The 'we use a fraction of our brain' thing, as Jeffro points out, is rubbish; this is a statement dating from the early part of the 20th Century, no one has any idea who first said it, but it was taken up and is now a full-blown urban myth. We all know it as we were exposed to it by dubbie pseudo-science, but it is NOT true.
Okay, here's three points;
One: criminality.
There has never, not ever, been a crime that was committed by someone using paranormal powers.
This means either;
- Criminals with paranormal powers don't even get detected, let alone caught
- That people with paranormal powers are not criminal by nature
- That paranormal powers don't exist
- That paranormal powers exist, but at the end of the day are random, weak and unreliable to the extent it's easy to believe they don't exist
Two: how.
What makes is happen or makes people think it happens?
- Undetectable entities interacting with human minds by means unknown?
- Hidden abilities of the human mind we can't measure yet?
- Imagination, dellusion, mental illness, egomania, wish-fulfilment?
Three: observability
There has never, ever, not once been an instance of precogniton being recorded in any remotely reliable or repeatable scientific matter, or a photograph et. al. of the paranormal that cannot be questioned, or of any remote manipulation or remote viewing being doen under controlled circumstances.
It's just like there's not one decent photo or film of the Loch Ness monster, the Yeti or Sasquatch, or of any claimed UFO sighting. For some reason when these things happen, there's no decent evidence other than eye-witness accounts.
ALL the evidence thus far is heresay, anecdotal. Why? Well maybe it's because;
- These things don't really happen?
- Because despite the massive number of blooper shows in the past twenty years caused by common ownership of home DV cameras, no one has ever managed to record anything paranormal as when ever something happens there is either no way of recording it, or the recording is of such a poor quality it isn't real evidence.
- Because the paranormal makes photoemulsion and CCD's go all wonky?
To me, as I have never had a paranormal experience, the thundering lack of closure and suspicous lack of evidence - considering how many people have some story or the other - seems very unlikely unless
- The paranormal is some quirky emergant characteristic developing in the human population that will never predominate as it is so vauge and useless it has no selection advantage,
- ... or unless it is a load of bollocks.
The lack of documentary evidence and repeatable scientific verification doesn't lead me to any other conclusions. What do other people think? I would love to have other people's analysis of the facts... er, we the lack of facts and surfiet of claims
I mean, considering new technology means that there are far more images being recorded every day than ever before, one would expect at some point someone who had a camera AND knew how to focus it or use NightShot would capture some decent footage of something paranormal, or would tape a prediction of someone's death or other event and leave it somewhere unimpeachable before the event transpires. Has it happened? Nope.
Oh, I should say I feel mundane intuition and possibly a better ability to pick-up subvocalisation in some people than others, plus the other aspects I mentioned in my earlier post, might VERY normally and mundanely explain many so-called paranormal events.
PS: Ross, in Julian May's "Galactic Milieu" books (where you'll encounter Abaddon, funnily enough), the Celts are one of the clines of humanity that start developing useful and usable mind-powers at the end of the 20th, start of the 21st Century. So you never know.
