Jump to content

the telepathy thread


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 957 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Um. The word debate was used, not experiment? I was talking about a debate, not scientific methods, and the rules followed for debates.

You can debate faith. You can debate science. And when you debate each one you follow a set of "rules" (like when an experiment is done, just to confuse us both more) for each one. You can debate faith and science (together) but in order to do so you have to follow a completely different set of rules than the one applied to each of the singular debates.

Are we talking about the same thing using different terms? 🤭

Because if we are, I'd like to know how to experiment on religious faith. Maybe it would open a few eyes. lol

I think we must be at cross purposes somewhere, since I'm having difficulty imagining the kind of debate you have in mind when you say "You can debate faith and science (together)."

I mean, what's the debate about?  Scientific debate, by definition, is about the material.    Religious debate is about the spiritual and non-material, and is conducted in the context of the conjuncture of particular faith traditions at a particular moment.

What's science got to tell me about faith or guilt or forgiveness?    What's faith got to tell me about the behaviour of subatomic particles, which either behave in the way a particular theory predicts or don't, or whether a particular therapy performs  better than a placebo?   

They seem to me two completely different levels of discourse, which is why I'm having problems understanding what you mean.

ETA: Also, it seems to me, religious debate has to be conducted within the intellectual structure of a particular faith tradition, while scientific debate has to be conducted in a context from which such particular cultural and historical variables are excluded.  

Edited by Innula Zenovka
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I think we must be at cross purposes somewhere, since I'm having difficulty imagining the kind of debate you have in mind when you say "You can debate faith and science (together)."

I mean, what's the debate about?  Scientific debate, by definition, is about the material.    Religious debate is about the spiritual and non-material, and is conducted in the context of the conjuncture of particular faith traditions at a particular moment.

What's science got to tell me about faith or guilt or forgiveness?    What's faith got to tell me about the behaviour of subatomic particles, which either behave in the way a particular theory predicts or don't, or whether a particular therapy performs  better than a placebo?   

They seem to me two completely different levels of discourse, which is why I'm having problems understanding what you mean.

ETA: Also, it seems to me, religious debate has to be conducted within the intellectual structure of a particular faith tradition, while scientific debate has to be conducted in a context from which such particular cultural and historical variables are excluded.  

What is a debate of science and faith about? I dunno. I didn't bring debates in. I just responded to it and I'm still not sure myself what was meant because I haven't gotten a response. I may not get one.

Yeah, you've obviously had a lot of experience with debating, maybe in high school debate club, something I have never done or had any real desire to do. I considered it at one point but it always felt too much like pointless arguing to me. I mean, a winner is declared so it's more like a pointless arguing game. But the sort of debates I had in mind are more like discussions. A conversation. 

I imagine the scientific side of things would go something like this (which I happen to agree with): 

https://www.nationalacademies.org/evolution/science-and-religion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

But the sort of debates I had in mind are more like discussions. A conversation. 

I agree!

I think there should be a deal: everybody supports the scientists when they're working or making vaccines, and doesn't say "Oh, just stick a pentagram on your arm and you'll be safe from Covid!" 😮 

But also, sometimes the scientists need to hang up their labcoats and accept that when two people say the same thing at exactly the same time, one person has to say "JINX" or else the universe explodes 🙂

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rat Luv said:

I agree!

I think there should be a deal: everybody supports the scientists when they're working or making vaccines, and doesn't say "Oh, just stick a pentagram on your arm and you'll be safe from Covid!" 😮 

But also, sometimes the scientists need to hang up their labcoats and accept that when two people say the same thing at exactly the same time, one person has to say "JINX" or else the universe explodes 🙂

 

Yes, even scientists sometimes need to hang up their labs coats and loosen up a little. Which leads me to wonder, who is more likely to loosen up, scientists or um... trying to think of a nice way to put it but can't think of anything better than religious person? My money would be on the scientists. 🤫

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Yes, even scientists sometimes need to hang up their labs coats and loosen up a little. Which leads me to wonder, who is more likely to loosen up, scientists or um... trying to think of a nice way to put it but can't think of anything better than religious person? My money would be on the scientists. 🤫

Hmm...to be fair, I have met some very funny religious people! I guess it depends on the individual. I don't know or meet many scientists because I am a bit thick 🥴

I love mystery, I used to be obsessed with the Elisa Lam case and get a thrill from weird coincidences...I don't expect people to agree, or try to sell it to them, but some witchy things work for me. But also if I'm ill, I'll go to the doctor and not a 'healer'. I don't like the way religions try to divide and frighten people, but sometimes science has been used to prove that groups are 'inferior' so...I don't know really...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Rat Luv said:

Hmm...to be fair, I have met some very funny religious people! I guess it depends on the individual. I don't know or meet many scientists because I am a bit thick 🥴

I love mystery, I used to be obsessed with the Elisa Lam case and get a thrill from weird coincidences...I don't expect people to agree, or try to sell it to them, but some witchy things work for me. But also if I'm ill, I'll go to the doctor and not a 'healer'. I don't like the way religions try to divide and frighten people, but sometimes science has been used to prove that groups are 'inferior' so...I don't know really...

1- don’t be self deprecating.  There’s plenty of creeps in the world cued up to nitpick & judge us- don’t do it to yourself!  🤗. I think you’ve a good bead on things & are never rude to anyone.

2.  I love me some real life mysteries- the Elisa Lam story is really sad- & creepy cause of the blog she kept- how it had posts published after she disappeared.  

& humans manipulate & skew things for their own means- in secular things & matters of faith.  It’s one of our (collective) worst attributes.

Edited by Pixie Kobichenko
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

 the Elisa Lam story is really sad- & creepy cause of the blog she kept- how it had posts published after she disappeared.  
 

Yes, it really freaked me out :| Even if you're really sceptical, surely you would be surprised if somebody called Elisa Lam goes missing in LA at the same time that there's a TB test going on in skid row called "Lam-Elisa"? 😮

And the website of the last bookshop she visited before she died has the same domain address as...the graveyard she was buried in in Canada??

I think it is out of order that internet sleuths contacted her grieving family...but that whole story is so bonkers...I haven't seen the new Netflix documentary about it, but I do remember this strange statement by a LA police chief and somebody tracked the name down and searched all the stations, and he didn't exist? :S

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Rat Luv said:

Hmm...to be fair, I have met some very funny religious people! I guess it depends on the individual. I don't know or meet many scientists because I am a bit thick 🥴

I love mystery, I used to be obsessed with the Elisa Lam case and get a thrill from weird coincidences...I don't expect people to agree, or try to sell it to them, but some witchy things work for me. But also if I'm ill, I'll go to the doctor and not a 'healer'. I don't like the way religions try to divide and frighten people, but sometimes science has been used to prove that groups are 'inferior' so...I don't know really...

What Pixie said. Except the Elisa Lam thing. *googles*

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Which leads me to wonder, who is more likely to loosen up, scientists or um... trying to think of a nice way to put it but can't think of anything better than religious person? My money would be on the scientists. 🤫

article-2412917-1AFCF02C000005DC-551_636

roller-coaster-monks.jpg

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't me , I simply reacted to my girlfriend's visible/palpable distress and her inexplicably abandoning the eggs to burn  to leave the kitchen walk through the front room and garden to stare down the road which showed only the brow of a hill in the distance .

I didn't give up on my breakfast and decide to go for a mile walk just to satisfy some vague whim she had .

Science accepts there is much we don't know so as much as 80% of our oceans remain unexplored because we don't yet have the intelligence or ability and much the same can be said of the human brain .

Hey and spooky was the old mirror my mum put on a small landing between stairs in one place we lived when i was a kid . I always complained it made my blood run cold though i felt myself i was just being a wimp . Many years later she explained that a girl who would have been my age then died in a fire on that same landing in the adjoining house about 5 years before we moved in .

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Oh that's cute .. they look so happy. Patriarchy

Is Patriarchy one of Buddha's teachings, or is it possible this is a reflection of traditional gender roles within their society?

 

Quote

Indigenous and hybrid Indo-Tibetan Buddhist understandings of gender described a ‘third sex.’ Buddhist gender systems, it must be noted, do not map onto current use of the terms gender and sexuality. The ‘third sex’ category was defined by Buddhist thinkers based on Indian medicine. Several important articles and books by Tibetologists have dealt with the ‘third sex’ in detail, including Janet Gyatso’s “One Plus One Makes Three: Buddhist Gender, Monasticism, and the Law of the Non-excluded Middle,” and José Cabezon’s forthcoming book on sexuality in the Indo-Tibetan tradition.

In her analysis of gender in Tibetan literature, terminology, and medical systems, Janet Gyatso points out that Buddhist conceptions of gender focused primarily on what we would term sex characteristics, rather than on gender identity. She also states that there is some overlap between gender and sexuality in the classification of the ‘third sex,’ which includes “those whose sexuality changes every half month (in some versions from male to female and back again),” as well as intersex individuals and eunuchs.

The ‘third sex’ category is expounded upon at length in Buddhist literature primarily in order to exclude this class from taking monastic vows, receiving teachings, and giving donations. These rules, like so many, were not always followed to the letter and interpretation varied across region, class, and era. It is uncertain whether ‘third sex’ was ever a fully inhabitable identity for Tibetans.

Whether ‘queer’ is a helpful way of describing these practices is questionable. Translating histories of sexuality and gender into terms that would be understood today, as well as thinking about how they relate to present practices of queerness, is no easy task, and represents a dilemma at the heart of decolonial queer studies.

Following the establishment of the PRC in 1949, a “scientific” model of monogamous heterosexuality that privileged and promoted the reproductive needs of the socialist state was emphasised. This resulted in widespread disruption of the various traditions and hierarchies of sexuality and gender that had formed the bedrock of Tibetan societies.

(https://theasiadialogue.com/2017/06/27/queer-politics-in-tibet-past-present-and-future/ )

 

Edited by Chroma Starlight
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:
On 7/10/2021 at 10:55 AM, Luna Bliss said:

Vedic science

isn't science

Though Vedic (Indian) wisdom itself largely predates the modern western scientific method, it (like most cultures) contains ideas that were the result of careful observation and consideration. Ancient medical, agricultural and economic practices etc, though rife with quackery, do reveal important knowledge new to the west.

Before any particular culture gets all snooty about their ancient wisdom, it's worth noting that some of that wisdom was obtained from animals. When I was a kid, Mom and Dad taught me about how animal behavior worked its way into alternative medicine and spirituality. One of the examples I recall was that of African elephants being seen denuding certain trees just before calving, leading to the development of herbal teas used by African mid-wives to induce labor in humans. I just went Googling and found this...

https://asknature.org/strategy/eating-bark-to-induce-labor/

The "extraordinary" discovery in that article was made in... 2016. If anything, this shows me just how clueless modern science can be. If a pre-teen girl in Wisconsin was aware of this in 1980, how could a trained ecologist be surprised by it thirty six years later? Worse yet, how did the entire publication chain miss it?

I'll be the first to agree that the progress of science looks like a drunkard's walk, and that people (and animals) were doing passable science long before the scientific method was widely promulgated. We can start from scratch in our investigations of the natural world, or can also delve into ancient wisdom to see if there might be some pearls there. Along the way, we relearn what we once knew, and develop at greater understand of how we learn.

MIT's Pune India campus has a School of Vedic Science. It does not blindly apply the ancient wisdom of Vedic traditions, but rather uses those traditions to guide the development and application of modern science in ways that are more respectful (and therefore more likely to be adopted) of Indian culture.

To misquote Ms. Poppins...

A spoon full of tradition helps the medicine go down, in a most delightful way.

One of the things that western medicine seems to have missed, and should learn from others, is the tremendous benefit of... delight.

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
Added the MIT link.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:
27 minutes ago, Chroma Starlight said:

Is Patriarchy one of Buddha's teachings, or is it possible this is a reflection of traditional gender roles within their society?

Wrong is wrong, yes?

Well yes, every organization in the world is wrong to a degree, including science, because patriarchy is or has been a part of it.

I just tend not to invalidate anything wholly because it has some faults. I don't know if Coffee was indeed doing this...but due to other postings I have a high degree of suspicion about it.  Hence, I do get Chroma's defense.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Chroma Starlight said:

Is Patriarchy one of Buddha's teachings, or is it possible this is a reflection of traditional gender roles within their society?

 

 

great links, btw...didn't know this about more Eastern traditions, but have come across it in Native ones..

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, cunomar said:

It wasn't me , I simply reacted to my girlfriend's visible/palpable distress and her inexplicably abandoning the eggs to burn  to leave the kitchen walk through the front room and garden to stare down the road which showed only the brow of a hill in the distance .

I didn't give up on my breakfast and decide to go for a mile walk just to satisfy some vague whim she had .

It does indeed sound like, from what you've described, your girlfriend had a psychic experience.

If it happened to me personally I would always keep the other frame of reference in my mind too....like...was there some physical clue like a siren barely audible...or whatnot. I guess though I am a great believer in psychic experiences (they happen a lot in Yoga communes/circles) I usually leave the door open to consider there might be something in the physical realm unaccounted for.

Not saying you should do that with your experience....just relating how I process it all.

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:
On 7/9/2021 at 7:53 AM, Luna Bliss said:

I had some fun reading about Natives related to the discovery of dinosaurs in the U.S., although I'm afraid it took me away from attempting to comprehend Vine Deloria Jr. to the degree I planned. Anyway, I had no idea Natives were so vital to the development of paleontology in the U.S.

An interesting bit:

"Strangely, prehistoric and ancient people with a pre-scientific understanding of nature had a better handle on what fossils represented than western scholars and naturalists of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries who considered fossils to simply be an attempt by rock to imitate life. While many ancient and aboriginal cultures considered dinosaur bones to be the remains or real creatures, western savants often passed off fossils as weird “sports of nature” that were created by supernatural forces within the earth. After all, religious dogma dictated that the world was only a few thousands of years old, and that the whole earth was created as is within that compressed timeframe. There was no room in biblical chronologies for fossils, so, therefore, the shark teeth, clam shells, mammal skeletons, and dinosaur bones had to be intricate fakes that could too-easily trick the unwary. It took decades of research, discovery, and re-discovery of older ideas before naturalists realized that fossils were true vestiges of prehistoric life, and that extinction was a reality. By 1800, at the latest, a scientific understanding of prehistory was finally forming."

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-brief-history-of-hidden-dinosaurs-9663115/

https://www.desertusa.com/desert-activity/dino.html

Expand  Expand  

https://nomegallery.com/chapter/fossil-legends-of-the-first-americans-by-adrienne-mayor/

I like the little I know of Native American (Buddhist, Pagan, etc) thinking on the interconnectedness of nature. Ultimately, however, their understanding of the fossils was also quite limited, and some of them cling as stubbornly to their creation stories as Christians do to theirs.

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/22/science/indian-tribes-creationists-thwart-archeologists.html

That's a paywalled article and you might not have access to it. In it, the author describes the difficulties archaeologists have excavating on Native People's lands. Here's a quote from it:

''We never asked science to make a determination as to our origins,'' said Sebastian LeBeau, repatriation officer for the Cheyenne River Sioux, a Lakota tribe based in Eagle Butte, S.D. ''We know where we came from. We are the descendants of the Buffalo people. They came from inside the earth after supernatural spirits prepared this world for humankind to live here. If non-Indians choose to believe they evolved from an ape, so be it. I have yet to come across five Lakotas who believe in science and in evolution.''

I doubt that represents the thinking of the majority of Lakota, just as the "sports of nature" idea did not represent the mainstream of European fossil thought, but it does illustrate that willful human ignorance is an equal opportunity employer. I'm certainly not well versed on the fossil lore of America's indigenous peoples, but I suspect the significant variance from European thinking of the same period is rooted in the comparative availability and nature of fossils throughout each culture's history. The Rocky Mountain range, particularly in Canada (home of the Burgess Shale), is the world's richest exposition of dinosaur fossils.

It's hard to wander around a place like Alberta's Dinosaur Provincial Park without understanding that, thousands of years ago, the indigenous people of the area were literally tripping over dinosaur fossils. When you get a 10,000 year head start on your mythology, it's hard not to look wiser for a while. China has similarly easily accessible dinosaur fossil sites and I have wondered whether their mythology reveals their long historical exposure to dinosaur fossils. There be dragons?

Ultimately, I suspect you can find archeologists and paleontologists hailing from most of the world's belief systems that are converging on a common understanding. That's a pretty impressive achievement for the most powerful tool we've ever created, science.

I will probably get back to you on this. I'm in the process of a deep dive into Native traditions.  I'm just wary of being ethnocentric....the Native experience is difficult to understand and has frequently been mischaracterized and overlooked by Western science.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I mean, what's the debate about?  Scientific debate, by definition, is about the material.

Scientific debate should be about the material, yes. The problem occurs when science definitively claims they know there is no 'as-yet-unmeasured' component of the Universe, and tells anybody who believes there is that they're wrong and silly. There's simply no proof one way or the other, and when science purports to know the truth that has not been proven....that is not science...it is scientism.  The most science should be saying is that they have not discovered enough evidence to make such a final determination as many unfortunately do.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Scientific debate should be about the material, yes. The problem occurs when science definitively claims they know there is no 'as-yet-unmeasured' component of the Universe, and tells anybody who believes there is that they're wrong and silly. There's simply no proof one way or the other, and when science purports to know the truth that has not been proven....that is not science...it is scientism.  The most science should be saying is that they have not discovered enough evidence to make such a final determination as many unfortunately do.

I think science simply says is that it's all very well speculating about what might be the case but, until you can back it up with data and calculations to prove it, it remains mere speculation and can't really be relied upon.

 

Edited by Innula Zenovka
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2021 at 11:31 AM, Arielle Popstar said:

Back on ESP, an interesting aside involves deer and how often hunters report that they seem to have a sixth sense in determining when there is danger lurking about. One hunting gear clothing company used the latest scientific research on electromagnetic vibrations said to emanate from every living being to create a suit that is in effect a faraday cage to absorb those energies and allow the hunter to get much closer to the deer.

 

Faraday cages do not absorb energy. If they do, why do they stay cool while setting your popcorn on fire?

Faraday cages reflect. If electromagnetic vibrations are at play, the rube in the video just donned a mirror suit. While some of his theorized magical EM emissions might be contained by the suit (and re-absorbed by his body) his uncovered face will continue to radiate and his reflection of ambient RF energy will be increased by orders of magnitude. If he were in the water, electric eels would be practically blinded by his suit. Unfortunately, unwary customers are blinded by the company's bullsh*t and spend hard earned money on snake oil they can wear.

Here's another video I found on their website, in which another layman displays an understanding of electric field theory that approximates that of my childhood...

Every effect he demonstrates is well known to anyone who's designed an ECG machine. Ask any cardiac ICU nurse if they've noticed perturbations in unconnected ECG leads as staff move around a patient's room. They have no understanding of the mechanism at work*, but they've experienced it. I have too, but I understand how it works.

I once amused myself by watching a circuit I was developing respond to the foot tapping of a colleague more than 20 feet away. I turned my display so he could see it, and challenged him to move his foot in a way that would approximate a heartbeat. It took him  less than a minute to get a "Normal Sinus Rhythm, 70BPM" display. He was even able to create premature ventricular contractions and fibrillations that were flagged by our analysis software. We spent the next few minutes working out the effect's mechanism, which ultimately resulted in him rubbing the sleeve of his wool sweater on the back of his chair, increasing the amplitude of the signal to the point it saturated my detector. Had he been wearing conductive clothing, the effect observed by my circuit would have been unchanged. My colleague, though so much more than a squishy bag of salt water in contact with various other materials, is approximately only that in the context of the  effect demonstrated in the video above.

My understanding of electric field theory and practice allows me to, with significant certainty, determine that the man in the video is profoundly ignorant of the effect he is demonstrating. He's using the same kinds of tools I have on my bench (probably less sophisticated, as one would need significant knowledge and training to use my RF network analyzer well) and misinterpreting the results. He would not get past an initial job interview at any tech company I've worked for/with.

So, once again I'm faced with making a judgment call. Is HECS ignorant or malicious? I have ways of resolving these questions. Here's the "HECS Experts" page.

https://hecshunting.hecsllc.com/hecs-technology/testimonials/

Do you find it at all curious that none of their experts are HECS personnel? One would expect that page to detail the expertise of the people who designed the system. Instead, it's a testimonial page. Why? Ask any corporate lawyer. Testimonials are a legal way to deflect liability. Let other people make your product claims. If they have no financial interest, they too are absolved of responsibility for misinforming the public. Ignorance is legal.

And so I make my judgment. HECS is celebrating ten years of legally using the public to deceive the public, for profit.

*One glowing HECS suit testimonial is offered by a cardiac nurse who, like every one I've met, has and needs virtually no understanding of electric field theory.

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

And so I make my judgment. HECS is celebrating ten years of legally using the public to deceive the public.

Sorry to put you through all that trouble but the only thing I was pointing out with the video and link is that the human body seems to put out an electromagnetic signal which some species can apparently pick up with a "sixth sense". This may be the medium through which some of these "telepathic" or other clairvoyant properties are being transmitted? Whether this suit or your bunny slippers have the ability to block, absorb or reflect that emf signal is somewhat secondary to the context of the thread topic though I thought somewhat interesting nonetheless. Your review of it leaves me unconvinced that it might not work as advertised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

This may be the medium through which some of these "telepathic" or other clairvoyant properties are being transmitted?

If that was the case, those transmissions would be detectable. measurable. reproducible.

It would be trivial.

There would be no mystery here at all.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 957 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...