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


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


Posted:
 Written by: BansheeCat


OWD-- If your last post is an accurate reflection of the views of Robnunchucks, Drudwyn , Jeff et al, then I would say we are much closer to mutual understanding than I thought! Great! I thought Rob was still on about proving or disproving the existence of auras , rather than investigating the nature of their existence and exploring how/why they may be perceived by some and not others, under some conditions and not others.

I would in that case find myself even more aligned with them then not, cause I too would be careful about defining auras.....



This is what I'm talking about with 'resolution' of two apparently opposing views.

Now I can't speak for all the sceptics here- maybe some disagree with the assessment of the sceptical position.

I'm fairly confident though, that most are not denying the fact that Valura does see bands of colour- the dispute is over whether those bands relate to actual energy.

One practical thing to do is for everyone to realise that part of this dispute is less to do with actual beliefs, than it is to do with the fact that some are defining 'aura' in terms of the 'qualia' aspect (the sensation/colour percieved by Valuraand others) while others are defining it in terms of 'actual radiated energy that can be seen'.

When that's sorted out, they can then progress to the second issue, which is, that, having agreed that Valura does see auras (ie bands of colour), then-

can Valura, via that aura perception, gain (non-obvious to others) information about the person looked at?

Even here, I feel, the sceptics are open to the possibility, postulating, perhaps, that Valura has synsethic tendencies, or that she is acutely sensitive to the feelings/body language of others and that the info she subconsciously perceives is represented to her conscious mind via changes in the auras she sees.

Of course, they're not going to blindly accept that she can, but, in principle, they're open to the possibility and, with favourable experimental results, would be happy to accept them.

"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:
If the above is accurate, then we have a theory which should be acceptable by both camps.

Valura can be happy because no-ones denying that she actually does see auras (bands of colour) and because the sceptics accept the possibility of the fact that, through the auras, she can 'read' people.

The sceptics are happy because they're not being pressured to accept facts for which there is no evidence.

Issues do remain of course- how can Valuras claims be properly tested?

But at least, the easing of pointless conflict based on, in some cases, simply having differing definitions of a central term, leads to the possibility of mutual understanding and, possibly, actual collabaration (for example, in designing suitable test procedures).

"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!


ValuraSILVER Member
Mumma Hen
6,391 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia


Posted:
 Written by: jeff(fake)


 Written by: robnunchucks


no that is not the rational thing to do because you never actually checked to make sure it wasn't just all in your head you just assumed it wasn't. you'll also note that none of the other people the aura group check to make sure it wasn't all in there head they simply assumed it wasn't. this assumption is the problem.

the rational thing to do would be to test your abilities using controlled scientific methods to determine if it was all in your head or not? only after you passed those tests could you say that logically it wasn't all in your head




None of those tests prove that they weren't in your head, just that they couldn't prove they were in your head. Neuroscience is still in its infancy.




Seriously Jeff where else would you suggest I get tested after I had been so sick?
I wouldn't be hopping into a science lab to get checked out, I would be in the hospital where they had saved my life.

I’m sure if I just waltzed in the science lab and said “hows it going? lets get these tests started" they are going to laugh their arses off at me, therefore I believe I have been tested as thoroughly as I possibly can be. Just not as scientifically as you would like...but I'm sure you'll agree, a little information is better than no information isn't it?

They didn't find anything wrong with me and they did hundreds of tests. Are you that sure you know enough to dispute them?
 Written by: jeff(fake)


 Written by: Valura


 Written by: jeff(fake)


Quote~ Jeff fake "If the follow ups were positive I would apply for Randi's prize, and certainly believe Valura's claim."




Are you saying YOU would apply for PROFIT from MY gift?

Yeah so are ya….?



What a bizarre and irrelevant question. I made it quite clear I would use the money to help others, an aim you described as "egotistical". Moreover, if you really did have powers, you would be under no obligation to take any test through myself because any decent scientist or knowledgeable layperson should be capable of running the tests themself.



Not irrelevant at all. It proves to me your intentions, from your desire to claim the money after I had done all the hard work, as you proposed. I just cant believe that you would claim money that you would have no right to.
I’m starting to get the feeling from a few of your statements that there is a more personal agenda here.

By the way I have just read back through this thread looking for where I said that giving the money to others is egotistical. Couldn’t find it. If I have overlooked it please feel free to point me to it. Other than that… don’t put words in my mouth matey. Perhaps you need to have a read back and be more objective just like I have?

 Written by: jeff(fake)


 Written by: Valura


I have done that so many times it’s normal to me. I’m pretty sure it would be quite normal to Jo also. I’m a reiki Master so I work with energy on a daily basis, and I can quite easily create a ball of energy. Or use my hands to scan the body of another and feel where there is problem energy. It feels hot and tingly.
If someone put there hands over mine I would know which one immediately.

I am starting to believe that no matter how much evidence is given, pseudo science or not, irrefutable or not, the sceptics are still going to reject the possibilities.

I also think that’s because they haven’t had control over the tests themselves so therefore couldn’t draw the conclusions that they believe are to be true… even if perhaps there is evidence that contradicts their proposed hypothesis. How could we even begin to make such tests fair?




Well, you've made a number of testable claims there. It would be an extremely easy matter to produce a fair and impartial test. You could sit blindfolded with your hands out on a table and a tester could place their hand above one of yours (taking precautions to avoid noticeable heat or turbulence etc. which would be the tricky part). You would then declare whether you thought it was the right or left hand, tester records the result. Repeat, say, 50 times for an adequate data set. You claim you would get a 100% success rate.




Yep that’s right….I would.

*turns on broken record*

I’m not going to do any tests because I don’t want to, I don’t feel the need to, and don’t have to prove anything to you.

Oh and by the way... I don’t work at all, so I don’t “dance like a performing monkey for money in other things in life” like you claim I do.
I also don’t charge for healings ever, they are a gift to be given freely, so stop insinuating, as you did in previous posts, that I am earning money off that.

For a guy who’s so interested in the facts Jeff, you're allowing a lot of unsubstantiated 'evidence' to slip through.

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"


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


Posted:
I should also say, that this does not mean the end of the theory that auras are actual radiated energy, visible to a few people and which indicate accurate information about the person whose aura it is.

If that energy is, in principal, detectable by instruments, then, in principle, it's a testable theory.

I feel that most sceptics however, will be more inclined to favour the theory outlined in the previous posts.

"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!


ValuraSILVER Member
Mumma Hen
6,391 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia


Posted:
 Written by: onewheeldave


If the above is accurate, then we have a theory which should be acceptable by both camps.

Valura can be happy because no-ones denying that she actually does see auras (bands of colour) and because the sceptics accept the possibility of the fact that, through the auras, she can 'read' people.

The sceptics are happy because they're not being pressured to accept facts for which there is no evidence.

Issues do remain of course- how can Valuras claims be properly tested?

But at least, the easing of pointless conflict based on, in some cases, simply having differing definitions of a central term, leads to the possibility of mutual understanding and, possibly, actual collabaration (for example, in designing suitable test procedures).



yep, I'm happy to accept that mate. No problems. I agree with what you have said there and I'm ETERNALLY grateful that you have had the thoughtfulness to clarify the definitions...seems fair to both sides...and this way I don't feel like I'm being scorned, or looked down upon.

and with that im going to sleep. ubblol hug

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
It's funny that the believers, and Valura in particular should feel so attacked by the sceptics. The results of the poll indicate that the believers outnumber the disbelievers by roughly 3 to 1. So Valura and Jo represent the majority of Hoppers and Jeff and Rob a grumbling minority.

neither the believers nor the sceptics are about to change their minds so if this debate has any meaning then it's a battle for hearts and minds. A battle that the believers have convincingly won. As a sceptic this saddens me.

I admire Jeff and Rob for their uncompromising stance and I stand shoulder to shoulder with them.....until I get bored and wander down to the pub. I just haven't the time or energy to invest in the debate.

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


ValuraSILVER Member
Mumma Hen
6,391 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia


Posted:
rolleyes
of course I felt attacked.

its not very comfortable to have to justify yourself, but ya know... I didn't see ya up there doing it... so enjoy the show! ubblol hug

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"


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


Posted:
 Written by: Valura


 Written by: jeff(fake)


None of those tests prove that they weren't in your head, just that they couldn't prove they were in your head. Neuroscience is still in its infancy.



They didn't find anything wrong with me and they did hundreds of tests. Are you that sure you know enough to dispute them?



You've made a very simple claim about an ability to detect hands. That is very simple to test. I've also made no claim that there is something "wrong" with you, just that it is illogical to rule out non-supernatural explanations just because the tests they ran didn't come to any conclusions.
 Written by: valura


Not irrelevant at all. It proves to me your intentions, from your desire to claim the money after I had done all the hard work, as you proposed. I just cant believe that you would claim money that you would have no right to.
I’m starting to get the feeling from a few of your statements that there is a more personal agenda here.



A personal agenda? I think we are descending well into the realms of the absurd. I've repeatedly said I would not take any money for myself, and that anyone could take you to Randi or the Nobel prize committee.

 Written by: Valura


 Written by: Jeff(fake)


Well, you've made a number of testable claims there. It would be an extremely easy matter to produce a fair and impartial test. You could sit blindfolded with your hands out on a table and a tester could place their hand above one of yours (taking precautions to avoid noticeable heat or turbulence etc. which would be the tricky part). You would then declare whether you thought it was the right or left hand, tester records the result. Repeat, say, 50 times for an adequate data set. You claim you would get a 100% success rate.




Yep that’s right….I would.

*turns on broken record*

I’m not going to do any tests because I don’t want to, I don’t feel the need to, and don’t have to prove anything to you.



No, you don't have to prove anything to me, but you could do a lot more good if you were to demonstrate that you can do something.

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


jo_rhymesSILVER Member
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom


Posted:
the boy g, I only felt attacked when Stout mentioned this being an argument of logic vs emotion, or belief vs science.

I've also said that I'm willing to change my perspective on it.

smile

hug

Hoppers are angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly.


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


Posted:
Jo, that wasn't meant as an attack, it was more of an attempt to label the "two worlds" that are in conflict on this thread.

If I add up all the things I've heard, and believed in my life, and I've often repeated as truisms, only to have them proved as falsehoods by tv shows like Mythbusters, and websites like Snopes and Quackwatch, I have no choice to admit that I have ( and may still do ) held a lot of "false" beliefs.

Off the top of my head, the behaviour of lemmings springs to mind, I believed that story for years

Mind you, none of those beliefs that I held and later abandoned could be considered sacred, which is another important factor in this discussion too.

robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
yep, I'm happy to accept that mate. No problems. I agree with what you have said there and I'm ETERNALLY grateful that you have had the thoughtfulness to clarify the definitions...seems fair to both sides...and this way I don't feel like I'm being scorned, or looked down upon.



wow this is maby the first debate of this nature i've seen were any kind of agreement has been reached i'll like to extend my thanks and congradulations to everyone involved. this is a rare occurence and one that brings a big smile to my face biggrin i'ed also like to thank dave for clarifying alot of things which i think helped with this brake though



but now the balls rolling i would like to suggest we take it to the next stage we now have 3 posable hypothises to explain aura reading.



hypothises



1. doesn't work at all



2. aura readers see are subcontous interpretations of information around them displayed as auras alowing them to read people with much better acuracy than the average person



3. aura readers can see supernatural energys eminateing from people which they can interprate to gain information about them.





i would like to propose several experiements to determin which of these is the correct hypothosis.

Experiments



1. the acuracy test we have some random volentears as well as some aura readers and non aura readers. for each volentear we randomly decide if they are going to lie or not about some fact about them selfs. once this has been decided we have both groups lissen to all the volentears and decide if there lieing or not. because aura readers are geting extra information they should perform the test much more accurately than non aura readers.



2. the person just out of veiw experiment (i wont go into detail its been covered plenty already)



expected results



hypothises 1 would predict that aura readers should fail experiment 1 and 2



hypothises 2 would predict that aura readers should pass experiment 1 and fail experiment 2



hypothies 3 would predict that readers should pass both experiment 1 and 2





i dont know about you lot but i for one would love to know whats actualy going on here smile
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1166108830)

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

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


jo_rhymesSILVER Member
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom


Posted:
Stout, I know it wasnt meant as an attack hun hug
but I feel like I belong in "both worlds". I don't want to be labelled as an irrational believer!
I don't think I am smile

Hoppers are angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly.


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


Posted:
Jo, we all belong in both worlds it's just that some favour belonging in one world more than the other. I understand your aversion to being labelled, but it's an unfortunate thing that's going to happen when these two worlds collide over an issue such as this.

Personally I find it easier to keep the two worlds separate, or at least I will until I find an acceptable way to meld the two ( but to my skeptical, scientific brain, I don't see this happening in the near future ) so I lump mediums into the same category I'd put priests into....strictly in the world of the spiritual.

Now I don't draw much comfort from the world of the spiritual,,but billions of people do, and who am I to deny that the benefits of spirituality actually exist ?
hug

Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
I would like to ask the believers what else they believe in.



Astrology?

life after death?

re-incarnation?

Ley-lines?

communicating with the dead?

faeries?

palmistry? (readng your the future from tha palm of your hand)

tarot cards?

all of the above?
EDITED_BY: the boy g (1166123709)

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


BansheeCatBRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada


Posted:
OWD you rock grouphug kiss

"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."


ValuraSILVER Member
Mumma Hen
6,391 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia


Posted:
 Written by: jeff(fake)



A personal agenda? I think we are descending well into the realms of the absurd. I've repeatedly said I would not take any money for myself, and that anyone could take you to Randi or the Nobel prize committee.







Jeff we were wading through the absurd when you were claiming that I had subconscious doubts about my abilities. I was quite taken aback by that and espically amused you would even claim to understand the complexities of my cognitive reasoning, and process' better than myself.





Now I have suggested to you that I understand your reasoning behind your need to test and that there would be personal gain for yourself from those tests, and your up in arms about it.



If you cant handle your argument being turned around on yourself, don't dish it out to others in the first place. smile





The boy G... all of the above.





Rob... perhaps this experiment wouldnt work, as you have suggested that people who read auras are actually very good at reading body language.... If you were correct in that suggestion, then that experiment would be tainted from the get go, cause peoples body language entirely changes when they lie... eg fidgety, sweating, their eyes look to the right, they elaborate too much etc etc.



I don't know if science would really think that test was um... well, 'controlled well'... with an easy 'out' for the scientist if people were getting it right too often shrug

maybe I'm wrong?

(thats not getting at you either, I'm just saying that properly wouldn't work)

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"


Bek66Future Mrs Pogo
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place


Posted:
 Written by: the boy g


I would like to ask the believers what else they believe in.

Astrology?
life after death?
re-incarnation?
Ley-lines?
communicating with the dead?
faeries?
palmistry? (readng your the future from tha palm of your hand)
tarot cards?
all of the above?



All of the above!!!

It's impossible to explain the 'feeling' that comes with each...it's just a matter of whether you are in touch with your inner self that allows you to feel and believe...

I've tried to explain...and failed miserably...
But it does not change my belief...and as long as that fulfills my life, makes me a loving and caring person, and leads me to want to help others, then what difference does it make???

That's what it's all about, after all!!!

( Oh...as far as the palmistry goes...it's not so much reading the future as it is telling you about who you are...just like astrology.)

"Absence is to love what wind is to fire...it extinguishes the small, enkindles the great."
--Comte Debussy-Rebutin


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
if you both believe "All of the above"



how do dead people communicate with the living if they've been re-incarnated? Surely I'm a re-incarnation of a previous being (of which I have no memory) and I'm pretty sure I don't talk to the living relatives of my previous incarnation.



How do you allow your dead former selves to speak? I mean their parents must be worried sick. First they died and then they didn't call in ages.



Do you have to stand on a Ley-line or enlist the help of the faerie folk?



I'm confused. There's just so much I don't understand at all.
EDITED_BY: the boy g (1166182171)

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


ado-pGOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland


Posted:
boy g



what is the point of that post dude?Its just what everyone in this thread is trying to avoid. Its worked, real progress has been made.



plus, your off topic, why not start a new thread instead of provoking people. Its not helping or contributing in any way...

Love is the law.


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
ado-p



I was genuinely curious as to what else believers in Auras believed. I was trying to get a handle on their world-view. It would help me understand auras and why people believe in them if I could understand that belief as part of a wider world view that perhaps encompassed other phenomena and a belief in other energies.





I suspected that a believer in auras would be predisposed to believe in other spiritual phenomena. The phenomena I listed are drawn from a variety of religons, folk traditions e.t.c.. I did not expect anyone to say that they believed "All of the above", yet that was the response from the only two respondants so far.





Faeries are a folk tradition, appearing in many tales, and re-incarnation is a recurrant concept in eastern religons. The two are not incompatible per-se but seem out of place together, to me at any rate.



my last post was a little rude, I felt guilty posting it, but I couldn't resist. There was a serious point though; Some of the concepts seem incompatible. To take the example I gave above how does re-incarnation- the notion that the soul goes on to live another life in another body, fit with the notion that the souls of the dead can communicate with psycics and mediums. Surely the dead are living another life?



In a way I think believing everything makes sense. Having accepted that things outside scientific understanding exist how do you decide which ones exist and which ones don't? it makes sense in a way to say that they all exist, thus removing the conceptual difficulty of justifying your beliefs while simultaneously rejecting others.



I still feel that some of these concepts are mutually incompatible.



maybe this should be a new thread
EDITED_BY: the boy g (1166188728)

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


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


Posted:
 Written by: Valura

Jeff we were wading through the absurd when you were claiming that I had subconscious doubts about my abilities. I was quite taken aback by that and espically amused you would even claim to understand the complexities of my cognitive reasoning, and process' better than myself.


Your writings have been completely synonymous with that hypothesis so far.

 Written by: the boy g


I was genuinely curious as to what else believers in Auras believed. I was trying to get a handle on their world-view. It would help me understand auras and why people believe in them if I could understand that belief as part of a wider world view that perhaps encompassed other phenomena and a belief in other energies.

I suspected that a believer in auras would be predisposed to believe in other spiritual phenomena. The phenomena I listed are drawn from a variety of religons, folk traditions e.t.c.. I did not expect anyone to say that they believed "All of the above", yet that was the response from the only two respondants so far.



At UFO conferences they sell books about big foot and Atlantis. It is an observed phenomenon that people who believe in one supernatural thing are predisposed to believing in other supernatural things, even if they are unrelated or contradictory. This has lead to the suggestion that there exists a predisposition to credulity.

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:
The boy g raises some good points, it would seem that some aspects of New Age spirituality are incompatible with others.

For instance, every ghost or spirit in the movies that I've ever seen has appeared fully clothed, leading me to formulate the question " why do ghosts wear clothes?". Now that may seem like a stupid question at first, but I'm curious as to just how inanimate objects ( like shirts and belt buckles )can cross over into the spirit world,,,and why.

I know it's the movies, but, never having seen a ghost myself, you can understand how I could be influenced by what I've been exposed to ( a gazillion fully clothed, and sometimes physically mangled ) spirits.

So I'm sincerely curious when I ask people who claim to be able to see spirits are they seeing naked ones, or clothed ones. and just which clothes are they wearing ? The clothes they died in ? the clothes they were buried in ? Does the spirit world have a wardrobe department ?

Once reincarnated, does a spirit still have the ability to communicate with the living ? Suppose I wanted to communicate with the spirit of Liberace, but he'd been reincarnated as someone else, would ( through the help of a medium ) I get his voice mail ?

Bek66Future Mrs Pogo
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place


Posted:
Let's just say that I believe that anything is possible...not that all of the phenomena that G brought up are exactly compatible but just that I believe that any of them could be feasable...

Faeries, for instance...in a very real sense to me...butterflies, dragonflies and any of the other beautiful little flying creatures(not birds...they're in a class all their own) that we all can see on our lovely Mother Earth...are faeries...as I would consider any lizard to be a dragon...

Myth...which is not fiction...but life models...gives us fantastical creatures, but if we look around us we can see the very real models wherever we are...

Just a bit of an example of my ways of thinking...
My idividualism...which is my right and my joy...just like it is the right of anyone else to not believe the things that I do.

"Absence is to love what wind is to fire...it extinguishes the small, enkindles the great."
--Comte Debussy-Rebutin


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
What about
U.F.O.'s,
Bigfoot,
a Christian God,
the Greek Gods
Santa Claus
the tooth fairy

Does everything potentially exist in your world?

Stout (and myself)
I think maybe ghosts can appear as they choose to the living (or not appear at all). And maybe some people are re-incarnated but some wander the ether. I wonder how it's decided. Is it an extracorporeal lottery to decide what happens? Maybe what we believe happens to us actually happens because we beileve it. If I believe in re-incarnation I get re-incarnated but if I believe in ghosts I become a ghost.

Fortunately for me I believe I'm God.

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


Bek66Future Mrs Pogo
4,728 posts
Location: The wrong place


Posted:
I should have taken my own advice and stayed out of this thread...

And now I will.

"Absence is to love what wind is to fire...it extinguishes the small, enkindles the great."
--Comte Debussy-Rebutin


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
Oh dear....I've upset someone. I guess I have been flippant about peoples deeply held beliefs.

I think if you believe something unconventional then you have to grow a thick skin because people will often label you as crazy or a freak.

It's a bit diffrent on HOP because unconventional beliefs are actually in the ascendancy here.

I'll be honest....I think all you Aura believers out there and spiritualists e.t.c are mad as hatters but I love you all anyway hug

it's a bit annoying really because I did want to know if you believed in U.F.O.'s and all the things on my second list.

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
you have suggested that people who read auras are actually very good at reading body language.... If you were correct in that suggestion, then that experiment would be tainted from the get go, cause peoples body language entirely changes when they lie... eg fidgety, sweating, their eyes look to the right, they elaborate too much etc etc.



I don't know if science would really think that test was um... well, 'controlled well'... with an easy 'out' for the scientist if people were getting it right too often




i think you've missunderstood the purpose of the test. the purpose of this test is to determin if aura readers are actualy better at reading people than non readers. wether that be though body lanugauge or supernatural meens. the way i designed the experiment was to alow people to use body language as a posable way of doing the readings.



this test wouldn't make a distinction between natural and supernatural methods of reading it would only show that aura readers are infact better (or not) at reading information and intent from other people than non-aura readers are. no matter how they were actutualy doing the readings.



the purpose of this test is to eliminate hypothisis 1 that aura readers actualy have no special abilitys what so ever and are no better than the average person. but it wouldn't tell the diffrence between hypothisis 2 and 3.



to tell the diffrence between hypthosis 2 and 3 we would need to use the curtain test. this test will determin if the information is been collected by perceveing actual auras or not. Once we have got results from both tests we can determin which of the 3 hypothises the results support.



to summerise because we have multipul hypothises and we need multipul tests and while one test in isolation can't give us a definate answer the combined results of both tests can.



test 1 just checks if doing anything at all.

test 2 checks if your doing it through supernatural meens or not.



hypthoises

1. doesn't work at all

2. aura readers see are subcontous interpretations of information around them displayed as auras alowing them to read people with much better acuracy than the average person

3. aura readers can see supernatural energys eminateing from people which they can interprate to gain information about them.



Test

1. lie detecting test

2. curtain test
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1166203167)

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

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


Mascotenthusiast
301 posts

Posted:
 Written by: fyrespirit


Faeries, for instance...in a very real sense to me...butterflies, dragonflies and any of the other beautiful little flying creatures(not birds...they're in a class all their own) that we all can see on our lovely Mother Earth...are faeries...as I would consider any lizard to be a dragon...




Right....but there is a big diffrence. Butterflies may have provided the inspiration for faeries but they're still butterflies. Faeries have magical powers and can perform all manner of tricks and spells.

Butterflies are amazing as they are, tiny creatures spending most of their lives as caterpillars and then, briefly emerging as butterflies. Why do you need to make them faeries?

the same goes for lizards, they are amazing creatures but they are not dragons. They are lizards. Dinosaur bones are widely believed to have been the inspiration behind dragons. Dinosaurs too are amazing but not dragons. Dragons can breathe fire and fly.

The world is an amazing place as it is, why do you need to embellish it?

Walls may have ears but they don't have eyes


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


Posted:
well,
i would say that embellishment is in the eye of the beholder
some say God is an embellishment and His angels
some can say the same about fairies and dragons
other people believe in them so they really aren't an embellishment but a fact of life

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


BansheeCatBRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada


Posted:
Robnunchucks, what do you mean by the term "supernatural"?

I think that might be one of a few definitions that needs clarification. I for one don't believe in "supernatural-- I just think there are are likely some natural things we dont fully comprehend , yet.

Lots of work needs to be done to specify and refine your various hypothesis if you want a realistic scientific experiment.

Another example, simple one-- What do you mean in Hyothesis one, by the term "work"? what does this mean in aura perception? People that perceive them perceive them in all sorts of different ways, some only under certain circumstances and not others, and then do all kinds of different things with the experience. What does "work' mean?


The person behind a curtain exercise scientifically would demonstrate nothing about auras, just that some people may or may not have a non-visual means of knowing whether a person is present or not, and little to do with an aura...



Also, many auras readers do not get factual information about a person at all, in the sense you mean- a detail that could be determined by a verbal lie. Like I have two children, when I dont... Few aura readers I know would pick up on that, or be interested in trying. That is not the sort of information/sensation most get from an aura. (I could be wrong on this, I am just referring to the people know that are involved in this sort of thing.)
But it would make me think that that experimental structure would also not offer much useful info about auras.

Perhaps it could offer useful information about specific individuals who claim to have the ability to do such things. Or could reveal how many people who think they can determine whether someone is lying with no observation of body language, etc.actaully can... Maybe.But I dont think you can extrapolate too far about how they do, or do not, manage that.And make a clear connection to how perception of auras was related.

At any rate, I dont think your suggestions of experimental procedures and the three hypothesis presented are developed rigorously enough at this point. Maybe continue to refine them? Do other people have suggestions how to do this? Jeff?

"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."


Page: ......

Similar Topics Server is too busy. Please try again later. No similar topics were found
      Show more..

HOP Newsletter

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