Remote viewing does it happen

@bioharmony,

bioharmony;60015 wrote:

To clarify my views on consciousness and nonlocality with respect to remote viewing let us use and "accept" for this short discussion the following definitions they are not laid in stone. ( I may have been a bit hasty in my first post)

An interesting definition of 'Consciousness" from a Western & English language perspective AND from a traditional or linear perspective:
[CENTER][CENTER] [/CENTER][/CENTER]
'Consciousness is the critical biological function that allows us to know sorrow, or know joy, to know suffering or know pleasure.'
[CENTER][CENTER] Prof Antonio Damasio [/CENTER][/CENTER]

Consciousness narrowly defined from a non-linear, non-local perspective:

'Consciousness and non-locality are when a persons
[CENTER][CENTER]thoughts and intentions are instinctively linked to nature and the universe.' Dr R Targ[/CENTER][/CENTER]

Western man (in particular) has lost touch with both nature and with himself - the reason many skills abilities of the past have waned. Also, because many people he no longer takes responsibility for their actions. However, many still posses these skills.

These skills are freely available and the exercises to achieve them relatively simple. However, very few have the discipline or 'desire' to practice and live a different way of life in order to develop multiple perspectives of and on life.

In fact, it is very difficult to meet real people nowadays.

[CENTER][CENTER] [/CENTER][/CENTER]

What's the deal with you people and your [SIZE="3"]Giant freaking font sizes? I can hear you just fine[/SIZE] at this size.
And what is meant by saying, "In fact, it is very difficult to meet real people nowadays" ? Who are you meeting? Figments? Cyborgs? Holograms?

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

I myself was a bit sceptical about this paranormal thing, but I'v seen too many palm readers being very accurate in very specific things that is beyond guessing.

10 years prior to the prediciton, I was read that I would enter the same company 3 times, it sounded redicolous, but I did enter the company 3 times, first in a sister division, then at the main company, 2 times.

I tryed to leave the main company, because I foresaw it all would go to Hell, which it did ..and I wouldn't sit around wasting my good time on a delusive CEO tearing his own creation down.
I left 3 times, but the CEO called me back giving me an offcer no man could refuse, but the 3rd time I had to stand stall, and say no!

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140256 wrote:

I myself was a bit sceptical about this paranormal thing, but I'v seen too many palm readers being very accurate in very specific things that is beyond guessing.

10 years prior to the prediciton, I was read that I would enter the same company 3 times, it sounded redicolous, but I did enter the company 3 times, first in a sister division, then at the main company, 2 times.

I tryed to leave the main company, because I foresaw it all would go to Hell, which it did ..and I wouldn't sit around wasting my good time on a delusive CEO tearing his own creation down.
I left 3 times, but the CEO called me back giving me an offcer no man could refuse, but the 3rd time I had to stand stall, and say no!

We can so easily find the correct predictions but forget the wrong ones. Its the consequences of your belief that you should consider. Prophesying and distant viewing are two completely different fields of consideration.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;140260 wrote:

We can so easily find the correct predictions but forget the wrong ones. Its the consequences of your belief that you should consider. Prophesying and distant viewing are two completely different fields of consideration.

Still in the paranormal world, which is dismissed by most siencetist. It both has similar aspects of seeing what is unbeknownst and uncertain.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140261 wrote:

Still in the paranormal world, which is dismissed by most siencetist. It both has similar aspects of seeing what is unbeknownst and uncertain.

There is distinct difference in seeing twenty miles away and seeing the future in detail. Remote viewing might be explained by science but not prophesying.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;140266 wrote:

There is distinct difference in seeing twenty miles away and seeing the future in detail. Remote viewing might be explained by science but not prophesying.

Uhmm, think the remote viewing program under the cold war did a bit more than that. They claimed a 30% success rate, which is more or less equal to what oridnary crime solvers has of success rate.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140268 wrote:

Uhmm, think the remote viewing program under the cold war did a bit more than that. They claimed a 30% success rate, which is more or less equal to what oridnary crime solvers has of success rate.

Sorry buts whats your point ? how does that make seeing the future more feasible?

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;140272 wrote:

Sorry buts whats your point ? how does that make seeing the future more feasible?

Trying to say that remote viewing isn't about just "viewing 10 miles away"

But, remote viewing can be victim of fraud.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140282 wrote:

Trying to say that remote viewing isn't about just "viewing 10 miles away"

But, remote viewing can be victim of fraud.

Remote viewing and prophetic tit bits are a million miles apart.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;140325 wrote:

Remote viewing and prophetic tit bits are a million miles apart.

Why? ..that hardly qualifyes as a satisfying answer to anything.

2 Replies

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140333 wrote:

Why? ..that hardly qualifyes as a satisfying answer to anything.

Why take personal experiences of the prophetic kind and place them against distant viewing? Ive seen UFOs is that relevant, my mother told me she has see ghosts, is that relevant. It neither adds nor detracts, its not relevant. I have dreamt the lottery numbers, interesting but has no relevance.

0 Replies

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;140333 wrote:

Why? ..that hardly qualifyes as a satisfying answer to anything.

I have just done a remote viewing test on another forum with rem arable results. I will not try to repeat it on this forum of hard nosed skeptics

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

[/COLOR]

Alan McDougall;59984 wrote:

I really do not think that this ability is restricted only to so called psychics

I don't think that the title "psychic" refers to anything more than a profession nowadays, because the majority of practitioners and teachings of psionics recognize that these abilities are not limited to anyone at all - we are all capable of them. Just because you are not Gordon Ramsey doesn't mean you can't still cook up a mean omelette. Just because you don't have a talent for art doesn't mean that you can't still manage to draw a dog. It's the same with psionic practices like remote viewing, telepathy, etc. - the consensus is that we can all learn to do them through practice, some may just have more of a talent and natural openness to these activities than others.

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Do not believe in Hindu mumbo jumbo. Every thing it say in there is a fraud. All yogis are just frauds who cheated people that time with few magic tricks to power over people.

1 Reply

@pondfish,

pondfish;141470 wrote:

Do not believe in Hindu mumbo jumbo. Every thing it say in there is a fraud. All yogis are just frauds who cheated people that time with few magic tricks to power over people.

It is rather interesting how easily fooled people are, even when they themselves know that there are magic tricks that people do that make it seem like things are happening that are not really happening. The trick of sawing a lady in half is a commonly known illusion, and yet the fact that there are such illusions does not seem to be noticed by suckers when someone comes along with another trick. I think it is a result of wishful thinking; it is that people want to believe foolishness, and so they do not think critically about the evidence.

1 Reply

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;141558 wrote:

The trick of sawing a lady in half is a commonly known illusion, and yet the fact that there are such illusions does not seem to be noticed by suckers when someone comes along with another trick.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here, could you please clarify? Are you saying that because illusions exist remote viewing must be an illusion? Is it because these things are as of yet unexplained? Just because it's something we can't fully understand or something that we don't have the scientific means or technology to study yet does not mean that it doesn't exist, nor does it mean that it's some sort of magical, paranormal phenomenon - just an event that we can't explain yet. People may have called Copernicus a fool when he suggested that Earth spun around the Sun, but that doesn't mean it wasn't true.

2 Replies

@lazer,

lazer;141576 wrote:

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here, could you please clarify? Are you saying that because illusions exist remote viewing must be an illusion? Is it because these things are as of yet unexplained? Just because it's something we can't fully understand or something that we don't have the scientific means or technology to study yet does not mean that it doesn't exist, nor does it mean that it's some sort of magical, paranormal phenomenon - just an event that we can't explain yet. People may have called Copernicus a fool when he suggested that Earth spun around the Sun, but that doesn't mean it wasn't true.

I am saying that because illusions exist, people ought to keep an eye out for some surprising new thing possibly being an illusion. The fact is, many people seem to simply dismiss that possibility, despite the fact that they should know that it is often a possibility. And when they dogmatically reject the idea of it possibly being an illusion, they claim that they are being open-minded!

1 Reply

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;141579 wrote:

I am saying that because illusions exist, people ought to keep an eye out for some surprising new thing possibly being an illusion. The fact is, many people seem to simply dismiss that possibility, despite the fact that they should know that it is often a possibility. And when they dogmatically reject the idea of it possibly being an illusion, they claim that they are being open-minded!

That's only IF you know it's an illusion.

Astronomers belive in gravity lenses, which some find as pure nonsens, when the counter claim is it's a mere gas/plasma lens, specially considering gravity is so weak.

0 Replies

@lazer,

lazer;141576 wrote:

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here, could you please clarify? Are you saying that because illusions exist remote viewing must be an illusion? Is it because these things are as of yet unexplained? Just because it's something we can't fully understand or something that we don't have the scientific means or technology to study yet does not mean that it doesn't exist, nor does it mean that it's some sort of magical, paranormal phenomenon - just an event that we can't explain yet. People may have called Copernicus a fool when he suggested that Earth spun around the Sun, but that doesn't mean it wasn't true.

I've seen some clips from modern magicians. They tend to dress up their tricks in scientific sounding jargon. They get a lot of play out of the "people said Copernicus was a fool" line. So you simply can't give that much much credit to "we don't know anything/there could be a mystical explanation". We can start with something we do know, and that is that people will try to con other people out of money, etc.

Here's an example for a "just because we don't have the technology yet". A guy was arrested for insider trading a few years back because he made something like 20 million in a week with a series of trades. His claim was that he was from the future and had traveled back in a time machine. Now, if you were the judge in that case, would you say "just because I don't understand the physics, doesn't mean your story isn't true: no charges will be pressed"? Or would you make the best decision with the information you have?

As someone said in another thread, people don't mind believing in the unlikely option as long as it doesn't require a big commitment. A palm reader who tells you that you will have good luck will be believed, a palm reader that tells you to go stand in front of a train will not.

I enjoy the presentation though.

1 Reply

@Jebediah,

I find it hard not to react with equal rudeness to certain posters who reject every subject with the same dogmatic certainty about any subject that does not conform to their highly valued scientific principles. This is a philosophical look at subjects that are more than pure scientific truths. I dont mind scrutiny or even opposing views but they must be respectful and not be discounted with this brash bully boy attitude. Is it their intention that everything not confirmed by science, not be debated?..I think the value of this forum is the sceptic has not the crude reputation other forums exhibit. Why not discount every religious subject as the act of a mad men , if this is the intention.

2 Replies

Remote viewing does it happen

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know