Remote Viewing (page 11)

julien

PS. if anyone here can tell me what image I often look at as I sit at my home computer I will stop picking on the remote viewers.

If I believed the moon was made out of cheese, and they found rocks instead. I would believe in the rocks. If I believed that the world was flat, and I got lots of evidence that the earth was a sphere, I would believe in the shere theory. I have read a great deal of research on psychic phenomena and there is nothing to it. Now, to tell me that there is someting to it, but it is all kept secret doesn't convince me. Anything the government can do reasearch on so can the Universities, and the academic community has not shown such a phenomena to exist.

I was engaged in a study once where a woman claimed that she could tell the kind of mental problems someone had, if she could hold in her hand a bar of metal that they had held. She couldn't do it. I will explain the how the experiment was conducted, it you are interested.

By the way, are you and your friend going to comment further on my suggested experiment?

bboynekosgirlfriend

What kind of a hypocrite are you? Derek devised a test. You self-proclained psychics failed, or came up silly excuses to not partake. We only have your words for your assertions you have seen anything outside your own head.

I have shown no hypocrisies. If you READ the posts you'd realise i wasn't on this board posting when derek devised this test or at least unaware of this test. AND you would see that i am trying to make a fair test that will satify both sides of this debate with larc. Read before you post!

And i was refering to test posted here from stargate and such, not those from random people on the board.

I never say beleive but don't call people crazy just because YOU can't comprehend it. How childish is that. 'NU UH. I don't beleive you. you're just dumb'

The only rational conclusion is that you have a problem that should be discussed with your psychiatrist and nobody else.

Not only is this offensive to me but to anyone who DOES have a mental illness. This is an IRATIONAL conclusion based on fear of the unknown. You can't understand it so you label it 'crazy'. Not only that it's hurtful. Just cause your norwegian doesn't give me the right to tell you you need to go to the psychiatrist. It's not your fault you're Norwegian.( by the way i grew up in Norway and speak fluent Norwegain just so i don't get labeled as predjudiced) This was a hurtful comment and not appreciated.

Isn't it a little counter productive to tell me to shut up on a chat board?

JanH

Again, the US government beleived in it enough to harbor a large group of TRAINED remote viewers

Get real, bboy! What world are you living in??? They believed in Star Wars under Reagan. How many billions did they use? Seen any of those promised laser satellites? None? Right. Now, they "believe in" Dubya's "son of star wars" project.

Is it because these people are dumb? No. Some of them are good scientists and soldiers. They know that these projects will never and can never work. But they also know that the government is shoveling out billions of dollars for them. Being a skeptic doesn't make you rich. Pretending to be a believer does. Simple math. Hey, offer me a billion $ and I will pretend to believe in anything!

If you don't see the parallel here, you're dumber than I thought.

- Jan
--
"Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets

bboyneko

One of you said that we don't know how gravity works. Of course we do and with great precision. If not, we could not put up satelittes and know their orbit ahead of time. Likewise, we could not predict the orbit of the planets or the speed of descent through the atmospher. All of the these are known.

yes but WHY does gravity happen? Explain that. Why is it any object with mass has a gravitaitonal pull? Why does it bedn light? We don't know. Again, read the definition of science. It is theories to explain observed phenomena. Of course we observe gravity and then calculate based on the observations. This still does not tell us how it works. Eienstein theorized that objects with mass have gravity because they are warping space time and drawing other objects towards it center, in a similair way that a bowling ball on a bed will cause objects placed on the bed to roll toward the bowling ball.

This is just a theory, and it hasn't been proven. There are other theories as to why objects with mass have gravity, but the most widley accepted one is Einstein's. The remarkable thing about the theory is it suggests other dimensions. What exactly, is mass 'warping' In the bowling ball example, the bowling ball warps the blanket. In Eienstein's theory, we have to assume that space-time is wrapped around 'something'

I beleive there is a book called flatland or flat world, in which there is a make-beleive land of little 2-dimensional people. Their scientists eventually figure out that there must a 3rd dimension besides there's. That's because the peice of paper they live on is folded and crumpled. By measuring straight lines and seeing that they curve (an anolgy to the observed effect of gravitational fields bending the path of light which physics tells us will only travel from point a to point b via the quickest path) that their peice of paper, their universe, is wrapped around a higher plane.

Again, this is just a theory to explain an observed phenomena. gravity and light are amazing and exrremley odd things we take for granted because we see it everyday. Suddenly, as soon as you get far enough away from an object with great mass, you weigh nothing. It very strange. Einestein also showed us that we cannot tell the difference between artifical gravity (like when you spin a bucket of water ina circle and the water does not spill out because the g forces keep it in the bucket, just as gravity does when the bucket is on a table) and actual gravity, that is, gravity caused by a an object with significant mass.

-Dan

JanH

bboynekosgirlfriend,

Isn't it a little counter productive to tell me to shut up on a chat board?

How come you deleted all arguments from my message, and failed to answer them? Of course, because you cannot answer.

You are a fraud.

I said: "put up or shut up!" Have a problem with basic English? You don't understand what that expression means?

Ok, you claim to know Norwegian: Bevis at du kan gjøre noe som helst overnaturlig, eller hold for helvete kjeft!

Forstår du?

You and bboy have come here with bold claims, and when you are asked for evidence, all we get are wimpy, pathetic excuses. I have no problems understanding or "comprehending" what you are talking about. It is well explained within the realm of human superstition, and that happens to be the area of life where I am highly educated.

You only need to know two areas of human knowledge to explain the alleged supernatural: superstition and fraud.

Your unwillingness to answer challenges makes it increasingly likely we have to look for the latter here.

- Jan
--
"Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets

bboyneko

If you don't see the parallel here, you're dumber than I thought

Good lord man can we please please stop with the insults????? Have I stooped to questioning the intillegence of any of you? Have I insulted your mother or your household pet?

larc

bboy,

Newton had the first theory of gravity, and Einstien's theory includes everyting that is within Newton's theory plus more. What are the other theories of gravity that you are referring to?

Science has done more that take observations and then made predictions. This is a primative first step. Scienteists have developed mathimatical equations that have greater precision than the observations that lead to them.

Swinging a bucket in a cirlce is not artifical gravity. There is not such term in physics. What is the name of this force pray tell? I think that you have forgotten most of your science. I have been out of school for longer than you have lived, yet I remember most of mine.

When are we going to get back to my experiment?

julien

bboy is right, just the terminology is vague.. the force in the bucket is acceleration; in general relativity it is the same as gravity. However bboy said that when you get far enough away from something massive you weigh nothing. That is not true, you will still be pulled by the object's gravity.

larc

Julien,

If the bucket is moving at a constant rate of speed, there is no acceleration. That is not the force at work here.

Remote Viewing

Share this