Do you believe in the supernatural? Poll

[jagman]

2. Many have a belief in God - or again the supernatural - based on their personal experience. If you have a very strong sense of a presence, then you could conclude (a) you're having a psychotic episode or (b) there was a presence. If nothing else in your experience leads you to believe you're psychotic, why wouldn't you conclude (b) is correct? In other instances, we rely on our senses to inform us correctly.

 

Connect a primitive person from darkest Africa or the amazon Jungle to an electric circuit and switch on = b) , however with the benefit of hundreds of years of science to disprove so many beliefs we still believe ,,,, to the primitive you could be God !!

[Dave]

where i work we have security cameras working 24/7 in one particular area a shadow about 3ft wide and 6ft long is seen moving across the floor,this has been recorded several times over different times ,there are windows but high up 12ft .there are no cars outside the building so it cant be headlamps ,this cannot be explained, im not saying its a ghost but its very strange .its things like this that make you think .so theres no proof that it isnt supernatural and no proof that it is .

 

sorry meant to add that this always occurs at night time when the building is empty.

[Morpheus]

Any chance of a (decent quality) video clip?

 

Edit, not that it couldn't be faked but anyone who automatically assumes this, is just cynical. To some people, such as the responses that you're likely to receive, everyone is dishonest.

 

Without seeing it, I would have to assume that it's just a shadow, as you say, caused by something that you all just haven't considered but I would never dismiss it until the cause was clearly identified.

 

Is there no pattern of behaviour atall?

[Tannhauser]

What if someone else saw you eat the mushroom , he also saw the connection or not,and passed it on to someone else ,who ,,,..... A myth appears, and we have an innate tendency to tell stories and embellish them

 

Absolutely. Though, along with these myths, the same mechanism is going to propagate true connections (some mushrooms do make you sick). That's why we need science, to separate out the two.

 

2. Many have a belief in God - or again the supernatural - based on their personal experience. If you have a very strong sense of a presence, then you could conclude (a) you're having a psychotic episode or (b) there was a presence. If nothing else in your experience leads you to believe you're psychotic, why wouldn't you conclude (b) is correct? In other instances, we rely on our senses to inform us correctly.

 

Connect a primitive person from darkest Africa or the amazon Jungle to an electric circuit and switch on = b) , however with the benefit of hundreds of years of science to disprove so many beliefs we still believe ,,,, to the primitive you could be God !!

 

Agreed. But it's difficult to extrapolate that to western societies, where there are plenty of people who also have intense personal experiences they cannot explain. Much as you want to write them off as either doolally or plain ignorant, there are plenty who don't fit into either category.

 

Again, personally, I think those experience can largely be explained by various psychological processes. My point is that it's not irrational to reject the evidence from your own senses.

[Morpheus]

There is in many people the desire to reject though. This is the problem with science, (ed. since research grants aren't always free). Does not the observer affect the subject, or was that just down to using electrons to see particles and thereby influencing them? What's the latest research on that viewer affecting the viewed question?

 

I know that my behaviour alters dramatically when I know someone is watching me. I feel guilty walking out of Sainsbury's every week past the security guard with a shopping trolley full of food that I just paid for, so how on Earth are 'sensitives' as they call themselves, supposed to 'perform' in laboratory conditions? Intuition (in tuition = receiving information) requires relaxation and an open mind to function, since it works by opening the Chakras and this can be dangerous to the subject. It's also why some men are so reluctant to show their feelings. It physically hurts when exposed to ridicule! A materialisation medium was even killed once when the Police forced entry to a seance during her 'ectoplasm' demonstration, according to Michael Roll.

 

A healer that I once visited regularly, had hands like magnets. She could literally pull my face around without touching me. I remember it well. I could list many such experiences. I can feel my own aura, for example.

 

Here's a little experiment to try; place both palms facing eachother and with fingers fairly straight, 'clap' your hands very slowly back and forth several times until you feel a buildup of 'energy' between them and then bend one index finger towards the opposite hand and see if you can feel it tickle the palm of the other hand without touching it, moving the fingertip in small circles around the opposite palm. You may be able to feel it without the clapping. This is the origin of clapping by the way. You're sending energy to someone when you do it. It's the opposite of 'looking daggers' at someone, since to a clairvoyant, this is what your aura looks like, apparently.

[stevie_b]

Any chance of a (decent quality) video clip?

 

 

Let's see some evidence.

[tbourner]

What's the latest research on that viewer affecting the viewed question?

 

Quantum physics you mean?

[Morpheus]

Quantum physics you mean?

 

Yes.

[Tannhauser]

There is in many people the desire to reject though. This is the problem with science, (ed. since research grants aren't always free). Does not the observer affect the subject, or was that just down to using electrons to see particles and thereby influencing them? What's the latest research on that viewer affecting the viewed question?

 

I know that my behaviour alters dramatically when I know someone is watching me. I feel guilty walking out of Sainsbury's every week past the security guard with a shopping trolley full of food that I just paid for, so how on Earth are 'sensitives' as they call themselves, supposed to 'perform' in laboratory conditions? Intuition (in tuition = receiving information) requires relaxation and an open mind to function, since it works by opening the Chakras and this can be dangerous to the subject. It's also why some men are so reluctant to show their feelings. It physically hurts when exposed to ridicule!

 

This is often referred to as the 'jealous phenomena' defence.

 

I think there's a huge problem with effectively providing a get-out clause for every time a phenomenon fails to appear. Any failure can be explained away as 'there was too much negative energy (or whatever)'.

 

The problem with demanding a particular mind set such as an 'open mind' (read 'believer') is that those sympathetic to psychic phenomena tend to make the worst investigators. They are inherently trusting of the individuals taking part, they don't want to look for fraud in their participants or their research assistants, so they don't.

 

I always think studying sexual behaviour is a good analogy for the jealous phenomena defence. Someone might be able to do it perfectly well at home, but not 'perform' under intense scrutiny in the lab. Well ,that's true initially for many, and yet sexual behaviour can be and is studied successfully under controled conditions. Any real phenomenon will eventually prove itself under carefully mnitored conditions.

[Lbm]

I think its a protection system, from the quite daunting truth that we are insignificant in the universe and our lives have no meaning except what we ourselves make of it. Some, well a lot, of people don't want to accept that so instead opt for a belief system where everything is controlled/created by a higher being and that death will allow them to pass over to a greater existance.

 

I often feel this manefests itself more these days as more people turn away from organised religion, with conspiracy theories. Its far easier to believe that some evil Govt. has orchestrated 9/11 and 7/7, or that "dark forces" assassinated Diana in that tunnel, because if you believe that there is hope that some "hero" can expose it and stop the evil and it will never happen again. The scarier truth, that anyone with the will power can fabricate a bomb and blow it up in the train that you're sitting in right now, and ultimately, no-one can stop them from doing so, is too hopeless to contemplate. Similarly, if Diana, with her security, and chauffers and wealth can die in a car crash, so can you.

 

I'm all for Orgone energy, and cloudbusting, it sounds like fun.

I spent 5 minutes one afternoon staring at clouds. I was attempting to eliminate them with my laser-eraser like visual technique.

 

In the end I just went a bit corss eyed and got a headache. So I popped in the house for a cup of tea instead.

 

Still, it was worth a punt. (I really wanted it to work. Oh well)

 

I'm in the unfortunate position of having a very clear vision of how and why unseen forces work in this world but people filter and project their own beliefs and prejudices over any attempt at an explanation.

 

Each person needs to deconstruct their own belief system in order to achieve any meaningful progress, spiritually. Until they are humbled by circumstances beyond their control, this may never happen.

 

It's one of the main reasons for so called 'accidents' and coincidences.

 

Start by observing synchronistic events.

 

 

Hmmm...I smell an Ickeism coming on....

[Lbm]

I meant to say there's been some eloquent posts again from Mr T. Still a great read.

[Tannhauser]

A materialisation medium was even killed once when the Police forced entry to a seance during her 'ectoplasm' demonstration, according to Michael Roll.

 

I had a look at Michael Roll's stuff. I hadn't come across him before. Man, he's a classic.

 

The medium he seems to be referring to is Helen Duncan. That will be the Helen Duncan who had previously been caught red-handed faking her 'manifestations'. More Establishment manipulation of THE TRUTH, I expect.

[Tannhauser]

I meant to say there's been some eloquent posts again from Mr T. Still a great read.

 

One tries . This thread's right up my street, because it goes from philosophy of religion right through to science and pseudoscience.

[jagman]

"Here's a little experiment to try; place both palms facing eachother and with fingers fairly straight, 'clap' your hands very slowly back and forth several times until you feel a buildup of 'energy' between them and then bend one index finger towards the opposite hand and see if you can feel it tickle the palm of the other hand without touching it, moving the fingertip in small circles around the opposite palm. You may be able to feel it without the clapping. This is the origin of clapping by the way. You're sending energy to someone when you do it. It's the opposite of 'looking daggers' at someone, since to a clairvoyant, this is what your aura looks like, apparently. "

 

Clapping is nothing to do with the fact that you make a noise then ! you can be heard from a distance , this in the most primitive cultures declares "here I am" not hiding with a spear ,not your enemy,peace,glad to see you, etc

Primitive man would have little or no concept of energy

[Morpheus]

Clapping is nothing to do with the fact that you make a noise then ! you can be heard from a distance , this in the most primitive cultures declares "here I am" not hiding with a spear ,not your enemy,peace,glad to see you, etc

Primitive man would have little or no concept of energy

 

Not so; they had and have, where they are still 'primitive' enough, a far greater understanding and appreciation of nature and Earth energies.

 

Anyway, I was talking about clapping in applause, not to alert someone incase they mistook me for dinner.

 

It is we, in our arrogance, that are primitive.

[jagman]

Primitive man were in groups and tribes , they also fought each other for food ,women, land etc , if you tried to shout or call to another tribes warrior in peace it could be hard to tell if it was a peace cry or war cry , limited or no language was available - however a clicking of the fingers or clap is an easy means of communication as is an open palm (not carrying weapon) - the romans started the formal clapping thing or clicking fingers as applause , probably derived fron the earlier gestures of primitive man .

Modern man still carries the basic needs and wants as primitive man but made more complex by social changes , in some eastern block countries they still kidnap their wives....

Not sure Primitive man understood appreciation as a concept ,and had very little understanding at all , it took thousands of years to draw something and many more to plant something to eat

[Morpheus]

If primitive man (at whatever arbitrary time period) didn't understand the concept of appreciation, why did they sacrifice their children to 'The Gods'? They presumably appreciated warmth and fresh Mammoth steak.

 

Anyway, I thought this would be of interest, regarding what is, or isn't theoretically possible;-

 

geBmlndUexA

[Dave]

Any chance of a (decent quality) video clip?

 

Edit, not that it couldn't be faked but anyone who automatically assumes this, is just cynical. To some people, such as the responses that you're likely to receive, everyone is dishonest.

 

Without seeing it, I would have to assume that it's just a shadow, as you say, caused by something that you all just haven't considered but I would never dismiss it until the cause was clearly identified.

 

Is there no pattern of behaviour atall?

 

i wanted a copy of the cctv but was told not possible, probably because the manager believes he is god.

 

its the same size and moves in the same direction on all occasions,it looks like someone dragging a sheet across the floor .

[Supra Gaz]

I'm unsure on this one.

It comes down to the fact that people make up reasons why things happen so they feel better or to further their position in a social group, it's the same with religion, mankind couldn't can't explain why day turns to night and why bad things happen so some fruit loop says "it's god, he lives in the sky, you can't see him he's invisible, occasionally he gets cheesed off and sends a tsunami our way". With the continuing development of science we have answers to many more of the things that we didn't 100 years ago, we know why tsunamis occur and why day turns to night etc.

Anyway, I have had several large alcoholic drinks, I feel a bit tipsy now, I will go pray that when I wake up I will feel better.

 

Ps no offence to those who are religious, it has a place in society I just don't get it

[Morpheus]

Dave, it's not a fox with a carrier bag stuck on it's head is it?

 

Seriously though, I'd love to see the tape. Whatever it is, everything has an explanation; it's just that some phenomena are harder to understand than others. If science was truly impartial, i.e. HONEST, all things would be within the laws of physics because physics would recognise all things as possible. They just may not have an understanding of it yet. It's a very simple concept. Just because something is unknown or mocked by so called intellectuals, it doesn't make it impossible. If history teaches us anything, it's that we don't know everything but that there have always been those who said "I told you so!" (but no-one would listen because it wasn't politically correct).

 

Political correctness literally means dishonesty. Politics is the art of perception management or persuasion, not necessarily of honesty. A fact can be politically incorrect, for example, thus proving that a bias exists. We all know that. So why do we use the term? Thankfully, it's becoming a pejorative.

 

For all we know, Atlantis or Mu did exist and was far more advanced 30,000 years ago than we are today. They may have done a fantastic job of totally annihilating themselves too. Underwater cities are being found all over the place, by the way. They may have had no need for machinery, for example, if they understood the power of the mind, especially the collective power of the mind, since each of us is a part of something much larger.

 

As a child, I would have profound 'memories' almost which made me wonder why we even needed to physically travel anywhere atall, when we could just 'be there'. It was really strong, like "Duh! All you have to do is think about it and you'll just re-create the whole thing how you want it!" kinda feeling. Has anyone else felt this frustration? Admittedly, I was born in '68 and the water supply was probably 10% LSD! (Speaking of which, no, I've never used it but a good book on the subject is 'Beyond The Brain' by Professor Stanislav Grof).

 

Anything we don't understand we call Supernatural, (beyond our knowledge of what should be natural). That's all it is, for now.....you'll see.

[tbourner]

If science was truly impartial, i.e. HONEST, all things would be within the laws of physics because physics would recognise all things as possible. They just may not have an understanding of it yet. It's a very simple concept. Just because something is unknown or mocked by so called intellectuals, it doesn't make it impossible.

 

Sorry but you got it the wrong way around, science is the art of disproving something. Scientists (proper scientists) have to be very careful not to fall into traps with confirmation bias, so they spend their time trying to disprove their own theories, so in fact, science is just a long list of things that we know are impossible, leaving everything else that may or may not be possible.

[Tannhauser]

Sorry but you got it the wrong way around, science is the art of disproving something. Scientists (proper scientists) have to be very careful not to fall into traps with confirmation bias, so they spend their time trying to disprove their own theories, so in fact, science is just a long list of things that we know are impossible, leaving everything else that may or may not be possible.

 

Good post. Karl Popper would be proud of you.

[tbourner]

Good post. Karl Popper would be proud of you.

 

Who?

 

 

//edit: Oh

Popper is known for his attempt to repudiate the classical observationalist / inductivist account of scientific method by advancing empirical falsification instead; for his opposition to the classical justificationist account of knowledge which he replaced with critical rationalism, "the first non justificational philosophy of criticism in the history of philosophy"; and for his vigorous defense of liberal democracy and the principles of social criticism that he came to believe made a flourishing "open society" possible.

 

[Tannhauser]

Who?

 

 

//edit: Oh

 

 

 

Just posted a long explanatory reply to that and lost it. Hey ho.

[Morpheus]

.....science is the art of disproving something.

 

Ok, I have nothing against real science and I take your point in the context within which you meant it and obviously agree in principle to the self-correcting methodology that you've explained but science means (the aquiring of) knowledge about the natural world.

 

The problem is corruption. Any experiment is only as good as the data and people aren't all honest, incase you hadn't noticed. I've said it before that my brother is a Scientist but by God is he blinkered. You cannot assume anything, if you're going to be scientific, right? Not even that the laws that you've been taught are all valid. My problem has always been that I didn't understand the higher maths and I could see that science didn't have all the answers and that acknowledged experts were asking absurd questions like, "Will time start to go backwards at the point of maximum entropy?"

 

The lack of common sense among some of these academics is astonishing, my brother included tenfold. There are documentaries made, seriously discussing this time reversal possibility, with reversed video of a dropped and smashed teacup rising off of the kitchen floor and reforming into it's original unbroken state. For a start, the teacup wouldn't exist and neither would any other 'solid' matter, as the atoms that made it up would have released all of their energy, which is what entropy means. It's a complete failure of logic, especially since gravity ultimately forms black holes from which not much can escape and everything would be trapped. Our spiral galaxy would have long since disappeared up it's own hole.

 

Yet, if a witness not just a 'believer' says that they were taken aboard a UFO or saw a spirit/ghost the typical response (as Mr T. has already confirmed), is that it's either delusion, a mistake or a lie. Nowhere in that 'rigorously proven' model of reality is there any room whatsoever for the possibility of it actually being true; not because it can't be true according to the known laws of physics but because it shouldn't be true according to the individual questioned. They just don't believe in it! This obviously varies from person to person, hence the poll.

 

When trying to scientifically determine the validity of 'paranormal' or 'supernatural' evidence, the data is the perception of the experiencer as witness to the event/s, which, since we all experience reality - whether it exists objectively or not - according to our own worldview, makes for a tough scientific evaluation process. No matter the protocol or the controlled environment, scientists are still people and they tend strongly to form opinions according to their existing beliefs, especially when there's money involved, even to the point of denial of their own results and requesting a second opinion, in the case of 'impossible' cancer remissions from the use of the (Dr. Bob) Beck protocol, for example.

 

Science deals with the physical, as observable with current technology, though the spectrum is broadening all the time but it's restricted in it's understanding of the occult, (meaning simply, that which is unseen or hidden), for a simple reason, that being the nature of reality itself, beyond the five senses. We've all heard of and indeed used our sixth sense or gut instinct but science or those purporting to represent it, would have us believe that all that exists is what we can see, hear, touch, taste or smell, either directly or indirectly through the use of many forms of sensory augmentation, such as telescopes and MRI, for example. Infact, your sensory organs and even 'your' brain are simply instruments in the same way but that's another topic.

 

The corruption comes from our intrinsic need for self-preservation, even at the expense of the rest of the population, i.e. fear of loss or in this case, the loss of money and /or power/security etc. since those who have the most to lose from our understanding of the true nature of reality, seem to have successfully programmed the majority of us (or atleast helped us choose) to accept a very limited and powerless view of ourselves and our rightful place in the grand scheme of things. Basically, someone stole all the toys and they're not giving them back without a fight!

 

Knowledge is power and we know nothing of our true potential. Most of us don't even know who we are and what we're doing here; those that have a suspicion that they may have been here or somewhere else before; the rest don't care and believe that they'll just cease to exist one day and that the whole thing was totally meaningless. Those that have attempted to enlighten us have been consistently unsuccessful. This relates to our soul purpose up until this point (to forget who we are) but again, another topic.

 

For an obvious example of corruption and the resultant failure of scientific protocol, i.e. objectivity and honesty, look at the NIST report into the controlled demolition of WTC7 for example. Apparently the 47 floor steel framed building fell on it's own in 6-7 seconds (from video evidence) due to small fires and the report said that structural failure was to blame. The laughable computer model of the collapse, just like the twins, blatantly contradicts all of the video evidence of an obvious controlled demolition. Larry Silverstein (owner and property developer) even admitted it on t.v. and people argue that he didn't really mean what he said! Now that is delusion.

 

I can't think of a more obvious example of people only seeing what they want to see, than the appalling lack of knowledge most people have on the subject, given that it's still being used to justify mass murder with our money. All this, whilst being only a few clicks away from the truth. It's as if people are afraid to know what really happened and are using every excuse in the book to deny the overwhelming evidence; most notably, the 'Conspiracy Theorist' label. Anyone who even uses the term, is automatically showing their complete ignorance in the matter and needs to spend a few hundred hours watching the available footage, Jesse "I ain't got time to bleed" Ventura being a notable exception. Hopefully, by calling his t.v. show 'Conspiracy Theory', it will lose it's stigma someday.

 

Did supernatural forces bring these buildings down? Our Governments and media seem to think so, as they were built to withstand multiple plane impacts and obviously couldn't have been controlled demolitions, right? I mean, there's no evidence for it......

 

Is there?

 

3PawC4u1U7k