|
|
Post by talisman on Mar 6, 2011 15:59:26 GMT -5
" He [J.B. Rhine] noted, however, that this experiment could not adequately distinguish telepathy from clairvoyance." Or divine intervention. Solid evidence at last. I'll look at one more source, and that's it. It's like herding cats. |
|
|
|
Post by talisman on Mar 6, 2011 16:21:29 GMT -5
I'll look at one more source, and that's it. It's like herding cats. OK. I have in fact sampled them all, but some of them are so big that I could not possibly read them completely, especially when they tend to be rambling rants against some organisation or another. None of the bits I have absorbed provide anything other than fuzzyness. Nothing hard. There's a lot of faith and hope, but a distinct lack of facts. I suggest the non-sceptics summarise it all and give us a précis, or at least indicate the convincing parts of each source article. |
|
|
|
Post by sadie on Mar 6, 2011 20:49:48 GMT -5
They are dreams......for every article you find where scientists are trying to figure it out.....you can probably find an article saying they haven't figured it out. That's the fun of science.....and our funny little brains.
Personally I would hope they don't solve it.........I enjoy my quirky dreams way too much to think there was some logical reason behind them.
|
|
|
|
Post by pipsqueak on Mar 7, 2011 5:50:14 GMT -5
i'm always a little surprised at rigidly held views about things outside ones personal experience. anything which cannot be fully explained or proved therefore does not exist and consequently is mumbo jumbo. i suspect it comes from very dominant left brain thinking. absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. for me keeping an open mind is important. i once dreamt something before it happened. it wasnt about any disaster or anything special or of much interest to anyone. but i remembered oh so vividly when i experienced my dream sequence in reality. it hit me like a bolt, so powerful was the sense of deja vu. of course i cannot prove it happened. 'Grand Design' suggests that metaphysics and physics are growing closer. i love the idea of a multiverse, many more dimensions than we ever considered possible, black holes, super black holes, dark matter, dark energy, string theory, M-theory, alternate pasts and alternate futures - it all becomes credible now thanks to Stephen Hawking and the other bloke, Leonard Mlodinow  there's a good review by Michael Moorcock in the LA Times if anyone cares to have a look. www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-stephen-hawking-20100905,0,2573263.story |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 7, 2011 8:19:07 GMT -5
absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. now that is 100% correct...i neither believe or disbelieve.....but just because we dont know or havent experienced is no reason to dismiss out of hand dreams or phrophesies....of course there will be charletans such as rasputin and various others ..but then there is also nostradamus and old mother shipton..who knows |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Mar 7, 2011 9:22:43 GMT -5
"absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. "
Plugging blind faith again.
If the evidence is put forward it can be considered, but not before.
|
|
|
|
Post by sadie on Mar 7, 2011 9:34:11 GMT -5
i dont know if i am sceptic or not.. but i do know that i went into a very old house[had never been in it before] and knew exactly where the fireplaces,,the stairs were...and what carvings were on the fire places etc etc etc it didnt spook me in the slightest...i just knew that house inside out..in fact i knew it so well as i crossed the threshold i asked the person i was with to check out if i was correct on all the stuff i knew should be there....and it was This dream, or whatever it was, really made me think Mouse. In Jr. High my cousin moved here from another town. I remember driving down the street with her showing her around when she suddenly screamed for me to stop and pull over. She pointed to a house. She said she dreamed about this house all the time. She sat there and described the inside of the house to me in detail. How she used to walk around it all the time. After she moved here......she stopped dreaming about the house. The funny thing about the story.....the house was continually for sale.....before she moved here......nobody seemed to be able to stay in the house.........after that I have never seen it for sale again. I always wondered if my cousin was kinda haunting it somehow..... |
|
|
|
Post by talisman on Mar 7, 2011 13:57:47 GMT -5
i'm always a little surprised at rigidly held views about things outside ones personal experience. anything which cannot be fully explained or proved therefore does not exist and consequently is mumbo jumbo. i suspect it comes from very dominant left brain thinking. absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. for me keeping an open mind is important. Me too. But it would be nice to actually see some actual hard evidence which isn't hearsay. There doesn't actually appear to be any. |
|
|
|
Post by biglin on Mar 7, 2011 17:44:36 GMT -5
"absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. " Plugging blind faith again. If the evidence is put forward it can be considered, but not before. Well, it already HAS been. (And I've hardly started posting) The trouble is, you can no more persuade someone who insists on keeping their eyes and ears tightly shut in case they might be forced to revise their prejudices than you can persuade someone who is allergic to a particular food to change their diet to include it. Basically you guys have made up your own minds on dogmatic first principles and no amount of evidence will make you change them because you prefer to believe your own certainties. |
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Mar 7, 2011 18:23:34 GMT -5
"absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. " Plugging blind faith again. If the evidence is put forward it can be considered, but not before. Well, it already HAS been. (And I've hardly started posting) The trouble is, you can no more persuade someone who insists on keeping their eyes and ears tightly shut in case they might be forced to revise their prejudices than you can persuade someone who is allergic to a particular food to change their diet to include it. Basically you guys have made up your own minds on dogmatic first principles and no amount of evidence will make you change them because you prefer to believe your own certainties. LOL If you cannot put forward any evidence you can't expect us to take it on blind faith. Simples. |
|
|
|
Post by sadie on Mar 7, 2011 20:54:00 GMT -5
Oh.......sometimes it is good for you to take a chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterf on Mar 8, 2011 3:40:40 GMT -5
"absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. " Plugging blind faith again. If the evidence is put forward it can be considered, but not before. Well, it already HAS been. (And I've hardly started posting) The trouble is, you can no more persuade someone who insists on keeping their eyes and ears tightly shut in case they might be forced to revise their prejudices than you can persuade someone who is allergic to a particular food to change their diet to include it. Basically you guys have made up your own minds on dogmatic first principles and no amount of evidence will make you change them because you prefer to believe your own certainties. Before one can take something so intrinsically improbable as dreams predicting the future as worth considering, one requires extremly good evidence. Such solid evidence is lacking. Also lacking is any explanation of how such predictions could occur. Vague speculation about 'parrellell universes' do not even start to convince. |
|
|
|
Post by pipsqueak on Mar 8, 2011 4:27:41 GMT -5
Well, it already HAS been. (And I've hardly started posting) The trouble is, you can no more persuade someone who insists on keeping their eyes and ears tightly shut in case they might be forced to revise their prejudices than you can persuade someone who is allergic to a particular food to change their diet to include it. Basically you guys have made up your own minds on dogmatic first principles and no amount of evidence will make you change them because you prefer to believe your own certainties. Before one can take something so intrinsically improbable as dreams predicting the future as worth considering, one requires extremly good evidence. Such solid evidence is lacking. Also lacking is any explanation of how such predictions could occur. Vague speculation about 'parrellell universes' do not even start to convince. my reason for mentioning parallell universes was not (necessarily) in relation to dreams but merely to say that some concepts that were previously rubbished by the main stream now have some credibility and consequently gain respectability. this is only because science has eventually 'caught up' and now able to explain what was once considered off the wall. i think it could be the same with our unconscious and dreaming. you wont find hard and fast evidence because as far as i know it doesn't exist in the mainstream, YET! it might well be that that it is the science which is still far from adequate in this field. |
|
|
|
Post by talisman on Mar 8, 2011 5:18:52 GMT -5
"absense of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absense. " Plugging blind faith again. If the evidence is put forward it can be considered, but not before. Well, it already HAS been. (And I've hardly started posting) The trouble is, you can no more persuade someone who insists on keeping their eyes and ears tightly shut in case they might be forced to revise their prejudices than you can persuade someone who is allergic to a particular food to change their diet to include it. Basically you guys have made up your own minds on dogmatic first principles and no amount of evidence will make you change them because you prefer to believe your own certainties. I've read a lot of what you gave links for, and I've asked you to pick out the most convincing bits and let us know what they are. I'll suspend disbelief at least until I've seen what it is that makes you believe so sincerely. But the trouble is, you guys have made up your own minds and nothing will make you change them or revise your prejudices. It's hard to have a sensible discussion with someone who would rather swallow any old paranormal story than give it some thought first. Summary: You so desperately want to believe. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2011 8:24:25 GMT -5
Oh.......sometimes it is good for you to take a chance. Don't say that, sadie. You may be giving some people ideas. Regards. Prashna |
|
Alpha 