@MittensMr I strongly agree with you. Believe it or not, but Carl Sagan actually believed that parapsychology needs to be taken seriously under scientific inquiry. I was arguing with atheists that science does not prove god does not exist. It was a bitch, but they now seem to be agreeing with me. Shit, it's a monster down there! LOL XD!
@NoMoreC2 A psychic passing James Randi's challenge isn't gonna prove to the scientific community that psi is real simply because of the lack of application of scientific methodology and confirmation bias. One shot isn't proof. Skeptic and magican, RS1963, has agreed with me. I prefer scientific evidence than just a demonstration.
@NoMoreC2 A psychic passing James Randi's challenge isn't gonna prove to the scientific community that psi is real simply because of the lack of application of scientific methodology and confirmation bias. One shot isn't proof. Skeptic and magican, RS1963, has agreed with me. I prefer scientific evidence than just a demonstration.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, thank you! For all the skeptics *coughs pseudo-skeptics coughs*; Psionify is right. Even if anyone for that matter takes Randi's challenge for any claim (ESP, Homeopathy, time travel, ghosts, etc.) will not be a via scientific methodological fact.
I prefer scientific evidence, rather than controlled testing of a via act.
@NoMoreC2 Of course, there is no burden of proof on claiming something you don't believe. Claiming X is not true requires proof as well as the opposite. If you tell me to prove X is true, then it is irrational to say to you prove X is false if you haven't claim X is false (Demanding negative proof fallacy).
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. Why do skeptics only say that they're always right? Well, the funny thing is - pseudo-skeptic's say *ONCE* science proves Psi or some scientists believe in it, they'll believe. Now, when a lot of scientists and parapsychologists say it's real. They say they wan't James Randi to prove it.
@Nikela1986 Hey, I made it to the "Invisible" section for a certain reason.. Nothing to do with Psionics or my YouTube friends or anything like that. I will email you or you can email me, I will tell you and others. I will turn it back.
@MittensMr A skeptic believing in Randi without evidence is not possible because skeptics doubt inconcllusive things. No evidence, no credibility. Thus, Randi's thoughts of the paranormal is just prejudice. Pseudoskeptics are dogmatic systems. The people in JREF even claim the paranormal isn't real because of dogma.
@MittensMr James Randi is not a true skeptic. He's a pseudoskeptic, debunker, and retired magican. If he was a true skeptic, he would have an open mind toward the paranormal without dogmatism, doubt inconclusive evidence, and he won't debunk things. A skeptic and debunker are 2 different things. Pseudoskeptical Dogmatism is unhealthy and a disgrace.
@MittensMr As for a diety, I believe there is a god. I'm not talking about the god from church or christainity. The god I'm talking about is the ultimate creator, the one who created the universe. The Big Bang is just a scientific theory, not a fact.
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. I get where you're coming from on the whole"God" concept. Seeing that God is a one-on-one relationship with religion (Christianity).
Even scientists are saying that something can't be created out of nothing; I believe the Big Bang theory is true, but science is still decided whether it's fact or fiction.
@MittensMr Well, I do think life after death is possible not because I wanna believe, but because I can justify it. In physics, it has been shown that matter and energy are the same thing and it cannot be destroyed (E=mc2). Energy changes forms by waves. So, logically speaking, when we die, our energies will not be destroyed, but go somewhere else.
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. But, I believe there is some reincarnation and ghosts involved at death. Yes, in Physics, the basic idea of energy is the capacity of a physical system to do "work," the product of a force times the distance through which that force acts. In Physics, energy is a term to express the power to move things, either potential or actual. Energy is a thing itself, but an attribute of something (Krieg). Energy travels in waves. As referring to Einsteins theory on energy (E=mc2).
@angelsssssssssssss Hey, have you ever heard of Psi Balls; which are basically balls of energy from the Universe that a lot of spiritual people, like me make. Psi Balls do defy the laws of Physics, but this is another thing to be proven as well as Psi and the paranormal. Ever heard of them?
New Agers; as well as spiritualists, like me make. Even though energy has been proven by science; the concept of spiritual and New Age energy hasn't; but eventually will be.
@angelsssssssssssss What do you mean? I might be able to Remote View something of you or what you wan't; but it'll take some time. Is that what you mean; or what?
@MittensMr Yes, every claim (Positive or Negative) needs evidence. The burden of proof lies to the person asserting a claim, regardless of what it is, unless it's IDK, not sure, or fuck it lets go get something. Don't fall to the fallacy that you can't prove a negative. This fallacy is widely used on pseudoskeptics, ESP, aliens, etc.
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, even Randi's claims (negative or positive) need evidence. Skeptics believe Randi, even though he offers *NO* evidence for his words or debunks or even challenge. Yet, they don't believe Psi or the paranormal. See where I'm getting at? Yes, and as the pseudo skeptic Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence". You've heard of him, right?
@angelsssssssssssss The difference is i do not claim psi is not true.I state i do not believe it so because i haven't seen it to be demonstrably so.In this case you are claiming a positive and the burden of proof lies with you. To try and deny such is to commit argumentum ad ignorantiam. I don't fall for that fallacy.
@MittensMr I might like it. Yeah saw is more like a horror movie. I haven't seen the whole parts, just some of them. I heard Paranormal Activity 2 is good and scary
@angelsssssssssssss Probably. Yeah, I'm more of a action an drama and thriller fan rather than horror. Yes, PA2 (Paranormal Activity 2) was good. But, they kept showing scenes from the beginning and other parts of the first Paranormal Activity.
@MittensMr I was just saying so we could play or chat online on the Xbox. It will be possible to play online if you had Resident Evil 5 or Call of Duty: Black Ops. I have a Wii, but the black one looks bad ass! Anyway, if you wanna add me on Xbox (if possible) then it is I think, "WackyBalla28"
@angelsssssssssssss Oh, yeah, maybe we could play Xbox Live or Elite sometime. Yeah, I heard Resident Evil 5 was the stuff as well as the new Black Ops. Wii kicks the ass too! And, if I can get my brothers Xbox 360; I'll be able to add you and play.
@MittensMr Yes, just because something is unexplained doesn't mean it is fake. It does have a potential scientific explanation, but the ones in the present are either far-fetched or unproven. Same thing goes to the paranormal. Do you believe life after death is possible?
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, exactly! If I where going to go on stage and say how fake Psi and the paranormal are; I better have some *GOOD BASIC EVIDENCE*!
Yes, if it's unexplainable or unproven; it can still be replicated by modern day science and/or Physics.
Do I believe in *LIFE AFTER DEATH*? As an Atheist; no. But, I do believe we become ghosts. But, not heaven or hell or God.
What is your thought and belief in Deities and life after death?
@angelsssssssssssss I haven't seen Saw 3D yet. I've seen the other ones; too much blood= not my style. I like action. Yes, I've seen the other Saw, but not the new one. Hope you like it!
@MittensMr I wish I had the ability to master lucid dreams. That would be awesome! I do think it is possible, but it requires a lot of mental training, like telekinesis. In a dream the sky is the limit.
@angelsssssssssssss You do have the ability to Lucid Dream (it's been scientifically proven). It is awesome, lol. It's possible; yes you're correct: it requires a lot of training like TK and such.
Yes, I'm in the 10th grade and today I got a shitty prize for scoring profiecent in English, and Science. The school gave me a cheap Wii game of sports, which was made in China T_T. I didn't liked it at all. I was expecting something like a PS3. Do you have Xbox?
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, thats cool! I hate school when they do that and give out prizes and such!? Wii kicks ass and same with PSP and Nintendo DS and DSi and the others.
No, I don't have Xbox 360, but I do have PS3; but my brother has Xbox 360, though! Why'd you ask?
@MittensMr UFOs are unexplainable phenomenas in science. There has been documentaries of UFOs, such as UFO hunters, files, etc. I am not sure if UFOs have anything to do with 51, but there is evidence from T.V. show documentaries of UFOs near 51.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, practically everything unknown is unexplainable in science and/or Physics. But, that doesn't make it fake; does it:? Yeah. I've seen the documentaries and such; they're pretty good. "U.F.O. Hunters" rocks and yeah, they've gone near Area 51- but they're not allowed inside. I WONDER WHY?
It's funny how labs and universities and Television can prove such feats and phenomenas; but our Physics and science can't? Weird, huh?
@MittensMr Well, U.F.O.s are flying objects that cannot be exposed via normal aircrafts. They are usually unknown. Yes, U.F.O.s exists, but we don't know where the hell they came from. The Phoenix Lights is a good example of UFOs. Some speculate that Area 51 is behind it, but we'll never know as far as we see it.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, hence the term 'U.F.O.' and it can't be explained by science which is a good start for science to prove it is real. Yes, they exist; and will be proven soon.
@MittensMr Ah, Lucid Dreams.... Yeah, they are very real, I have experienced one, but not the controlling part. The one I can mostly remember was the part where I got trapped inside this giant jar because there were giant creatures coming toward me and if I don't jump to the jar I'll get smooshed. LOL yeah I've been having weird dreams. HAHA, yesterday I had a dream I went to the airport and somehow ended up in Iraq. I was scared shitless lol! Had you had any weird dreams?
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. I've never experienced on, to be honest. But, I'm working trying to control it and be aware. LOL! Giant jars! Yeah. I've had some damn scary dreams and funny and awkward and all what you'd name in the book.
Yeah. I've had a lot of weird dreams. I'm going to PM you about them; too many creeps on here, lol. And, skeptics, who will say I'm LYING.
@MittensMr A skeptic is someone who doesn't accept inconclusive evidence and ask for evidence. For instance, "Aliens exist" I, as a skeptic, will not accept it untill I see evidence of it, but I would not say, "It's bullshit"or get into an attitiude on debunking it, which is pseudeoskepticism. Pseudoskepticism make negative claims, but don't prove it. Do you understand now?
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, but they're not skeptics; they're pseudo skeptics. A TRUE skeptic would go out looking for the truth and accept facts and evidence and feats.
Actually, I used to be a skeptic to Psi and the paranormal; at thirteen I became a believer. I'm now fifteen.
Skepticism makes true claims; pseudo skepticism makes FALSE claims. Simple as that!
@angelsssssssssssss And, if I say U.F.O.'s exist and I have evidence (which I do; it's a funny story) and I say here it is. They'll deny me. But, when Randi says it's real and accepts my evidence (which he never will) I'll be laughed at and they'll only believe him. Simple.
@MittensMr Yes, you're correct! If Randi says X doesn't exist or there is no evidence of X, then it is likely Randi's fans and pseudoskeptics will accept it as true just because Randi says so. This is called, "Bare Assertion Fallacy," which states that X is true because X is said to be true.
@MittensMr One of the big problems on Randi's challenge is that it contains selective bias and the statistical power (The power to reject a null-hypothesis) is very weak because of the few trials they use during the testing. Studies, test, research, and investigations can be easily biased and Randi is one of them.
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. And, when being tested, Kramer says "Oh, it's just a sleight of hand procedure. Yet, the study, test, and research are made by parapsychologists and not Randi. Yet, he says he is.
@MittensMr In Quantum Theory, the act of observation creates reality. For instance, suppose you were conducting a double slit experiment. You would expect to see an interference pattern or 2 lines. If you observe an atom, the atom's wavefunction will collapse and behave as particles and form 2 lines, but if it was unobserved, the atom's wavefunction will remain in a superposition state, which behaves as waves and form an interference pattern. weird isn't??
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, and it's sort of like the Law of Attraction, in this case. If you're observing an atom and Atomic energy; both are resistant and the same. But, different matter.
Very weird, lol.
It makes it look like the atom is trying to fool you, lol.
@MittensMr With a Type II error, you cannot pass a test because the Type II error accepts the null-hypothesis when the null-hypothesis is false. Randi's challenge contains a type II error because he expects a P-Value of 0.000001, which is unacceptable in hypothesis testing. Reject it at <0.05, not 0.000001. A paranormal phenomena are phenomenons that aren't widely observed in science. Once it has been accepted in science, it will be considered normal.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, Randi's 'guide' will telling you how the challenge will go. Yet, when you'r having good successes in the test he'll change the rules in the error.
While paranormally testing; he'll get the credit, but for their wins.
@angelsssssssssssss Also, the test can't be fully won and/or examined because o Randi's stupid assistant Kramer. he always make the testers look like cheaters and fools and especially idiots.
He was found by Randi during "Project Alpha"; when Randi ran it.
@MittensMr Science is an inquiry process. It is based on the scientific method, nothing else, nothing more. If you were a scientist and claimed something doesn't exist, that would be more of prejudice (Not science) unless you have evidence that justify your claim. Judgement in science is not based in prejudice and ad hominem, but in skepticism and emperical evidence.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, and only on the scientific via method. Thats it. Yeah, you're right; it'll be like me saying "I don't like skeptics, yet I am one". Makes sense, right? When a skeptic states something; it's a claim not a fact. Which is why people say Psi is fake. Because, they're claims make it look fake because it looks like a fact, and not a claim. Am I right?
@MittensMr Actually, skeptics are admiting that psi or parapsychological research needs to be further study and taken seriously. On the other hand, pseudoskeptics, such as Warcorpse666 and the idiot, still claim that psi doesn't exist because of confirmation bias. Fuck them, they are ignorant and cynical. Skepticism is one of the hallmarks of science. It must be implied. Pseudoskepticism is just a dogma system.
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. And, in that case; they're admitting that Psi exists. If... more research for Psi and parapsychology.
Yes, like Warcorpse666, and CharcieDing, and other pseudo skeptical idiotic fags... they're saying all depends on James Randi. So, if Randi says Psi and the paranormal are real; they'll believe it, but not if science says it is. Funny how skeptics work, right?
@MittensMr I don't really believe that just because something defies or is outside the laws of physics, it doesn't exist or can't be measured. Scientific knowledge isn't 100% complete, so why should we quickly dismiss something just because it violates laws of physics?
@angelsssssssssssss True, and you'd hear a skeptic tell you that Zener Cards or Tarot Cards defy the laws of Physics; yet, there is NO physical force done in either of the two.
Yes, so if I am a scientist and I talk about psychic powers and say how fake they are; and I' saying "Well, it defies the laws of Physics" am I being accurate to science or not? Also, I can say just because I don't understand something, I don't have to discredit it and say it defies the laws of Physics.
@MittensMrYes, you are correct. Careful: Quantum mechanics does not replace classical physics, it just encompasses classical physics. You are right about one thing. Quantum mechanics does disprove some classical theories, such as Newton's theory that photons behave only as billard balls and the theory that objects can only be influenced via physical forces. Schrodinger's equation governs the behavior of microscopic objects and the macroscopic world.
@MittensMr The problem with senior scientists is that they are more theory driven than data driven. They usually accept things from theories and anything that violates the theories will find it hard to accept. That's why they find psi phenomena hard to accept, but I'm sure they will accept it once science advances.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, like Dean Radin; he as a senior scientist and parapsychologist would agree that even though one may violate a code or via method; that doesn't make it fake.
Pseudo scientists find Psi hard to accept, because science isn't yet capable of measuring the results.
@angelsssssssssssss For instance, how do you measure a prediction about a future event? Is it not just a matter of the prediction either comes true or not? I wish it was that simple, however even when the event is happening in the near future (and therefore easily traceable), could the fact that it was known about in advance, cause changes that prevent the event from happening?
@angelsssssssssssss Again, this is something which I've wanted to state about dogmatic pseudo skepticism. For example, Lucid Dreaming; which is the ability to control your dreams and be aware that you're dreaming. It used to be considered a psychic ability, now that it is scientifically proven; it's just known as 'normal'.
And, some skeptics don't believe Lucid Dreaming is real; they've still considered it 'psychic'.
So, when Psi is proven; it will be known a normal, not psychic. Get it?
@MittensMr Well, not exactly. Einstein's Relativity states that gravity curves space-time and nothing can travel faster than speed of light. There is one problem with the theory. Quantum nonlocality effects, which has been scientifically proven, can travel faster than light regardless of the distance. So, whatever you do, you are influencing me and everything you interacted with. Sounds crazy, but Quantum theory has never be shown wrong, even when Einstein and John Bell tried to knock it down.
@angelsssssssssssss True, but Einstein and Newton do speak of which you say and how objects curve time. When an RNG is manipulated by TK it has some speed of light breaking to it; believe it or not. Consciousness has been proven to effect matter, also.
Physics; has been proven to be wrong, but not Quantum Mechanics.
@MittensMr Yes, there is strong scientific evidence where observation affects matter. Does this mean conscious observation? Yes, but it depends on the context. We really don't need a conscious observer to alter matter. A photon detector can influence matter. Even the most tiniest possible atom size peak of a cat in the box can collapse the cat's wavefunction. Isn't quantum mechanics amazing?
@angelsssssssssssss Evidence is knowing; belief is showing. So, even when Psi is officially proven; people still wont believe in it. Mostly, the JREF skeptics
Photons; especially atomic energy can influence matter even by consciousness.
Quantum Mechanics rocks; but not pseudo mechanics, lol.
@MittensMr I have been studing Quantum Mechanics and according to Quantum Mechanics, objects can very well be influenced via non physical forces. Einstein tried to disprove it, but he failed. Such influences has been scientifically demonstrated to exist. So, since objects can be influenced via nonphysical forces, then telekinesis should exist. I see no reason why it shouldn't exist. What I just told you is part of Quantum Theory and it is one of the most successful theories in hard sciences.
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, even if Quantum Mechanics says that a force HAS to be complied to move an object otherwise; it doesn't mean that TK isn't real.
Yes, Quantum Mechanics has proven that a force can be complied without a physical standing force. Einsteins theory on 'Relativity' some what is referring to your theory on the subject.
Science has proven the fact to be true; so why shouldn't TK exist?
I think that the Quantum Theory is most successful theories in hard science, IMO.
If the phenomenon exists outside the realms of physics,in that in can not be measured or detected using the scientific method,i wonder what insight the experiments offer.I'm prepared to be open minded but as you stated " ,what we need is real scientific applications and tests as well".In all the 20 years that PEAR existed they never produced any data that was repeatable.It a huddle that apparently can not be pasted.
@NoMoreC2 "If the phenomenon exists outside the realms of physics,in that in can not be measured or detected using the scientific method"
Wrong. Just because a phenomenon exist outside the realms of Physics does not mean it cannot be scientifically measured or detected via the scientific method. Every genuine phenomena effect can be scientifically measured, even the tiny ones. The tiny ones are detected via Statistical Analysis, which tells you the result is statistically significant or not.
@angelsssssssssssss But is that the case? I'm sure that you will agree that in statistical analysis there is a degree of error.If the phenomenon shows a significantly low rate of success than it is difficult to distinguish between the two.
@NoMoreC2 Yes, I agree that statistical analysis has a degree of error, such as a Type I or Type II error. Well, if the P-Value of the hypothesis is < 0.05, then we could say that we have emperical evidence of the hypothesis, but we cannot say with confidence that it is not due to chance or luck. However, we could distinguish luck from real effects by using what they called, "Meta-Analysis." Replication is the key to distinguish luck from real effects. A P-Value of 0.05 is based on chance.
@angelsssssssssssss Ah, but you're absolutely right! In this case; while ANYTHING is being observed and/or scrutinized by science it does have I guess "depths" to it. Because, whenever science is testing with anything paranormal, the results drop; they still don't know why or how it does, it just disappears.
For, E=MC 2, you can have a Type-2 error and still pass the test; while we can bring anything else need to measure the results. All to know the Confirmation Bias.
@NoMoreC2 In Statistics, there's a strong possibility that the result of the hypothesis could be due to 1 or more factors, even under controlled conditions. For instance, suppose I conducted an ESP Zener Card test on a computer. Now, let's say that I got a result that is statistically significant, which shows evidence of ESP. The resut does show evidence of ESP, but what if it was due to psychokinesis, which influenced the outcome of the cards? This is why proof doesn't exist in experiments.
@NoMoreC2 Yes, you're right; but Angel has a point. You're mostly speaking about the analysis of the statistical process; so when Zener Cards or RNG's are being influenced by psychics, there is a good chance an error may occur; but due to the bad observation of the scientists; not the psychics.
@angelsssssssssssss Although, I mostly agree with you! You're right on saying something that isn't in the realm of well known Physics, doesn't mean it can't be measured by the via scientific test or method.
Scientists; such as Dean Radin, Rupert Sheldrake, and Charles Tart; have shown the smallest amount of evidence of PK; can still be measured by hard science and NOT just parapsychology.
There is a common element to all the psi experiments.The balancing of a lightweight material precariously on a fine point.Over the past 20 years no one has developed past that stage.That leaves me to wonder what potential it could possibly have,if any.I would be interested in your views on where the future lies.As you know i am sceptical but all i envisage is another ten years of videos with paper or foil wheels with no progression.
@NoMoreC2 Yes,there is!Your absolutely right,all Psi experiments can't for some reason,have evidence,even when tested by true scientist's.Telekinesis is real,you just have to research it,universities take Psi seriously and there have been several experiments done on it to prove that it is real.
Now,what we need is real scientific applications and tests as well.For the publics (skeptics) eyes to open.
Just open your mind,buddy!Many people have developed past the Psi Wheel,moving other objects.
The sceptics need to see details of experiments,the conditions and the controls put in place.I think your blanket claim that universities take psi seriously is an exaggeration and the only one appears to be Princeton which closed it's facilities in 2007.
@NoMoreC2 Yes,but I am just waiting for Psi to be officially proven to the world and Telekinesis is published in true scientific data journals and not just labs or universities.
@MittensMr "Yes,but I am just waiting for Psi to be officially proven to the world and Telekinesis is published in true scientific data journals and not just labs or universities."
Yes, there is strong scientific evidence of telekinesis and psi. However, psi is a controversial science simply because of the bullshit coming out from pseudo-skeptics, frauds, pseudoscientist and Randi claiming there's no evidence of psi.
Another reason is because of confirmation bias on scientists.
It's real, don't put yourself under the boot of psuedo skeptics or classical physics dogma; their logic is faulty anyway. They often make all kinds of assumptions about how telekinesis would work if they believed it, and use this to determine the goal posts. It would be more honest to observe possible anomalies without bias. It's clear that they are often trying to protect a world view, and they often sound like religious zealots. I say free your mind & train for yourself:)
@TheMoonKingdom Yes,agreeable!I am not putting my self under Pseudo Skeptics or even Dogmatism of Science,religion,or even classical Physics like you said,but understandable.Yes,people are sprung to what they believe only what they've experienced.Basically,if they haven't experienced anything Paranormal then they say "Wait,hold up!Since I haven't experienced this;it's not real" ,vs, "I had many experiences on the Paranormal;it's means it's real!" it's that logic.
Comment removed
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr I strongly agree with you. Believe it or not, but Carl Sagan actually believed that parapsychology needs to be taken seriously under scientific inquiry. I was arguing with atheists that science does not prove god does not exist. It was a bitch, but they now seem to be agreeing with me. Shit, it's a monster down there! LOL XD!
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
Comment removed
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NoMoreC2 A psychic passing James Randi's challenge isn't gonna prove to the scientific community that psi is real simply because of the lack of application of scientific methodology and confirmation bias. One shot isn't proof. Skeptic and magican, RS1963, has agreed with me. I prefer scientific evidence than just a demonstration.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 A psychic passing James Randi's challenge isn't gonna prove to the scientific community that psi is real simply because of the lack of application of scientific methodology and confirmation bias. One shot isn't proof. Skeptic and magican, RS1963, has agreed with me. I prefer scientific evidence than just a demonstration.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, thank you! For all the skeptics *coughs pseudo-skeptics coughs*; Psionify is right. Even if anyone for that matter takes Randi's challenge for any claim (ESP, Homeopathy, time travel, ghosts, etc.) will not be a via scientific methodological fact.
I prefer scientific evidence, rather than controlled testing of a via act.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 Of course, there is no burden of proof on claiming something you don't believe. Claiming X is not true requires proof as well as the opposite. If you tell me to prove X is true, then it is irrational to say to you prove X is false if you haven't claim X is false (Demanding negative proof fallacy).
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. Why do skeptics only say that they're always right? Well, the funny thing is - pseudo-skeptic's say *ONCE* science proves Psi or some scientists believe in it, they'll believe. Now, when a lot of scientists and parapsychologists say it's real. They say they wan't James Randi to prove it.
See?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr. Hey! What happened to your channel? It's not available.
Nikela1986 1 year ago
@Nikela1986 Hey, I made it to the "Invisible" section for a certain reason.. Nothing to do with Psionics or my YouTube friends or anything like that. I will email you or you can email me, I will tell you and others. I will turn it back.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Welcome back MittensMr! I thought you deleted your account?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Thank you. I will PM you why I made my YouTube account to "Invisible".
Blessed Be! )o(
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr A skeptic believing in Randi without evidence is not possible because skeptics doubt inconcllusive things. No evidence, no credibility. Thus, Randi's thoughts of the paranormal is just prejudice. Pseudoskeptics are dogmatic systems. The people in JREF even claim the paranormal isn't real because of dogma.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr James Randi is not a true skeptic. He's a pseudoskeptic, debunker, and retired magican. If he was a true skeptic, he would have an open mind toward the paranormal without dogmatism, doubt inconclusive evidence, and he won't debunk things. A skeptic and debunker are 2 different things. Pseudoskeptical Dogmatism is unhealthy and a disgrace.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr As for a diety, I believe there is a god. I'm not talking about the god from church or christainity. The god I'm talking about is the ultimate creator, the one who created the universe. The Big Bang is just a scientific theory, not a fact.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. I get where you're coming from on the whole"God" concept. Seeing that God is a one-on-one relationship with religion (Christianity).
Even scientists are saying that something can't be created out of nothing; I believe the Big Bang theory is true, but science is still decided whether it's fact or fiction.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Well, I do think life after death is possible not because I wanna believe, but because I can justify it. In physics, it has been shown that matter and energy are the same thing and it cannot be destroyed (E=mc2). Energy changes forms by waves. So, logically speaking, when we die, our energies will not be destroyed, but go somewhere else.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. But, I believe there is some reincarnation and ghosts involved at death. Yes, in Physics, the basic idea of energy is the capacity of a physical system to do "work," the product of a force times the distance through which that force acts. In Physics, energy is a term to express the power to move things, either potential or actual. Energy is a thing itself, but an attribute of something (Krieg). Energy travels in waves. As referring to Einsteins theory on energy (E=mc2).
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Hey, have you ever heard of Psi Balls; which are basically balls of energy from the Universe that a lot of spiritual people, like me make. Psi Balls do defy the laws of Physics, but this is another thing to be proven as well as Psi and the paranormal. Ever heard of them?
New Agers; as well as spiritualists, like me make. Even though energy has been proven by science; the concept of spiritual and New Age energy hasn't; but eventually will be.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Just a question: Can you find lost things via remote viewing?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss What do you mean? I might be able to Remote View something of you or what you wan't; but it'll take some time. Is that what you mean; or what?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Yes, every claim (Positive or Negative) needs evidence. The burden of proof lies to the person asserting a claim, regardless of what it is, unless it's IDK, not sure, or fuck it lets go get something. Don't fall to the fallacy that you can't prove a negative. This fallacy is widely used on pseudoskeptics, ESP, aliens, etc.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, even Randi's claims (negative or positive) need evidence. Skeptics believe Randi, even though he offers *NO* evidence for his words or debunks or even challenge. Yet, they don't believe Psi or the paranormal. See where I'm getting at? Yes, and as the pseudo skeptic Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence". You've heard of him, right?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss The difference is i do not claim psi is not true.I state i do not believe it so because i haven't seen it to be demonstrably so.In this case you are claiming a positive and the burden of proof lies with you. To try and deny such is to commit argumentum ad ignorantiam. I don't fall for that fallacy.
NoMoreC2 1 year ago
@MittensMr I might like it. Yeah saw is more like a horror movie. I haven't seen the whole parts, just some of them. I heard Paranormal Activity 2 is good and scary
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Probably. Yeah, I'm more of a action an drama and thriller fan rather than horror. Yes, PA2 (Paranormal Activity 2) was good. But, they kept showing scenes from the beginning and other parts of the first Paranormal Activity.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr I was just saying so we could play or chat online on the Xbox. It will be possible to play online if you had Resident Evil 5 or Call of Duty: Black Ops. I have a Wii, but the black one looks bad ass! Anyway, if you wanna add me on Xbox (if possible) then it is I think, "WackyBalla28"
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Oh, yeah, maybe we could play Xbox Live or Elite sometime. Yeah, I heard Resident Evil 5 was the stuff as well as the new Black Ops. Wii kicks the ass too! And, if I can get my brothers Xbox 360; I'll be able to add you and play.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Yes, just because something is unexplained doesn't mean it is fake. It does have a potential scientific explanation, but the ones in the present are either far-fetched or unproven. Same thing goes to the paranormal. Do you believe life after death is possible?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, exactly! If I where going to go on stage and say how fake Psi and the paranormal are; I better have some *GOOD BASIC EVIDENCE*!
Yes, if it's unexplainable or unproven; it can still be replicated by modern day science and/or Physics.
Do I believe in *LIFE AFTER DEATH*? As an Atheist; no. But, I do believe we become ghosts. But, not heaven or hell or God.
What is your thought and belief in Deities and life after death?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr have you seen saw 3D yet? If so, how was it? me, my uncle and his girl are planning to see it this weekend.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss I haven't seen Saw 3D yet. I've seen the other ones; too much blood= not my style. I like action. Yes, I've seen the other Saw, but not the new one. Hope you like it!
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr I wish I had the ability to master lucid dreams. That would be awesome! I do think it is possible, but it requires a lot of mental training, like telekinesis. In a dream the sky is the limit.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss You do have the ability to Lucid Dream (it's been scientifically proven). It is awesome, lol. It's possible; yes you're correct: it requires a lot of training like TK and such.
LOL! The skies the limit!
MittensMr 1 year ago
Yes, I'm in the 10th grade and today I got a shitty prize for scoring profiecent in English, and Science. The school gave me a cheap Wii game of sports, which was made in China T_T. I didn't liked it at all. I was expecting something like a PS3. Do you have Xbox?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah, thats cool! I hate school when they do that and give out prizes and such!? Wii kicks ass and same with PSP and Nintendo DS and DSi and the others.
No, I don't have Xbox 360, but I do have PS3; but my brother has Xbox 360, though! Why'd you ask?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr UFOs are unexplainable phenomenas in science. There has been documentaries of UFOs, such as UFO hunters, files, etc. I am not sure if UFOs have anything to do with 51, but there is evidence from T.V. show documentaries of UFOs near 51.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, practically everything unknown is unexplainable in science and/or Physics. But, that doesn't make it fake; does it:? Yeah. I've seen the documentaries and such; they're pretty good. "U.F.O. Hunters" rocks and yeah, they've gone near Area 51- but they're not allowed inside. I WONDER WHY?
It's funny how labs and universities and Television can prove such feats and phenomenas; but our Physics and science can't? Weird, huh?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr You are one year younger than me. I'm 16. I'm guessing you're in the high school, right?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. I'm one year younger than you. Yes, I'm in high school too! What grade are you in? Tenth.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Well, U.F.O.s are flying objects that cannot be exposed via normal aircrafts. They are usually unknown. Yes, U.F.O.s exists, but we don't know where the hell they came from. The Phoenix Lights is a good example of UFOs. Some speculate that Area 51 is behind it, but we'll never know as far as we see it.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, hence the term 'U.F.O.' and it can't be explained by science which is a good start for science to prove it is real. Yes, they exist; and will be proven soon.
Project Blue Beam and Area 51 have to do with it.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Wait, you seen pseudoskeptics claiming Lucid Dream doesn't exist?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr Ah, Lucid Dreams.... Yeah, they are very real, I have experienced one, but not the controlling part. The one I can mostly remember was the part where I got trapped inside this giant jar because there were giant creatures coming toward me and if I don't jump to the jar I'll get smooshed. LOL yeah I've been having weird dreams. HAHA, yesterday I had a dream I went to the airport and somehow ended up in Iraq. I was scared shitless lol! Had you had any weird dreams?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. I've never experienced on, to be honest. But, I'm working trying to control it and be aware. LOL! Giant jars! Yeah. I've had some damn scary dreams and funny and awkward and all what you'd name in the book.
Yeah. I've had a lot of weird dreams. I'm going to PM you about them; too many creeps on here, lol. And, skeptics, who will say I'm LYING.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr A skeptic is someone who doesn't accept inconclusive evidence and ask for evidence. For instance, "Aliens exist" I, as a skeptic, will not accept it untill I see evidence of it, but I would not say, "It's bullshit"or get into an attitiude on debunking it, which is pseudeoskepticism. Pseudoskepticism make negative claims, but don't prove it. Do you understand now?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, but they're not skeptics; they're pseudo skeptics. A TRUE skeptic would go out looking for the truth and accept facts and evidence and feats.
Actually, I used to be a skeptic to Psi and the paranormal; at thirteen I became a believer. I'm now fifteen.
Skepticism makes true claims; pseudo skepticism makes FALSE claims. Simple as that!
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss And, if I say U.F.O.'s exist and I have evidence (which I do; it's a funny story) and I say here it is. They'll deny me. But, when Randi says it's real and accepts my evidence (which he never will) I'll be laughed at and they'll only believe him. Simple.
MittensMr 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MittensMr Yes, you're correct! If Randi says X doesn't exist or there is no evidence of X, then it is likely Randi's fans and pseudoskeptics will accept it as true just because Randi says so. This is called, "Bare Assertion Fallacy," which states that X is true because X is said to be true.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr One of the big problems on Randi's challenge is that it contains selective bias and the statistical power (The power to reject a null-hypothesis) is very weak because of the few trials they use during the testing. Studies, test, research, and investigations can be easily biased and Randi is one of them.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. And, when being tested, Kramer says "Oh, it's just a sleight of hand procedure. Yet, the study, test, and research are made by parapsychologists and not Randi. Yet, he says he is.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr In Quantum Theory, the act of observation creates reality. For instance, suppose you were conducting a double slit experiment. You would expect to see an interference pattern or 2 lines. If you observe an atom, the atom's wavefunction will collapse and behave as particles and form 2 lines, but if it was unobserved, the atom's wavefunction will remain in a superposition state, which behaves as waves and form an interference pattern. weird isn't??
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, and it's sort of like the Law of Attraction, in this case. If you're observing an atom and Atomic energy; both are resistant and the same. But, different matter.
Very weird, lol.
It makes it look like the atom is trying to fool you, lol.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr With a Type II error, you cannot pass a test because the Type II error accepts the null-hypothesis when the null-hypothesis is false. Randi's challenge contains a type II error because he expects a P-Value of 0.000001, which is unacceptable in hypothesis testing. Reject it at <0.05, not 0.000001. A paranormal phenomena are phenomenons that aren't widely observed in science. Once it has been accepted in science, it will be considered normal.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, Randi's 'guide' will telling you how the challenge will go. Yet, when you'r having good successes in the test he'll change the rules in the error.
While paranormally testing; he'll get the credit, but for their wins.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Also, the test can't be fully won and/or examined because o Randi's stupid assistant Kramer. he always make the testers look like cheaters and fools and especially idiots.
He was found by Randi during "Project Alpha"; when Randi ran it.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Science is an inquiry process. It is based on the scientific method, nothing else, nothing more. If you were a scientist and claimed something doesn't exist, that would be more of prejudice (Not science) unless you have evidence that justify your claim. Judgement in science is not based in prejudice and ad hominem, but in skepticism and emperical evidence.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, and only on the scientific via method. Thats it. Yeah, you're right; it'll be like me saying "I don't like skeptics, yet I am one". Makes sense, right? When a skeptic states something; it's a claim not a fact. Which is why people say Psi is fake. Because, they're claims make it look fake because it looks like a fact, and not a claim. Am I right?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Actually, skeptics are admiting that psi or parapsychological research needs to be further study and taken seriously. On the other hand, pseudoskeptics, such as Warcorpse666 and the idiot, still claim that psi doesn't exist because of confirmation bias. Fuck them, they are ignorant and cynical. Skepticism is one of the hallmarks of science. It must be implied. Pseudoskepticism is just a dogma system.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yeah. And, in that case; they're admitting that Psi exists. If... more research for Psi and parapsychology.
Yes, like Warcorpse666, and CharcieDing, and other pseudo skeptical idiotic fags... they're saying all depends on James Randi. So, if Randi says Psi and the paranormal are real; they'll believe it, but not if science says it is. Funny how skeptics work, right?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Agreed! Actually, it's the dogmatic system, you're right!
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr I don't really believe that just because something defies or is outside the laws of physics, it doesn't exist or can't be measured. Scientific knowledge isn't 100% complete, so why should we quickly dismiss something just because it violates laws of physics?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss True, and you'd hear a skeptic tell you that Zener Cards or Tarot Cards defy the laws of Physics; yet, there is NO physical force done in either of the two.
Yes, so if I am a scientist and I talk about psychic powers and say how fake they are; and I' saying "Well, it defies the laws of Physics" am I being accurate to science or not? Also, I can say just because I don't understand something, I don't have to discredit it and say it defies the laws of Physics.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMrYes, you are correct. Careful: Quantum mechanics does not replace classical physics, it just encompasses classical physics. You are right about one thing. Quantum mechanics does disprove some classical theories, such as Newton's theory that photons behave only as billard balls and the theory that objects can only be influenced via physical forces. Schrodinger's equation governs the behavior of microscopic objects and the macroscopic world.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@MittensMr The problem with senior scientists is that they are more theory driven than data driven. They usually accept things from theories and anything that violates the theories will find it hard to accept. That's why they find psi phenomena hard to accept, but I'm sure they will accept it once science advances.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, like Dean Radin; he as a senior scientist and parapsychologist would agree that even though one may violate a code or via method; that doesn't make it fake.
Pseudo scientists find Psi hard to accept, because science isn't yet capable of measuring the results.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss For instance, how do you measure a prediction about a future event? Is it not just a matter of the prediction either comes true or not? I wish it was that simple, however even when the event is happening in the near future (and therefore easily traceable), could the fact that it was known about in advance, cause changes that prevent the event from happening?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Again, this is something which I've wanted to state about dogmatic pseudo skepticism. For example, Lucid Dreaming; which is the ability to control your dreams and be aware that you're dreaming. It used to be considered a psychic ability, now that it is scientifically proven; it's just known as 'normal'.
And, some skeptics don't believe Lucid Dreaming is real; they've still considered it 'psychic'.
So, when Psi is proven; it will be known a normal, not psychic. Get it?
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Well, not exactly. Einstein's Relativity states that gravity curves space-time and nothing can travel faster than speed of light. There is one problem with the theory. Quantum nonlocality effects, which has been scientifically proven, can travel faster than light regardless of the distance. So, whatever you do, you are influencing me and everything you interacted with. Sounds crazy, but Quantum theory has never be shown wrong, even when Einstein and John Bell tried to knock it down.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss True, but Einstein and Newton do speak of which you say and how objects curve time. When an RNG is manipulated by TK it has some speed of light breaking to it; believe it or not. Consciousness has been proven to effect matter, also.
Physics; has been proven to be wrong, but not Quantum Mechanics.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr Yes, there is strong scientific evidence where observation affects matter. Does this mean conscious observation? Yes, but it depends on the context. We really don't need a conscious observer to alter matter. A photon detector can influence matter. Even the most tiniest possible atom size peak of a cat in the box can collapse the cat's wavefunction. Isn't quantum mechanics amazing?
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Evidence is knowing; belief is showing. So, even when Psi is officially proven; people still wont believe in it. Mostly, the JREF skeptics
Photons; especially atomic energy can influence matter even by consciousness.
Quantum Mechanics rocks; but not pseudo mechanics, lol.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr I have been studing Quantum Mechanics and according to Quantum Mechanics, objects can very well be influenced via non physical forces. Einstein tried to disprove it, but he failed. Such influences has been scientifically demonstrated to exist. So, since objects can be influenced via nonphysical forces, then telekinesis should exist. I see no reason why it shouldn't exist. What I just told you is part of Quantum Theory and it is one of the most successful theories in hard sciences.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, even if Quantum Mechanics says that a force HAS to be complied to move an object otherwise; it doesn't mean that TK isn't real.
Yes, Quantum Mechanics has proven that a force can be complied without a physical standing force. Einsteins theory on 'Relativity' some what is referring to your theory on the subject.
Science has proven the fact to be true; so why shouldn't TK exist?
I think that the Quantum Theory is most successful theories in hard science, IMO.
MittensMr 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If the phenomenon exists outside the realms of physics,in that in can not be measured or detected using the scientific method,i wonder what insight the experiments offer.I'm prepared to be open minded but as you stated " ,what we need is real scientific applications and tests as well".In all the 20 years that PEAR existed they never produced any data that was repeatable.It a huddle that apparently can not be pasted.
NoMoreC2 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 "If the phenomenon exists outside the realms of physics,in that in can not be measured or detected using the scientific method"
Wrong. Just because a phenomenon exist outside the realms of Physics does not mean it cannot be scientifically measured or detected via the scientific method. Every genuine phenomena effect can be scientifically measured, even the tiny ones. The tiny ones are detected via Statistical Analysis, which tells you the result is statistically significant or not.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss But is that the case? I'm sure that you will agree that in statistical analysis there is a degree of error.If the phenomenon shows a significantly low rate of success than it is difficult to distinguish between the two.
NoMoreC2 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 Yes, I agree that statistical analysis has a degree of error, such as a Type I or Type II error. Well, if the P-Value of the hypothesis is < 0.05, then we could say that we have emperical evidence of the hypothesis, but we cannot say with confidence that it is not due to chance or luck. However, we could distinguish luck from real effects by using what they called, "Meta-Analysis." Replication is the key to distinguish luck from real effects. A P-Value of 0.05 is based on chance.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Ah, but you're absolutely right! In this case; while ANYTHING is being observed and/or scrutinized by science it does have I guess "depths" to it. Because, whenever science is testing with anything paranormal, the results drop; they still don't know why or how it does, it just disappears.
For, E=MC 2, you can have a Type-2 error and still pass the test; while we can bring anything else need to measure the results. All to know the Confirmation Bias.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 In Statistics, there's a strong possibility that the result of the hypothesis could be due to 1 or more factors, even under controlled conditions. For instance, suppose I conducted an ESP Zener Card test on a computer. Now, let's say that I got a result that is statistically significant, which shows evidence of ESP. The resut does show evidence of ESP, but what if it was due to psychokinesis, which influenced the outcome of the cards? This is why proof doesn't exist in experiments.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 Yes, you're right; but Angel has a point. You're mostly speaking about the analysis of the statistical process; so when Zener Cards or RNG's are being influenced by psychics, there is a good chance an error may occur; but due to the bad observation of the scientists; not the psychics.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Although, I mostly agree with you! You're right on saying something that isn't in the realm of well known Physics, doesn't mean it can't be measured by the via scientific test or method.
Scientists; such as Dean Radin, Rupert Sheldrake, and Charles Tart; have shown the smallest amount of evidence of PK; can still be measured by hard science and NOT just parapsychology.
MittensMr 1 year ago
There is a common element to all the psi experiments.The balancing of a lightweight material precariously on a fine point.Over the past 20 years no one has developed past that stage.That leaves me to wonder what potential it could possibly have,if any.I would be interested in your views on where the future lies.As you know i am sceptical but all i envisage is another ten years of videos with paper or foil wheels with no progression.
NoMoreC2 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 Yes,there is!Your absolutely right,all Psi experiments can't for some reason,have evidence,even when tested by true scientist's.Telekinesis is real,you just have to research it,universities take Psi seriously and there have been several experiments done on it to prove that it is real.
Now,what we need is real scientific applications and tests as well.For the publics (skeptics) eyes to open.
Just open your mind,buddy!Many people have developed past the Psi Wheel,moving other objects.
MittensMr 1 year ago
The sceptics need to see details of experiments,the conditions and the controls put in place.I think your blanket claim that universities take psi seriously is an exaggeration and the only one appears to be Princeton which closed it's facilities in 2007.
NoMoreC2 1 year ago
@NoMoreC2 Yes,but I am just waiting for Psi to be officially proven to the world and Telekinesis is published in true scientific data journals and not just labs or universities.
MittensMr 1 year ago
@MittensMr "Yes,but I am just waiting for Psi to be officially proven to the world and Telekinesis is published in true scientific data journals and not just labs or universities."
Yes, there is strong scientific evidence of telekinesis and psi. However, psi is a controversial science simply because of the bullshit coming out from pseudo-skeptics, frauds, pseudoscientist and Randi claiming there's no evidence of psi.
Another reason is because of confirmation bias on scientists.
angelsssssssssssss 1 year ago
@angelsssssssssssss Yes, even Quantum Physics has proven the mind can alter matter as well as science and labs and universities.
Agreed, these scientists are agreeing on the hypothesis side; using the Confirmation Bias and they're FALSE claims.
MittensMr 1 year ago
It's real, don't put yourself under the boot of psuedo skeptics or classical physics dogma; their logic is faulty anyway. They often make all kinds of assumptions about how telekinesis would work if they believed it, and use this to determine the goal posts. It would be more honest to observe possible anomalies without bias. It's clear that they are often trying to protect a world view, and they often sound like religious zealots. I say free your mind & train for yourself:)
TheMoonKingdom 1 year ago
@TheMoonKingdom Yes,agreeable!I am not putting my self under Pseudo Skeptics or even Dogmatism of Science,religion,or even classical Physics like you said,but understandable.Yes,people are sprung to what they believe only what they've experienced.Basically,if they haven't experienced anything Paranormal then they say "Wait,hold up!Since I haven't experienced this;it's not real" ,vs, "I had many experiences on the Paranormal;it's means it's real!" it's that logic.
Plus,these religious nut jobs!
MittensMr 1 year ago