. Nothing actually changes in the environment, we simply pay more attention to different bits of it.

 Written by: shen shui

as in, quantum chaos or particle theory or whatever its called where the viewer observing the experiment cant help but influence it.


I'm afraid I'm going to have to correct you on this one. What you are refering to is a common misrepresentation of the Aharonov-Bohn effect. The correctly stated effect is essentially that any physical phenomenon which would allow the exeriment to be obervable (such as a reflecting photon) would change it. It makes no more difference to the experiment if the reflected photon is detected by a computer system, a human, or simply left alone, the experiment is still changed. Sadly, many in the new age community have run away with the idea and misrepresented it to suggest that simply looking at something changes it.

 Written by: shen shui

but what i am getting at, is that people who do not believe until they have overwhelming evidence sometimes will not find the evidence they are looking for, because they start off by doubting.

another way of saying it is, have an open mind.


The strictly scientific position to any unsubstantiated claim is to regard it as unsubstantiated, not as false (although in practical terms it often useful to regard a completely unsubstantiated claim false as a corrolary). What a scientist does is collect evidence in such a way that it would convince a reasonable person. If an objective claim is being made, it will in theory be possible to construct a valid test for it, making adjustments for any claim interferences (cameras, magnets etc.). A well designed experiment will give result which are completely idependant of the designers beliefs or opinions.

 Written by: shen shui

to me, the fact that many people experience these states, and are able to objectively describe these states, is a very strong indicator of their validity.


There are a number of technical problems here. Firstly, you cannot ever truely "know" (or know that you know, if you believe ou can "know") what anyone experiences. Secondly, one cannot "objectively" describe such a state, they can only subjectively describe it.

 Written by: shen shui

(check the work of barbara brennan if you are really very keen on western explanations, because this lovely lady has been on the cutting edge of the western frontiers push into research of the HEF (or human energetic field) for the past 20 years thats right, they have been doing research for 20 years already. so much so that there is an internationally recognized course in energetic healing working from three separate countries. check this out)


There really isn't enough time to go into the fine details of this matter, so I will cover it briefly. A vital aspect of being a scientist is to design your experiments carefully, and to co-operate with the rest of the scientific community, to avoid becoming detached from reality and producing valid work. Sometimes a scientist, for personal, religious, economic or other reasons, basically stops acting in a scientific fashion. For instance, the "scientific evidence" the cigarette companies came up with against a link to cancer. When someone stops acting in a scientific fashion, the work which they produce is simply junk. It can be a complex and controversial judgement call when exactly one has to regard a scientists work as junk, as it is very much a spectrum. However Barbara is very much to on the extreme end of the spectrum, being driven by religious and financial reasons to disregard proper scientific methodology.

 Written by: shen shui


its my personal opinion that everybody is capable of everything, and we are predominantly restricted by our belief that we can or cannot do something. so im going to believe i can do everything, which potentially opens me up to far many more exciting experiences than people who doubt that something can occur, and doubt that they could do it IF it was real.


That's a popular sentiment in modern culture, but it isn't correct, and I fell it's unhealthy. If I was totally bad ass and a repentant vampire, I would demonstrate the point by asking you if you could fly, then throwing you out the window of a tall building, but I've watched too much American t.v lately...

 Written by: shen shui


its like the old adage about the athiest: how can you have a belief that something is not?

This is really a seperate point from the others, but I'll address it anyway. The correct definition of "Atheism" (taking the word to it's latin roots, and modern meaning by atheist groups) is generally not the belief in the absence of god/s (mankind has invented thousands over the aeons), it is the absence of belief any god/s. Thus, many would argue that all humans are born atheists.

 Written by: shen shui

to disbelieve in something, it must first be in existenceif its not in existence, the thought would never come to mind to doubt its validity.

Something does not have to exist to not believe in it. I do not believe in the invisable pink unicorn, that does not mean the invisable pink unicron must exist.

 Written by: shens shui


also, something does not have to fit into the predominant western science thought-paradigm for it to work, or be valid. i guess its a bit unfortunate that so many people have been unconsciously swayed by their society into needing so much tangible, physical evidence before believing something. but then, thats not my loss, and i dont mind too much. smile all im saying here is that there ARE other ways of understanding these things, and the best way that i can think of is this: if you really are that keen on seeing the validitiy of these states of being, then you should conduct your own research, upon yourself...


Does not conducting one own research upon oneself not carry the inescapable possibility, if not the great likelyhood, of being absolutely, completely wrong? The scientific method (practiced by peoples of all cultures, races and creeds, truely a great human universal) has demonstrated itself to be the most highly effect method humans have for elucidating details of the world. If there is a better method, it has has never yet been proposed.

 Written by: shen shui


and to whoever said that they tried for years but couldnt get anything, perhaps you were being shown the wrong methods. perhaps you were shown the right methods but didnt do them right. perhaps you DID do them right, but didnt do them for long enough.


You must also accept the possible that it simply does not work, if you are being open minded.

 Written by: shen shui

there is never a 100% absolute hard-n-fast explanation for Anything. EVERYTHING is subjective and relative. (even this statement)


If everything being subjective is subjective then logically it is possible for the existance of objectivity.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


shen shuiSILVER Member
no excuses. no apologies.
1,799 posts
Location: aotearoa, New Zealand


Posted:
wow.

cool reply, jeff. thanx for the time and effort you put in to verify and negate what i said... im humbled that you cared so much to present this for me... smile

your first three points: i concur.

 Written by: jeff


However Barbara is very much to on the extreme end of the spectrum, being driven by religious and financial reasons to disregard proper scientific methodology.




i honestly dont see how you can come to such a conclusion so rapidly, jeff. i am left presuming that you did not research into the site or her past enough to actually see that this has been, and continues to be, at the leading edge of scientific research of the Human Energy Field in the US and Europe. Please do a bit more reading before presenting your opinions in such a strong manner. smile perhaps you just got carried away, and i can understand that... i find it a lot of fun to have a good rant... smile but its good to know when you are ranting, too.. haha.

 Written by: jeff


 Written by: shen


its my personal opinion that everybody is capable of everything, and we are predominantly restricted by our belief that we can or cannot do something. so im going to believe i can do everything, which potentially opens me up to far many more exciting experiences than people who doubt that something can occur, and doubt that they could do it IF it was real.



That's a popular sentiment in modern culture, but it isn't correct,




is that your opinion, jeff, or scientific fact? smile

 Written by: jeff


Firstly, you cannot ever truely "know" (or know that you know, if you believe ou can "know") what anyone experiences.




if this is so, then how can you know that i dont know what anyone experiences? if you cannot know my mind you cannot know what i know, therefore, there is the potential that one thing can be known by more than one person? have you read about mirror neurons? i presume so, i have always thought you have been well-read and are intelligent and articulate (i have enjoyed observing your posts over time smile )

im not trying to persuade you of anything, by the way, just putting my thoughts up, i dont think im right all the time, and if i say something that you think is wrong, im fine with that, you know? just thought people might like to hear from someone who doesnt only postulate about these states of being, but rather, experiences and interacts with them on a daily basis... smile

 Written by: jeff


Something does not have to exist to not believe in it. I do not believe in the invisable pink unicorn, that does not mean the invisable pink unicron must exist.




but it exists as a thought-form in the minds of everyone who read that statement. just because it does not exist in the Physical realm does not mean it does not exist. do your thoughts exist less than your physical body because your mental/emotional bodies vibrate at higher frequencies? hmmm....! i dont think they do. i think, feel, see and experience that they exist Just As Much as our physical body, and interpenetrates it as a unified whole.


 Written by: jeff


You must also accept the possible that it simply does not work, if you are being open minded.




i do. and perhaps it doesnt. but i know that it IS working for me, or rather, i am working with IT (perhaps there is no separation :P), and at the end of the day i am happy that you have been stimulated by this discussion and that you said what felt right to you, because thats what i've been doing... haha..

sorry, bloody hippies... you know.

 Written by: jeff


If everything being subjective is subjective then logically it is possible for the existance of objectivity.




i maintain and honour my experience of the duality of the subjective and objective realms. :P i thought it was obvious that subjectivity and objectivity go hand in hand.

and to cast some scientific validation on this situation, In the 1950's:

a Japanese researcher, Yoshio Nakatani, proved that acupuncture points had a lower electrical resistance compared to non acupuncture points. He later came up with Ryodaraku as a way to measure the electrical properties in the different meridians.

In the 1960's, a French researcher, Pierre de Vernejoul, established the existance of acupuncture meridians. He injected radioactive isotopes into acupuncture points and tracked their movement with a special gamma imaging camera. The isotopes traveled 30 centimeters within 4 minutes. Vernejoul also inected the radioactive isotopes into blood and lymph vessels and these isotopes did not travel anywhere. This reserach seemed to suggest that acupuncture meridians are seperate pathways in the body.

smile

those that know, dont say. those that say, dont know.


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
 Written by: shen shui


 Written by: jeff


However Barbara is very much to on the extreme end of the spectrum, being driven by religious and financial reasons to disregard proper scientific methodology.




i honestly dont see how you can come to such a conclusion so rapidly, jeff. i am left presuming that you did not research into the site or her past enough to actually see that this has been, and continues to be, at the leading edge of scientific research of the Human Energy Field in the US and Europe. Please do a bit more reading before presenting your opinions in such a strong manner. smile perhaps you just got carried away, and i can understand that... i find it a lot of fun to have a good rant... smile but its good to know when you are ranting, too.. haha.


I'm really not ranting, that's what the plants thread is for. What I'm saying is that this woman really isn't a good scientist. It can be confusing to non-scientists to explain how we appraise each others work, so I left it out of my original post, but i'll go into a bit more depth here. When a scientist does some work, they write it up and submit it a science journal, who employ experts who read it over to judge whether it's been done well, or is garbage. Some journals are commonly known to have rubbish judges who let everything through, so serious scientists ignore them. If a scientists work gets published in a serious journal, then we can consider it a serious piece of work unless someone demonstrates it otherwise. It's not a perfect system, but it works. Babara doesn't do that, so the legitimacy of her work is suspect.

 Written by: shen

 Written by: shen


its my personal opinion that everybody is capable of everything, and we are predominantly restricted by our belief that we can or cannot do something. so im going to believe i can do everything, which potentially opens me up to far many more exciting experiences than people who doubt that something can occur, and doubt that they could do it IF it was real.


 Written by: jeff


That's a popular sentiment in modern culture, but it isn't correct,




is that your opinion, jeff, or scientific fact? smile



Can you fly?

 Written by: shen


 Written by: jeff


Firstly, you cannot ever truely "know" (or know that you know, if you believe ou can "know") what anyone experiences.




if this is so, then how can you know that i dont know what anyone experiences? if you cannot know my mind you cannot know what i know, therefore, there is the potential that one thing can be known by more than one person? have you read about mirror neurons? i presume so, i have always thought you have been well-read and are intelligent and articulate (i have enjoyed observing your posts over time smile )

im not trying to persuade you of anything, by the way, just putting my thoughts up, i dont think im right all the time, and if i say something that you think is wrong, im fine with that, you know? just thought people might like to hear from someone who doesnt only postulate about these states of being, but rather, experiences and interacts with them on a daily basis... smile


Mirror neurons let you think that you know what a person knows, and you might actually be thinking the same thing. But you cannot truely know that you know what they know. After all, con artists opperate by tricking you into thinking that they aren't thinking about decieving you. It's a philospohical point that's never been countered, and one that will get bogged down in endless chains of "know that you know"s

 Written by: shen

 Written by: jeff


Something does not have to exist to not believe in it. I do not believe in the invisable pink unicorn, that does not mean the invisable pink unicron must exist.




but it exists as a thought-form in the minds of everyone who read that statement. just because it does not exist in the Physical realm does not mean it does not exist. do your thoughts exist less than your physical body because your mental/emotional bodies vibrate at higher frequencies? hmmm....! i dont think they do. i think, feel, see and experience that they exist Just As Much as our physical body, and interpenetrates it as a unified whole.


That's equivocation or different meanings of "exist", shen. The idea of a god is different from the physical or meta-physical existance of a god.
 Written by: shen


 Written by: jeff


You must also accept the possible that it simply does not work, if you are being open minded.




i do. and perhaps it doesnt. but i know that it IS working for me, or rather, i am working with IT (perhaps there is no separation :P), and at the end of the day i am happy that you have been stimulated by this discussion and that you said what felt right to you, because thats what i've been doing... haha..


I'm not sure you've thought that one out wink

 Written by: shen


i maintain and honour my experience of the duality of the subjective and objective realms. :P i thought it was obvious that subjectivity and objectivity go hand in hand.

and to cast some scientific validation on this situation, In the 1950's:

a Japanese researcher, Yoshio Nakatani, proved that acupuncture points had a lower electrical resistance compared to non acupuncture points. He later came up with Ryodaraku as a way to measure the electrical properties in the different meridians.

In the 1960's, a French researcher, Pierre de Vernejoul, established the existance of acupuncture meridians. He injected radioactive isotopes into acupuncture points and tracked their movement with a special gamma imaging camera. The isotopes traveled 30 centimeters within 4 minutes. Vernejoul also inected the radioactive isotopes into blood and lymph vessels and these isotopes did not travel anywhere. This reserach seemed to suggest that acupuncture meridians are seperate pathways in the body.


Two points:
The first is that we need to do is carefully consider the "scientific validation" you cite. Have they been confirmed by other researchers, and generally regarded as correctly done and well perform? There is a lot of junk science out there, and it can be very difficult even for a specialist to detect it.

The second is that the physical reality of a "meridan" in the body, if it was real, doesn't really corroborate your point.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
just observing jeff, cause i have seen it more than a few times now, but it seems like if you don't like a fact, even if it is from a journal, you make up some reason why it isn't a fact. for example, some journals really aren't journals and therefore, the fact is immediately discounted
why not just say you disagree with that statement, you scientists-as you put it-disagree all the time, it fuels experimentation and research

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: faithinfire


just observing jeff, cause i have seen it more than a few times now, but it seems like if you don't like a fact, even if it is from a journal, you make up some reason why it isn't a fact. for example, some journals really aren't journals and therefore, the fact is immediately discounted
why not just say you disagree with that statement, you scientists-as you put it-disagree all the time, it fuels experimentation and research



I'm afraid it's just a simple fact that some journals are nowhere near the standard required for the scientific community.

No scientist will take those journals seriously because they are not up to the standard required- the research they report is not up to the high standards required by scientific method.

This is not a 'pick-and-choose' matter- some journals are respected by the community, others aren't.

Those who disagree with scientific standards are free to dismiss them and pursue their beliefs regardless of those standards.

And I wish they would do that- have the courage of their convictions and just accept that their views are not scientific, rather than persisting in running down science and saying its faulty because it won't back them up.

To those who've got those kind of beliefs are truly secure in them- what better way to demonstrate that then to say 'OK, they're unscientific, but they work for me, so I'm fine with that'.

Whereas, running down those who helpfully try to explain what science is, would seem to indicate a degree of insecurity about those beliefs.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
incidently, Jeff- much as I'm backing you up in the post above, I do feel the need to point out (and I hope this doesn't cause offence) that some aspects of the way you post are pretty sure to put some peoples backs up.

A certain arrogance seeps through and I'm pretty sure that's part of the reason you attract some fairly hostile replies.

Of course, it may be that you're OK with that, but, at the end of the day, these discussions are supposed to be about communication and, when it comes to trying to pass on insight to those who have opposed views, the last thing you need to do is cause unnecessary annoyance, cos that just blocks communication completely.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
if people realy are phycic why do we not see any of them makeing use of it



why arn't all profesinal poker players phycic



why do we never see the headline phycic wins lottery



why do we never see the headline phycics averts terrorist attack



why arn't the worlds greatist and most respected doctors spirtiual healers



why dont the police simply use a phycic to ask the murder victim who killed them



and why do phycics only ever use there powers to perform feats that can be replicated by magicains i dont know about you lot but that sets off alot of alarm bells for me



and finaly a project that demonstrated very clearly why we must be very very carfull about the types of scientific recearch we accept as good science



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Alpha

EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1170461306)

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches


RoziSILVER Member
100 characters max...
2,996 posts
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia


Posted:
 Written by: onewheeldave



 Written by: faithinfire



just observing jeff, cause i have seen it more than a few times now, but it seems like if you don't like a fact, even if it is from a journal, you make up some reason why it isn't a fact. for example, some journals really aren't journals and therefore, the fact is immediately discounted

why not just say you disagree with that statement, you scientists-as you put it-disagree all the time, it fuels experimentation and research





I'm afraid it's just a simple fact that some journals are nowhere near the standard required for the scientific community.



No scientist will take those journals seriously because they are not up to the standard required- the research they report is not up to the high standards required by scientific method...



Those who disagree with scientific standards are free to dismiss them and pursue their beliefs regardless of those standards.









To extend a little bit on what onewheeldave is saying, within my own field there is a big distinction between academic papers/research and non-academic theory. I work in education, and at least when it comes to academia, there is a divide between what is deemed to be "education" and deemed to be "training". It is implied that because of the more rigorous research methods of academia, there is more value in "education" than in "training".



Yet no one who has seen the instinctive knowledge of a good "trainer" as they guide a class through a subject, recognising those who are lagging and extending those who require it, can deny that the knowledge, experience and skills there are real. It is just harder to identify what is really going on.



Having been inside academia, I will say that there is an awful lot of politics that goes into it. Sometimes this prevents knowledge from outside that sphere infiltrating inside (eg. A well researched paper that is not written in the appropriate style or with the right references not making it into publication for a particular journal).



Basically, just because knowledge and experience has come from a source other than academia, doesn't mean it is any less real (although it doesn't mean it is always right). And just because something comes from an academic source, doesn't make it right (and that doesn't mean it is always corrupt or wrong, either).



All you can do is rely on your own critical faculties to analyse the research and thought behind what is being presented.



 Written by: robnunchucks



if people realy are phycic why do we not see any of them makeing use of it



why arn't all profesinal poker players phycic



why do we never see the headline phycic wins lottery



why do we never see the headline phycics averts terrorist attack



why arn't the worlds greatist and most respected doctors spirtiual healers



why dont the police simply use a phycic to ask the murder victim who killed them



and why do phycics only ever use there powers to perform feats that can be replicated by magicains i dont know about you lot but that sets off alot of alarm bells for me



and finaly a project that demonstrated very clearly why we must be very very carfull about the types of scientific recearch we accept as good science



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Alpha







Errrrmmmm, I suspect a lot of what you are asking has been answered by people far more qualified to answer than I. But my take on it is this:



- If a person has a power and is going to use it dishonestly (eg. winning lotteries or poker) they are not going to shout it from the rooftops and risk never being able to make money again.

- If a person has a power and has a code of ethics that stop them from using that power dishonestly, well... do I need to complete that sentence?

- We cannot determine if physic powers are real, let alone how they work. And I am yet to meet someone who claims to such reliable psychic powers that they believe they are 100% correct all the time. So why would a detective choose to use a method of investigation that is not wholly reliable and therefore is unlikely to stand up in court, even if there was a chance of getting the right answer?

- Just because a phenomenom can be duplicated using certain means, does not mean it was created using those means. (Although it does suggest that the phenomenom bears further investigation)

- Just because people who believe they have psychic powers can be fooled, does not make them wrong.



I'm not really on any side in this discussion. I smack bang on the fence (good ol' fence sitter me wink ). My main purpose in posting is to say that neither side has a monopoly on the certainty of their arguments.

It was a day for screaming at inanimate objects.

What this calls for is a special mix of psychology and extreme violence...


faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
fine, he has a point, but he does this often, dismisses something as he sees it unfit for the world he lives in...i forgot which thread it was but...it doesn't matter because jeff doesn't really exist anyway

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


shen shuiSILVER Member
no excuses. no apologies.
1,799 posts
Location: aotearoa, New Zealand


Posted:
whatever you say, jeff.



it appears that whatever i say to you, you disagree with and have an argument for, so i am not going to reply to your reply. smile



i am not interested in attempting to show you enough information that you would consider adequate for you to allow something to be considered "real" in Your reality... who knows how long that would take? (rhetorical)



at the end of the day, i actually experience states of being that, it appears, from your words, you do not. you telling me something that i am experiencing is not Real because it does not fit into your understanding of the world is irrationally juvenille.



it appears that science is very unsure of the reality of the non-physical realms, concerning itself with the basest, densest aspect of our particular perception of the energetic spectrum. also, science is just ANOTHER way of looking at the world (and, predominantly, the physical world). the understanding of the nonphysical realms cannot be understood using the tools of the physical realm. science is not more right than other views just because it says it is.



i feel that someone who has not actually delved into this matter by practising some form of spritual practice, be it meditation, yoga, tai ji, prayer, or whatever, should perhaps attempt to understand it experientially before attempting to voice their opinion using purely theoretical arguments created out of a lack of understanding of the topic. because this is something you actually dont understand, is it, jeff? when the crunch comes down, you're arguing against this because it hasnt been proven?



do your own research (ie, talk with many people who have experienced states that you are attempting to invalidate, delve into the mysteries of meditation sufficiently that you experience altered states of consciousness, practice empathy, etc.... smile ), before attempting to advocate the degree to which something is "real" or not. it'd be like me trying to tell you that you're wrong about something that you know much more about than me.



anyway, what im saying is this: the aura (and that which it infers) is experienced by many people (its laughable, really, because everyone experiences it to a greater or lesser degree, whether they are consciously aware of it or not), and just because science has not amassed enough evidence for it to concede that it is real yet, it is Still real. but hey, science has only been around for a few hundred years. its still young, and is still learning.



learning that cultures such as the Chinese have been practicing energy-work for more than ten times as long as what modern science has been around, and have classical literature (ie more than 2000 years old) telling of the greater and lesser energy movements of our realm, that cultures such as the aboriginals of australia or the ascetics of tibet have spent thousands of years experiencing consciousness in the non-physical realms...



slowly science is catching up. and that makes me happy smile because then more people will understand ever truer understandings of reality. because there is always more to understand... we must ever discard our opinions for better ones.



im willing do discard Everything that i presently know to be true, through realising greater understanding. im willing to throw Everything away. i could die tomorrow, after all. smile holding on (even to opinions) will eventually lead to suffering when the time comes to let it go....



or do you disagree? smile



rant. smile

those that know, dont say. those that say, dont know.


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
 Written by: onewheeldave


incidently, Jeff- much as I'm backing you up in the post above, I do feel the need to point out (and I hope this doesn't cause offence) that some aspects of the way you post are pretty sure to put some peoples backs up.

A certain arrogance seeps through and I'm pretty sure that's part of the reason you attract some fairly hostile replies.

Of course, it may be that you're OK with that, but, at the end of the day, these discussions are supposed to be about communication and, when it comes to trying to pass on insight to those who have opposed views, the last thing you need to do is cause unnecessary annoyance, cos that just blocks communication completely.


It's a constant worry actually, and I think it's unavoidable. It's human nature to view contrarian views as hostile or condescending, so there really isn't any way to tell someone that they're wrong without offending them if they choose to take offense. It's unfortunately true that this tends to be even more common in "true believers", who will often react extremely negatively to anything less than acceptance. Paradoxically this reaction tends to grow even stronger the less supported the belief is by reason.

For this reason I endevour to lay out the facts as far as I know them in plain English because I think it would be patronising to those involved to present the facts in any way other than plainly, even if it would avoid confrontation. Personally I think the taboo on challenging peoples opinions is ultimately pernicious, but that's a whole other topic.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


StoutBRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada


Posted:
shen shui....I don't anyone here's disputing the spiritual/emotional states that anyone can achieve through practicing ( for lack of a better term ) the paranormal. It's just that it's the paranormal that consistently ties to validate itself by crossing the line into scientific territory and science isn't going to just blindly accept anecdotal evidence without a fight.

The problems lie with the validity of the science presented. To the non scientific, creating an "institute" or publishing a paper is equally valid as what is considered to be "real" science and this is the point I've seen Jeff continually trying to drive home.

So ancient cultures have been practicing energy work for thousands of years,, yet it took modern science to eradicate diseases that had been plaguing those same cultures for those same thousands of years. eg smallpox, polio, leprosy.

I'd like to ask you...If you woke up with flesh eating disease tomorrow morning, what would you do ? visit an acupuncture practitioner, or call 911 ? given the nature of the disease, this should be viewed as an either/or question, not a try one and if it doesn't work try the other,,,like you would with something like chronic back pain.

faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
but it might be able to help avoid the getting sick by boosting immune systems (i don't really believe in eastern medicine but i know some aspects are valid-natural =/= invalid ex: willowbark helps with headache which in turn became aspirin or acetomicin (sp))
but jeff, people can disagree without feeling condescended...i hope brigit feels the same, but we have disagreed, and i do not feel any ill feelings like when you and i disagree

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


StoutBRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada


Posted:
faithinfire...I totally agree..likewise I don't doubt the value of the placebo effect,,nor do I have any problems with what's referred to as "attitudinal healing" and it's possible effects on the physical body. As long as the patient knows what they're getting into.

I see the "alternative" healing arts trying to cross the line into science as a deception, especially when what's presented as evidence is junk science.

Willow bark yields a compound that becomes salicylic acid in your stomach, which can make you feel really sick in itself, but modern science tacked on an acetyl group to the salicylic acid to make ASA..or aspirin.

faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
point being a natural (now labelled alternative) medicine can have valid benefits...i wasn't sure the name (it's been five years since that lab)
i had serious doubts but classmates had peppermint oils that helped with my headache, had never heard of it
chamomile helps me sleep, once again doubts but as an insomniac gave it a try
also, acupuncture (needles-ewww) could have validity...i put foward the wet cool wash cloth on the back of the neck helps with nausea...we rub temples when we have a headache
i think of attitudinal healing as prayer or laughter...are you thinking of positive thinking as attitudinal healing? not arguing just trying to make sure we are on the same page

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


jeff(fake)Scientist of Fortune
1,189 posts
Location: Edinburgh


Posted:
Herbs are just unpurified drugs, faith. Either they work or they don't (and possibly hurt). We can test them happily so people can know if they are wasting their money or not. The other thing I think you're refering to are placebos.

This is getting offtopic now.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...


StoutBRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada


Posted:
Yes...off topic, but not drastically.

I am thinking of positive thinking when I mention attitudinal healing. it's been years since I heard and explored the AH idea, but now when i google it I, come up with sites that offer to heal my attitude...fair enough. Another way to put it is I'm thinking of the direct opposite of stress induced illness, a topic which I haven't seen anyone dispute.

Do treatments like acupuncture and reki actually play a role in positive thinking your way to better health? maybe. I have a suspicion that this is where their true healing power lies. Likewise with all the other energy disciplines, if you believe..then maybe that's the key, but to skeptics like me who can do the whole positive thinking thing without guidance, trying to digest that these arts are on par with modern science is a tough sell indeed.

faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
fair enough stout

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


Page: ...

Similar Topics No similar topics were found
      Show more..

HOP Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...