Like I said above, there cannot be evidence as to what happens in the mind. That is - you can understand it only if you try it yourself. Two persons trained in telepathy can use it to communicate between themselves but they cannot prove it to public because it will be labeled as a co-incidence, mental retardation or something of that sort.
Like I said above, there cannot be evidence as to what happens in the mind. That is - you can understand it only if you try it yourself. Two persons trained in telepathy can use it to communicate between themselves but they cannot prove it to public because it will be labeled as a co-incidence, mental retardation or something of that sort.
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
It's quite easy to prove. Person A in Moscow, person B in New York. A is shown a number between 1 and 10,000 and attempts to communicate it to person B. If they can communicate via telepathy, B should get the correct number several times in a row. I suspect person B will get the correct number about one time in ten thousand.
hmmm......yea
- but what's more important is 'how it works'. I think I should stop here, there is a meta physical/spiritual aspect associated with this fact. PM me if you are interested.^ Exactly! If everyone believes it, aka consensus, it must be true even without verifiable facts.
Ahem... flat earth.
Ahem... flat earth.
Evidence supports a theory.
Evidence against refutes a theory.
Lack of evidence does not support a theory nor refute it.
Lack of evidence against also does not support a theory or refute it.
Have you no belief in the flying spaghetti monster?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noodly_appendage
^ Don't be such a whiner, if you want proof - try to discover it yourself, don't depend on others or contradict the theories because you aren't doing any better. Use that analytical power of your mind, it will be the most selfless thing you ever do to the world and your family. The biggest flaw in the modern scientific minds is that they always try quote a bunch of scientific theories and place their arguments on the top of that, I tell you it is no good being a walking library so pitifully degenerated in the intellect. New discoveries always bring new mysteries and if you feel there is more mystery than answers then don't wait for someone else to solve it for you.
Anyway, this reminds me of a comic strip from Calvin and Hobbes, I find it really funny, here: http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/7204/ch950107qs8.gif
Anyway, this reminds me of a comic strip from Calvin and Hobbes, I find it really funny
, here: http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/7204/ch950107qs8.gif^ my proof is my every day existence. From all the years I have been alive, I've been bombarded with evidence that telepathy does not exist. I don't even have to try other than to live.
Considering your undeserved rant about how "degenerate" I am and how being "analytical" will help my family, it is obvious you are quite a bitter person. I am laughing right now at how you view the "modern" intellect. You truly believe you are an "out of the box" thinker and see everyone else trapped in this tiny box of societal suppression. If you are ignorant of the reasons why scientist theorize based on previous validated scientific theories, you have no place to criticize. Unless, you are bitter, of course.
Considering your undeserved rant about how "degenerate" I am and how being "analytical" will help my family, it is obvious you are quite a bitter person. I am laughing right now at how you view the "modern" intellect. You truly believe you are an "out of the box" thinker and see everyone else trapped in this tiny box of societal suppression. If you are ignorant of the reasons why scientist theorize based on previous validated scientific theories, you have no place to criticize. Unless, you are bitter, of course.
i think it would be e times faster than the speed of light (about 2.72x faster) because of the particles known as tripons.
Born2bwire
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2005
- 9,840
- 6
- 71
Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
In the secular sense, absolutely, but don't confuse a "belief" and "faith" as any form of evidence.
Before you think of a response, I will give that I am a man of faith myself but have learned to separate the differences of faith and science.
Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
I think you misunderstand precisely where I am coming from.
Regardless of faith OR belief the fact is lack of proof does not itself prove lack of existence. I am not saying that any "mystic power" type claims (God, telepathy, time travel, you name it) exists however i AM saying its very, very shortsighted and ignorant to assume that it does not exist because it has not been proven one way or the other.
In fact whats interesting is those in this very thread who attempt to represent themselves as highly educated are proving more their own ignorance and complacancy. The greatest minds of our time never stopped to say "Well, theres no proof so it doesntg exist." Quite the opposite in fact, the greatest minds have routinely said "I think.....Now I will attempt to prove".
Of course one can always find examples of individual "greats" who claim one way or the other on certain issues. One example is "Religion is a crutch...." from I believe Mr. Churchill himself. Naturally in my post I am taking it horribly out of context but none the less. While one may choose not to believe to take the standpoint that it absolutely does not seems to me very very shortsighted and shallow.
I don't think anybody is advocating that people should not be innovative, but your follow up statement to my simple post implies the X-files theme, that truth is out there, just not proven, so you can understand my reaction.
If anything, I do not think the "intellectuals" here are trying to prove anything. If a post seems complacent, ask for clarification. You will find that many choose to paraphrase their position and "dumb down" if you will, their response, especially in a subject such as "telepathy."
Your statement "I think... Now I will attempt to prove." is leaving out a lot of assumptions. First, their "thinking" must be rooted in some existing methods or existing processes else, they waste their time trying to prove something absolutely nonsensical. The "hypothesis" should be sound and likely to be fruitful and supported by many other sound and proven hypothesis.
You don't expect an individual to "think" that the tooth fairy exists and spend their life trying to prove it. That's just madness.
If anything, I do not think the "intellectuals" here are trying to prove anything. If a post seems complacent, ask for clarification. You will find that many choose to paraphrase their position and "dumb down" if you will, their response, especially in a subject such as "telepathy."
Your statement "I think... Now I will attempt to prove." is leaving out a lot of assumptions. First, their "thinking" must be rooted in some existing methods or existing processes else, they waste their time trying to prove something absolutely nonsensical. The "hypothesis" should be sound and likely to be fruitful and supported by many other sound and proven hypothesis.
You don't expect an individual to "think" that the tooth fairy exists and spend their life trying to prove it. That's just madness.
Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
The truth IS out there. One way or the other. Now certain things are obviously taken to the extreme such as Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, but none the less to dismiss all mystic / religious beliefs as make believe still seems very short sighted in my opinion.
Case in point......
Theories do not start out as an idea which the theorist then tries to find proof for. You start with the proof and then try and find the most likely explanation for this.
After the theoretical groundwork is done you can look for consequences of your theory which are testable predictions and see if they match up with observables.
You'll find that a lot of people do the reverse, that is, they start with a theory and then cherry pick phenomenon that could support their theory. The problem with this approach is that it most likely cannot explain other phenomenon, ie. the consequences contradict observable phenomenon.
After the theoretical groundwork is done you can look for consequences of your theory which are testable predictions and see if they match up with observables.
You'll find that a lot of people do the reverse, that is, they start with a theory and then cherry pick phenomenon that could support their theory. The problem with this approach is that it most likely cannot explain other phenomenon, ie. the consequences contradict observable phenomenon.
I didn't ask you for proof. I explained that lack of evidence against something is not proof of it. This is not the explanation of a theory. It's a logical fact.
Making sh1t up then calling it true does not constitute using the analytical power of your mind. In fact it shows an utter lack of analysis.
Are you preaching at me to get out there and figure things out while you start a thread asking for the answer?
Anyway, this reminds me of a comic strip from Calvin and Hobbes, I find it really funny
Not funny. Shoo.
We will have to find two telepaths and test it... hmmm would have to put one on the moon so that reaction time wouldnt be as big a factor...
More important question. Whats the bandwidth like?
More important question. Whats the bandwidth like?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter