@JayJayAbels You can see the accumulated, quantitative data in The Global Consciousness Project website. If you don't know much about significance testing in statistics, the data and its statistical analyses may confuse you...
Extremely skeptical. Where can I read the data and see the evidence? I don't mind people with agendas attempting to prove that they're correct but I'd like to see the results laid out in a precise fashion. Scientists will too.
This is very exciting... Is it me or Does anyoneelse think that there may be a relation between the results of testing being done at LHC in Switzerland and Global Conciousness Project..
1- Some particles may travel faster than light..
2- Information may travel faster than light..
3- Some events may be foreseen before it happen..
4- Is the cause and effect principle becoming history-- at a certain level??
@nemirn Doubtfully. The evidence for these things, at least in small effects, is undeniable -at least by any honest skeptic. We don't know what is going on -but we know that something very strange is.
So I've gathered that we have 0's and 1's peaking in times of collective consciousness.
So this, hypothetically, could be measuring a force that bridges our minds in an interconnected consciousness. So, we would all be one mind, separated by different physical realities. So, it's almost like friends sitting in a car. Kickin in the front seat. Sittin in the back seat. Gotta make my mind up... WHICH SEAT SHOULD I TAKE?!
What exactly does Dr. Radin mean when the number generators became "more organized"? Did the numbers on all of the generators start listing the same sequences of numbers, or did the generators form patterns of numbers, or...
@LucasI3434 Well i guess that the generators started to show the same numbers more often, or something like that. Maybe i should read this man's books. Brilliant stuff!
@LucasI3434 What he means is that the random number generators behave in a statistically significant way, i.e. they either move up or down in a way that would hardly happen by chance alone.
I wouldnt sum up Dean Radins career on RNG alone, he's done a few doozies. But nothing was more profound than Time Reversed Human Experience in Precognitive studies, where EEG brainscans monitor brainwave function during response of emotional stimuli, This test has been practiced at campuses globally as scaring & arousing patients shows significant brain activity. RNG is no more validating than the old card guessing trials. For the simple reason of synchronicity & lack of stimuli.
Ive even woke up on these future signals, I couldnt be more happy that we are finally getting SERIOUS study on ESP. I have had these signals ever since ive known, I started feeling like society would never find any answers. I studied brain functions & found the TRUTH. All memories are stored with an emotional tag. This means that the supposed logical hemisphere is merely a recall of these emotional tags. We eliminate making choices when our Amygdala disables the frontal lobe.
I just watched this silly video again. For those of you that want to believe this: test it! Do what he says at the first of the video and flip a coin 100 times while always "wanting it to be the same" heads or tails. The randomness won't change. If that worked then why don't you always win at video poker? Why don't hundreds of people pick the same winning lottery numbers? This whole thing is nothing but wishful thinking. Wake up!
@bowenstudios Thats why Radin bases all his tests on subconscious acquisition & obtained by EEG brainscans. Its a little difficult to disprove that TRUTH. Your just jealous because you arent intuned. Ofcourse people that arent experiencing it wont believe it exists, So shut the hell up & let this man give me 37 years of discloser on my precognition. I dont care if you believe me, but i cant help but think that minds without ESP are what i call a dumb brain. So shut your frontal lobe.
@bowenstudios ESP isnt likely to pull up numbers. Emotion is the method that scientists use. Colors & sounds help recall memories. The idea that if we're psychic, then why dont we win the lottery is far fetched when no one is gonna remember numbers when they wake up, BUT.... it is stored in the subconscious & CAN be obtained. I have a number but i cant remember the last digits. 72,000,000. It may be something like this 72,385,231(dream). So if science helps recall, it will work.
@LendMeYourHand "Emotion is the method that scientists use."
Nope, sorry, but scientists use the scientific method, 14 year old girls use emotion! RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR, not emotional "how hot of a lover are you" machine grip device at the Castle miniature Golf Course ARCADE! You have no "grip" on reality. This isn't a study on working or long term memory. What information are you being given? What exactly is a RNG? ESP is EXACTLY what is proved 1,000,000,000:1
@LendMeYourHand Colors & sounds, & accessing sub conscious thought aren't emotional processes, and they're still not the method science uses. Adrenaline coheres experience to memory, check it out!
After second & third reading, you may not be as far afield as I thought, you're closer to understanding psychic phenomenon then I was giving you credit for. If I'm missing something, spell it out, rise above another's condescencion and help them in spite of it. No bad students, only poor teachers.
@shizzleman8 Biochemistry in generational trauma outlines memory processes which are classified in folders outlined with emotional tags. The whole imprint of observed thought is an emotional response from the frontal lobe(creativity) or Amygdalla (fear/anger). These images are burnt into recognition with increased emotional intensity. Otherwise we only hold less emotional memory in short term in most cases, as they draw less interest to the observer. Synchronicity shock of pre-memory, deja vue
@LendMeYourHand I'm familiar with all that, I've been studying the brain for quite some time, and just recently in arguing with atheists here about life after death, NDE's and how THAT consciousness is impossible to explain naturally. I don't see the correlation between emotional/adrenaline and it's effect on memory and effecting Random Number Generators? Maybe we're entirely on the same page, and I'm missisng how you're attributing it to this research. 1,000,000:1 mind over matter = NDE study
@bunny153649. Yes, I understand the fundamentals of quantum entanglement. (Please see my other comments on this page). This 'phenomena' is nothing like quantum entanglement which ONLY works on the quantum level - human brains are large and therefore cannot be entangled with a random number generator. But even if our minds 'could' be entangled WHY would they be entangled with random number generators?! It makes no sense. It
No matter how quantic or not this is, Radin talks here about the data he collected. So to all of you who don't agree that this is a quantic phenomenon, fine.
But Radin's experience surely shakes the materialistic theory of consciousness...
Two notable quotes from the brilliant German physicist, Max Planck, relevant to the topic and to some of the comments: 1. "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." 2. "Science advances one funeral at a time." This latter quote has proven itself true way too many times., and I think will do so in Radin's case too.
That's analyzing data & establishing a link between the data and an event, but it's all after the fact. How much of a diffrence is there between the randomness & order during the event? Does it go from totally random to 1,2,3,4,5,6,7...? He never says. He just says that there is a clear change. How so?
Ridiculous! This is a joke. I can’t believe ANYONE thinks that is even a remote possibility. What about the shape of ice cycles being related to the constipation of red-headed women? That’s how stupid this is. Really. THINK about it! Consciousness is a function of the brain. Of 'individual' brains. Do you think all of our spleens somehow communicate through space and that determines the sex of kittens? NO!
@1234stives I do know a bit about it. Quantum physics in no way supports such a claim. I'm assuming you're referring to entanglement - in which two particles can be 'contected' to each other althought they may be physcially far from each other. When entangled one of the particles can effect the other partical instantly over a large distance. ONLY entangled particles effect each other in such a way. NOT all particles are entangled, in fact almost none are. (continued...)
@1234stives For consciouness to be measured at a distance by some 'quantum effect' it would require something simialr to entanglement. Our minds are NOT entangled with the random number generators. Only partical can be entangled - not large objects. Quantum physics do not even allow for such a thing. Watch Depok Chopra & Michael Shermer debate on ABC's Nightline. (go to ABC's site, seach "Does God Have a Future?") Watch all of it - they talk about common misperceptions of quantum physics.
This work needs to be taken seriously by the world and academia! At least decades have been spent working on this research. Double blind experiments reveal that this is fact.
I wonder if the experimenter's expectation of the effect of events on random number generation is the driving factor of this experiment. Though it's still astonishing that they might affect the machine with their mind...
Obviously there is a world wide psychic connection, that just happens to tap into TV events simultaneously around the world, hours before events happen, it is so obvious.
'Events would occur that we couldn't predict' But you should be able to predict some form of major event hours before now this gear is kicking off.
The whole world was expecting OJ Simpson's trial verdict?
Barely anybody knows who the guy is outside US since the rest of the world couldn't care less about american football and most people who actually know the name of the guy know it vaguely and mostly related to how in america, if you are rich and famous enough you can get away even with murder...
This theory appears ridiculous yet plausible and understandable. However, what are the practical implications of a global consciousness interconnected with all of global matter? I can't think of any.
@Dewillough This raises the question: Does our thoughts matter or are we just matter....? Yes, our bodies are matter, but thoughts decides if we live in love or fear. This (and many other) experiences proves that our attitude/thoughts matter in a unified way. Witch means that we should care about what we do cause what we do to another we also do to ourself. Its about responsibility to create a more loving world.
@Dewillough - All great discoveries in science begin with people not being able to see the practical significance. When people begin to understand the implications of Dean Radin's research there will be significant changes in our society.
It is most notable that Radin and Randi are anagrams of each other. Most synchronistic and indicative of a polarity, my friends/brothers/lovers. Much love and heterosexual indio etheric kisses to you all, you men you, you women you. Love awaits in the Now. Grasp only the threads so that you could bind them with your consciousness. Salutation concluded.
This is the kind of science that we need more of. Pushing the boundries. Science becomes religion when it stops moving forward. There is always more to discover.
that is one of THE most ignorant statements i think i've EVER read... science exist to solve problems if we ever reach a point where all problems facing humans are solved (which i don't think we ever will) then science would stop... following unproven (probably unprovable) "pusedo science" for the sake of "progress" IS religion
@Leadman1989 And you're telling me how ignorant my statement is... why? If you're going to insult someone and say that their opinion is ignorant, you could at least spell check your own statement first. If you don't agree with me, fine... big deal. Your opinion of me and my choice of words changes nothing.
what a surprise you aren't even open to conversation... this is a comment section you left YOUR comment and then i left a comment CRITIQUING your comment
that's how science is and more importantly that's how the human race is exchanging ideas and opinions openly and honestly
i will apologize if you took any offense but i meant no harm i just found what you said to be really stupid and i was in a bad mood
@Damienf77 Why? So far it's nonesense. The study like it is now, doesn't say anything and therefore isn't accepted by science yet. Does nobody read wikipedia anymore?!
@stauffap How is Parapsychology or the Global Consciousness Project nonsense??? Have you even critiqued these studies with an open, unbiased, skeptical mind or are you just accepting everything what Wikipedia or the so-called skeptics tell you???
The problem with Wikipedia is that some or most of the info isn't really realiable and the worst of it is that Wikipedia can be easily edited by anyone. Cognitive biases abound...
It's time for you to critique both sides of the same coin......
@IceAges14Aces You're right and that's why i always read about the discussion on wikipedia and the changes that were made. Wikipedia is great because you can always find both sides of the coin. But come on, just look at the experiment and the results...sometimes the random number generator reacted before and sometimes after and event...and sometimes not at all. And sometimes the RNG gets highly unproable results without anything happening. What should that be proving? unconnnectedness imho
The problem with this whole line of experiementation (aside from the fact that the data is cherry picked and sketchy) is the fact that they assume it's an effect of conciouness when there is no real definition of conciouness and no way of proving or disproving that it is conciouness that is having an effect.
@phookadude - You need to check out the earlier work that was done at Princeton Uni. They performed studies on individual volunteers who's attention was focussed on an REG (e.g. they were trying to consciously influence the outcome). This later research using EGGs is like a scaled up version of the earlier research.
Dean's latest declassified research is blowing the cover off these pseudo skeptics, exposing them as biased cynics ! A scientific skeptic keeps an open mind which is lacking in many of the comments below. They are similar to the gullible that believe anything they are told, only in the cynics case they arrogantly swallow the folk tales as 'the proof' instead of studying genuine research from the specialists in this field. In this way the cynic is married to the gullible mind.
Everything comes together. I mean, you have that series called "The Secret" which comes down to: you can make your own reality. You also have that quantum mechanical effect that the molecules of water form up beatifully when exposed to the written word love and becoma a ugly mess when exposed to the written words hate and anger. This is yet another proof that our minds have a huge impact on the world. The only difference with other expiriments is that this one is scientific
@Fangornmmc Don't belive that the stuff in the secret or "what the bleep do we know" has any basis in realisty. The water freezing into beautiful or ugly crystals is a BS artistic effort, "ugly" and "beautiful" crystal were picked out after the fact based upon the word. Quatum mechanics has absolutely nothing to do with "making your own reality" and anyone who says so is tryign to make thier stuff sound better by wrapping it with pseudoscience.
There have been plenty of other tests that seem to support some inter-connectedness bewtween everything, not a god, just a connection. The double slit experiment, entanglement theory, and chaos theory all seem to suggest a higher conscious or at least suggests that there is some hidden reality that we cannot observe. Yes, maybe this test has a variable unaccounted for but that does not mean we should discard the theory all together.
This is a good example of academics falsely trying to find cause and effect relationships where they don't exist. So many countless doctoral theses written for the same reason never advance human knowledge because they are "reaching" for something that isn't there. If he'd publish his findings, I'm sure you'd find an error coefficient which is perfectly plausible and could not be attributed to anything other than normal variance.
Another lunatic along with John Hagelin. Clearly that guy is religious fuckhead tryin to support some liquid shit. I think that's what @nergvol ment by saying 'Bad science'. What??? GLOBALNONSENSE (joke) ;)
Where do you get that he is religious? Why don't you respond with something that is actually halfway intelligence or halfway having to do with what he's talking about instead of calling him a fuckhead. So why don't you just not say anything until you really have something to say that actually accomplishes something.
Secondly, what I find interesting about this project is that the idea of focusing attention in a meditative state to achieve order is exactly what a healer does to achieve healing in him/herself or in a patient in various alternative therapies -- with practice a healer can become quite powerful feeling almost like stronger forces are being harnessed from outside him/her. This project shows that we really are just part of a much bigger organism and what applies to the whole applies to the parts.
@allthings509 faith healing or alternative therapies by definition have been proven to either not work, or not proved to work. All results are consistent with the placebo effect. In other words, if a medicine is proven to work, it ceases to be "alternative". The only evidence to alternative medicine working is anecdotal.
@chefflik, several alternative therapies are and have been available on the UK's national health service for many decades, the reason is that they have been proven to be effective beyond doubt. The only reason drugs dominate medice is because the pharma industry is a billion dollar money maker which has total control over what is taught and how by medical schools. Also, doctors, like prostitutes, get huge amounts of money as sweetners to prescribe drugs.
My opinion: His most significant word in this video is BIAS.
These experiments / studies have not been completed to the degree needed to prove that BIAS is not present in determining the outcome. There should be (at least) a double-blind examination conducted.
Otherwise - IT'S ALL BOLLOCKS!
Just another religio-fascist trying to force a belief on the skeptical through bad science.
@Candyliz2003 How would you know the details of the experiments from a 10min interview clip? You may be psychic or maybe you are a remote viewer. You seem to know things that no one could know from the information presented here. Wow. A real life remote viewer!
Gee, aren't you an intelligent individual! If the experiment was conducted in the manner I suggested a TRUE scientist would have made sure that EVERYONE knew that. He didn't , hence the assumption. The most important thing is PROOF and this guy does not demonstrate it. It's a joke as far as science is concerned and I suspect the Institute of Noetic Science because of this foolishness.
@Candyliz2003 You are right! This interview must have been only 10minutes. I'm sure after this little clip they packed it all up and went home. He had nothing else to say . Of course if Dean Radin doesn't conduct his interview the way you want him to he must be a bad a scientist. You powers are great Candyliz. Search Dean Radin speaks at google here on youtube. You'll get all the names and places you need.
1) If you'd like I could PM you a link to one of the studies I managed to find?
2) It certainly does, when evidence is proposed and most skeptics even refuse to look at it, claiming they don't need to because it's bullshit right off the bat.
3) I don't know anything about that, but he had a valid counter argument as to why Randi is nuts.
The main point being, it would take 8 years of study on a single person and well over a million dollars. Larger sample population = better.
THE reason for the high degree of skepticism: no proof.
If it was real there would be global news coverage, etc. How do you explain THAT away?
Calling Randi nuts is simply deflecting examination. What's the valid counter-argument?
Everyone who's confronted me has no solid proof and only alludes to "studies & experiments - some by others" ... that's just not enough. Think about it. If it's real there should be evidence readily available somewhere in the world.
Everyone wants to have the opportunity to believe in the fantastic - even an atheist like myself - but just saying it's so doesn't cut it. And getting angry at people who are not convinced doesn't change the outcome. There is all kinds of "evidence" to support the existence of The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and The Tooth Fairy but we all know better.They are fairy-tales for children. You are simply providing fairy-tales for adults and weak-minded people who need fantasy in their life.
@Candyliz2003 Through out history all human civilizations have found there to be an unseen consciousness that interact with the physical world. Take that stupid easter bunny, santa clause, spaghetti monster crap and take it out of here. It does not apply. Name one culture 2000 years ago that believed in the easter bunny. Name one that DID NOT believe a God. This is not fairy tales. You are ignorant. The people who mapped the stars are weak minded? You are the weak minded one.
@DoctorTachyon And throughout human history there have been those who question the fantastic beliefs others use as explanations for the unexplainable. Your premise that there was no civilization 2000 years ago that did not believe in a God is ridiculous! They also believed Earth was flat and the center of the universe. And how would you know for certain that there wasn't a people who simply believed in nature?
@Candyliz2003 My point is your easter bunny example has no where near the foundation in history that the God belief does. Pls tell the rest of your atheist friends that its a stupid point. Stop using it. We are not theist bible thumpers here. We are discussing a belief that comes up over thousands of years in unconnected places around the planet. That is data. It deserves a closer look and proper respect. And this page is unrelated to God at all.
Dude, YOU are the one that brought God into the discussion.
Where is you data you mention. You and Radin and others here keep making these claims but you still have NOTHING to show for it.
The fact that humans have similar thought processes in unconnected places is not proof of anything other than the fact that humans have similar thought processes because - are you ready for it - THEY ARE HUMANS WHO HAVE THOUGHT PROCESSES. There's nothing magical there. Get over it.
@Candyliz2003 When unconnected people have similar experiences that IS data. Search Dean Radin speaks at google for the experiments, controls, results and people who conducted them. Saying "oh people have similar thought processes" does not cover it. It is the skeptics cop out and has no backing from any study. "Oh it's in your head" type bull is not science. And it is you who brought up that stupid easter bunny, santa claus point to challenge spiritual/God beliefs.
@DoctorTachyon Wow the effects of these experiments are negligible, its the exception rather than the rule. Its like ghosts and unexplained phonomenas - the unexplained parts of science but can otherwise be ignored. There wil be no practical application really for this.
@Vernonpaddy Regardless if they are negligible or not is beside the point. They are there. The unexplained parts of science can be ignores? Science doesn't ignore what it can not explain. It charges at the things it cannot explain. Whether there is practical applications are not are beside the point. Science is the search for knowledge.
@DoctorTachyon well tbh I'd like to see the opinions of other scientists, you seem to think your some sort of a visionary or something. there are lots of unexplained parts of science and lots of proposed solutions, your drawing conclusions too quickly
@Vernonpaddy and you are disregarding too quickly. This is the undiscovered country of science here my friend. Keep an open mind, don't give into bias and dogmatic thinking. The religion of science is just as blinding as the religions of God.
Normally, scientists haven't mastered their consciousness beyond the mental level, so they have no say on spiritual and psychic matters, unless they have experiences. Although they do have a say on how well people do in artificially objective experiments where the emotionally activated effects of psychic phenomena are conveniently ignored. No reply necessary.
You still have no proof for these "powers" or for "god" for that matter. And I never said the people who mapped the stars were weak-minded. Our ancestors did incredible things and I don't diminish their accomplishments based on their faith. They didn't know any better because they did not have the information we have now.
Just imagine how different things will be 500 yrs from now. Even atheists fight for knowledge over superstition will seem "quaint."
@Candyliz2003 Our sciences are birthed from mystic roots. Astrology to astronomy alchemy to chemistry. The foundation is by scientist who found a very real connection between the spiritual and physical. "weak-minded people who need fantasy in their life" What of the ancient greeks? egyptians? Weak minded? These ideas of God are not from the uneducated classes of these civilizations. It is from the educated ruling class. We are not as smart as we think we are.
Well, how else would you describe a meditative trance increasing a healer's abilities? Of course it's a placebo, but how is that even relevant? Leadership, motivation, mental relaxation from the self, all placebos. It comes from you, no doubt.
Firstly, it is already scientifically established that the brain anticipates events immediatly before they happen, so, could this explains the 9/11 phenomenon Dean is talking about where the machines register order from just before the event. I believe so.
@cheflink if you want me to do some research digging for you you can pay me at $100/hour and I will happily oblige, otherwise get off your stupid lazy ass and research what you need yourself.
Considering consciousness is not a physical phenomenon it makes it difficult to measure with scientific instruments but doesn't entirely make it bad science
the fact that conciousness is CURRENTLY not a measurable physical phenomenon doesn't mean that its NOT a measurable physical phenomenon.. if you can't admit this is possible have a nice life. for every monumental scientific discovery there's been 1000's of 'scientists' beforehand saying its not possible or 'bad science'. Its anomolies research with no hypothesis for gods sake! why would that be bad science? the search for skepticism over this idea is the opposite of what should be happening, imo
Thought technically does have physical substance to it. I guess you could say you are manipulating matter with your thoughts alone, just at that micro level.
Alright, i have performed one iteration of 100 trials, remaining unbiased, and following what little instruction the video established. The random device "followed my will" 52 times, a number just above the expected 50. we all agree that 52 is greater than 50. but not by a statistically significant amount. To be statistically significant at the 5% range, we should be greater than 52.5, we are not. i invite you to try the experiment yourself, but dont waste your time one it.
By definition random is random. Scientific method is a well established technique for observing phenomena dating back over 1000 years. You cannot talk about proof without first analyzing data. You might as well consider this a religion as it cannot be approached scientifically. That is in no way a degradation of religion, all it means is that you cannot approach them the same way.
How can one begin to talk about proof of causality without proper data?
Common sense definition? That means nothing. There must be words and a logical definition before you can make your case to the scientific community.
Look up statistical hypothesis testing, and restructure your inquiry to follow its guidelines. Once you follow those rules correctly, you can perform experiments like this and have a place within science. As far as I'm concerned they have not defined their criteria correctly and I'm doing what I should be doing in question that.
i thought at first that the influence is a spike in telecommunications... everyone is calling and turning on the news and using the internet at the time of a major event. Massive use of electronics would alter the magnetic fields and be able to effect a small "random" number generator. but how do we explain how the shift happened just BEFORE a major even like 9-11
in one of his other interviews, he explains how all of his random number generator systems are completely shielded from any kind of electronic - electromagnatic - frequency type of interferences
It's unfortunate that Radin's claim gets thrown into the Trolls and Boogeyman basket. I've talked to people about the GCP, and unexpectedly, their seems to be quite a bit of confusion and difficulty in understanding all of it.
5:57 - 7:50 - "Strange Non-Random effects" Wouldn't that be referred to as "Random"? Also it goes back to orderly after 9/11.
7:51 - 9:42 - Maybe its the mind. Maybe its not. Gee genius, maybe before you attempt to say "its the mind" you should study the brain and find out how the mind actually works in an individual.
Congratulations people. You created an electronic Ouija board and produced a lot of correlative evidence that evidences NOTHING.
It's all made up? There's no chance he's telling the truth? He's either dumb, or lying. Interesting method of peer review we got going on here.
What would it take for this information to be taken in objectively? Perhaps if he was backing up what you already believe? What if he's not making it up? What if his data is correct?
Considering Radin's only response to his critics was to call them prejudiced dogmatists and has provided no data or formal definition as tro what counts as a "shift towards order", then yes, he's a first rate crackpot who has nothing to support his claim.
I mean, seriously, he provides nothing here but the promise of fantasy come true.
and your response is to call him "crack pot" so now you're even. Insults doesn't deal with claims either way. My question to you: is what if his data is correct? Because he doesn't do a full presentation in an interview does not mean it is flawed. Lets just saw this man did the work, got the results, and is being honest about them. Can you be objective for a moment?
Dean Radin is a crackpot by his own actions, not just by how he reacts to other people criticizing his work.
Science is not about faith. I am under no obligation to "just say the man did the work." There are these little things called methodology and publishing data. No one has to take this fool's "word for it" if he can't figure that part out.
THAT IS BEING OBJECTIVE. No objective mind has to placate to "what ifs" just because you really want to believe otherwise.
Crackpot by his own actions? Conducting and experiment then telling people about it? It's an interview. When's the last time you saw someone bring along charts and streams of data from a 50 year period of study. The man is obviously an intelligent and sane man. If you wish to dig deeper search it out. You have made up your mind on the matter. You take to name calling any one we disagrees with you. You are not being objective.
50 year period of study? Oh really? Considering that he's only 57 yrs old, that would be quite a feat.
I hold all scientists to the same level of criteria. Those, like Radin, who who go as far as he has off the deep end of rational science earn the title crackpot on their own.
Crackpot because he did a study that's not "rational" science? Who's the crackpot now? You write him off on the topic he is looking into. 50 is what he said. He also said he was not the only one doing the research.
The skeptics prejudice, close minded, and hostile reaction to these types of scientists remind me of another group of people... you and the religious are more alike than you think.
Does Dean Radin know what part of the brain connects people with each other? No.
Does Dean Radin's notion have any direct biological evidence that the numerical fluctuations, if they exist, are directly related to the influence of the human mind? No.
Dean Radin's conclusions are all correlation and absolutely no causation. Acknowledging this flawed logic is neither irrational, dogmatic nor being non-objective.
Gullible. Radin states in other videos that he is not saying how these thing happen, rather that they are happening.
If I'm understanding your logic, a man must know HOW something happens before he can say that SOMETHING has happened.
Nothing gullible here. He did an experiment, found results. I say interesting. You say crackpot. But where is your evidence and study to prove his claims wrong?
Once again, a man can't be wrong just because he holds a view different from yours...
He's looking at the randomness of random generators over a very small sample, with no conscious effort by anyone to affect them. He's offered no real mechanism for how they could even affect the results, and as far as I can tell, has not submitted his data for scrutiny by others.
Dismissing someone because they don't submit their studies for peer review isn't even close to being "religious". But slavishly defending such tripe is.
@ikvsabre This is an interview cut into a 10min clip. You want details? And how would you know he has not submitted his work for peer review from this clip? Search Dean Radin speaks at google here on youtube or on my page. You will find names, places, and all the other information you need. Now the question is are you brave enough to leave your bias at the door and deal wit the data honestly? Probably not. You skeptics are really like the religious. I've done this dance many times.
Great collapsing wave functions batman!
TheAwakenedHeretic 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JayJayAbels You can see the accumulated, quantitative data in The Global Consciousness Project website. If you don't know much about significance testing in statistics, the data and its statistical analyses may confuse you...
IceAges14Aces 2 weeks ago
Extremely skeptical. Where can I read the data and see the evidence? I don't mind people with agendas attempting to prove that they're correct but I'd like to see the results laid out in a precise fashion. Scientists will too.
JayJayAbels 3 weeks ago
This is very exciting... Is it me or Does anyoneelse think that there may be a relation between the results of testing being done at LHC in Switzerland and Global Conciousness Project..
1- Some particles may travel faster than light..
2- Information may travel faster than light..
3- Some events may be foreseen before it happen..
4- Is the cause and effect principle becoming history-- at a certain level??
These i would love to know... :))
jeremybronson7 2 months ago
Superstitious anti-science.
nemirn 3 months ago
@nemirn Doubtfully. The evidence for these things, at least in small effects, is undeniable -at least by any honest skeptic. We don't know what is going on -but we know that something very strange is.
429Cage 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@429Cage "The evidence for these things, at least in small effects, is undeniable"
- Where can I view this undeniable evidence?
JayJayAbels 3 weeks ago
@nemirn You've just shown that Science is a belief-system just as strong as religion.
Wretbornify 2 days ago
So I've gathered that we have 0's and 1's peaking in times of collective consciousness.
So this, hypothetically, could be measuring a force that bridges our minds in an interconnected consciousness. So, we would all be one mind, separated by different physical realities. So, it's almost like friends sitting in a car. Kickin in the front seat. Sittin in the back seat. Gotta make my mind up... WHICH SEAT SHOULD I TAKE?!
ITS FRIDAY, FRIDAY
coolduderyan07 5 months ago 6
@coolduderyan07
You, my sir
are
genious!
SlipAllCityToy 3 months ago
congrats, you just proved that devolution exists
commandro 6 months ago
What exactly does Dr. Radin mean when the number generators became "more organized"? Did the numbers on all of the generators start listing the same sequences of numbers, or did the generators form patterns of numbers, or...
Could anyone clear this up for me?
LucasI3434 8 months ago
@LucasI3434 Well i guess that the generators started to show the same numbers more often, or something like that. Maybe i should read this man's books. Brilliant stuff!
ChiefBiggM 8 months ago
@LucasI3434 What he means is that the random number generators behave in a statistically significant way, i.e. they either move up or down in a way that would hardly happen by chance alone.
IceAges14Aces 7 months ago
Thank you, Dean Radin, for all you are doing.
sistersuperior1 8 months ago
I wonder what the results were on May 1, 2011 when bin Laden was killed.
dancingshoes1111 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dancingshoes1111 Bin Laden has been killed ?
alfgand 8 months ago
I wonder how the random number generators in the Global Consciousness Project would behave in December 21, 2012 ;)
IceAges14Aces 9 months ago
I've just posted a vido response to this video that people interested in the GCP may find interesting. -thanks
metaRising 9 months ago
I wouldnt sum up Dean Radins career on RNG alone, he's done a few doozies. But nothing was more profound than Time Reversed Human Experience in Precognitive studies, where EEG brainscans monitor brainwave function during response of emotional stimuli, This test has been practiced at campuses globally as scaring & arousing patients shows significant brain activity. RNG is no more validating than the old card guessing trials. For the simple reason of synchronicity & lack of stimuli.
LendMeYourHand 9 months ago
we are super powerful beings we just have to know how. this video is not for stupid people how seems to see science as limited as it is.
jirasakura 9 months ago
Is this a joke?
tonowicz1 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tonowicz1 Not at all, My Friend. This is not a joke.
You are a very powerful being.
kozychik 10 months ago
go to globalconspiracy.co.uk to see how society has and is being shaped around us
asnidejoy 10 months ago
Ive even woke up on these future signals, I couldnt be more happy that we are finally getting SERIOUS study on ESP. I have had these signals ever since ive known, I started feeling like society would never find any answers. I studied brain functions & found the TRUTH. All memories are stored with an emotional tag. This means that the supposed logical hemisphere is merely a recall of these emotional tags. We eliminate making choices when our Amygdala disables the frontal lobe.
LendMeYourHand 11 months ago
I just watched this silly video again. For those of you that want to believe this: test it! Do what he says at the first of the video and flip a coin 100 times while always "wanting it to be the same" heads or tails. The randomness won't change. If that worked then why don't you always win at video poker? Why don't hundreds of people pick the same winning lottery numbers? This whole thing is nothing but wishful thinking. Wake up!
bowenstudios 1 year ago
@bowenstudios Thats why Radin bases all his tests on subconscious acquisition & obtained by EEG brainscans. Its a little difficult to disprove that TRUTH. Your just jealous because you arent intuned. Ofcourse people that arent experiencing it wont believe it exists, So shut the hell up & let this man give me 37 years of discloser on my precognition. I dont care if you believe me, but i cant help but think that minds without ESP are what i call a dumb brain. So shut your frontal lobe.
LendMeYourHand 11 months ago
@bowenstudios ESP isnt likely to pull up numbers. Emotion is the method that scientists use. Colors & sounds help recall memories. The idea that if we're psychic, then why dont we win the lottery is far fetched when no one is gonna remember numbers when they wake up, BUT.... it is stored in the subconscious & CAN be obtained. I have a number but i cant remember the last digits. 72,000,000. It may be something like this 72,385,231(dream). So if science helps recall, it will work.
LendMeYourHand 11 months ago
@LendMeYourHand "Emotion is the method that scientists use."
Nope, sorry, but scientists use the scientific method, 14 year old girls use emotion! RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR, not emotional "how hot of a lover are you" machine grip device at the Castle miniature Golf Course ARCADE! You have no "grip" on reality. This isn't a study on working or long term memory. What information are you being given? What exactly is a RNG? ESP is EXACTLY what is proved 1,000,000,000:1
shizzleman8 9 months ago
@shizzleman8 I guess you'll never know then. Good for you. No.. No.. Your totally right, i insist.
LendMeYourHand 9 months ago
@LendMeYourHand Colors & sounds, & accessing sub conscious thought aren't emotional processes, and they're still not the method science uses. Adrenaline coheres experience to memory, check it out!
After second & third reading, you may not be as far afield as I thought, you're closer to understanding psychic phenomenon then I was giving you credit for. If I'm missing something, spell it out, rise above another's condescencion and help them in spite of it. No bad students, only poor teachers.
shizzleman8 9 months ago
@shizzleman8 Biochemistry in generational trauma outlines memory processes which are classified in folders outlined with emotional tags. The whole imprint of observed thought is an emotional response from the frontal lobe(creativity) or Amygdalla (fear/anger). These images are burnt into recognition with increased emotional intensity. Otherwise we only hold less emotional memory in short term in most cases, as they draw less interest to the observer. Synchronicity shock of pre-memory, deja vue
LendMeYourHand 9 months ago
@LendMeYourHand I'm familiar with all that, I've been studying the brain for quite some time, and just recently in arguing with atheists here about life after death, NDE's and how THAT consciousness is impossible to explain naturally. I don't see the correlation between emotional/adrenaline and it's effect on memory and effecting Random Number Generators? Maybe we're entirely on the same page, and I'm missisng how you're attributing it to this research. 1,000,000:1 mind over matter = NDE study
shizzleman8 9 months ago
@bunny153649. Yes, I understand the fundamentals of quantum entanglement. (Please see my other comments on this page). This 'phenomena' is nothing like quantum entanglement which ONLY works on the quantum level - human brains are large and therefore cannot be entangled with a random number generator. But even if our minds 'could' be entangled WHY would they be entangled with random number generators?! It makes no sense. It
bowenstudios 1 year ago
No matter how quantic or not this is, Radin talks here about the data he collected. So to all of you who don't agree that this is a quantic phenomenon, fine.
But Radin's experience surely shakes the materialistic theory of consciousness...
FortYeah 1 year ago
why be orderly 2 hours before 9/11
crackkatt 1 year ago
@crackkatt
it was orderly 2 hours before 911 because of the massive ppl involved in the plan to attack our own country and frame our enemies
princesspeachism 1 year ago
@princesspeachism k thx :D
crackkatt 11 months ago
Two notable quotes from the brilliant German physicist, Max Planck, relevant to the topic and to some of the comments: 1. "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." 2. "Science advances one funeral at a time." This latter quote has proven itself true way too many times., and I think will do so in Radin's case too.
avidclip 1 year ago
That's analyzing data & establishing a link between the data and an event, but it's all after the fact. How much of a diffrence is there between the randomness & order during the event? Does it go from totally random to 1,2,3,4,5,6,7...? He never says. He just says that there is a clear change. How so?
cfrancisco74 1 year ago
Ridiculous! This is a joke. I can’t believe ANYONE thinks that is even a remote possibility. What about the shape of ice cycles being related to the constipation of red-headed women? That’s how stupid this is. Really. THINK about it! Consciousness is a function of the brain. Of 'individual' brains. Do you think all of our spleens somehow communicate through space and that determines the sex of kittens? NO!
bowenstudios 1 year ago
@bowenstudios go read some quantum physics, then maybe youll be able to understand this experiment....otherwise shut up
1234stives 1 year ago
@1234stives I do know a bit about it. Quantum physics in no way supports such a claim. I'm assuming you're referring to entanglement - in which two particles can be 'contected' to each other althought they may be physcially far from each other. When entangled one of the particles can effect the other partical instantly over a large distance. ONLY entangled particles effect each other in such a way. NOT all particles are entangled, in fact almost none are. (continued...)
bowenstudios 1 year ago
@1234stives For consciouness to be measured at a distance by some 'quantum effect' it would require something simialr to entanglement. Our minds are NOT entangled with the random number generators. Only partical can be entangled - not large objects. Quantum physics do not even allow for such a thing. Watch Depok Chopra & Michael Shermer debate on ABC's Nightline. (go to ABC's site, seach "Does God Have a Future?") Watch all of it - they talk about common misperceptions of quantum physics.
bowenstudios 1 year ago
@bowenstudios ever heard of quantum entanglement?
bunny153649 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
This work needs to be taken seriously by the world and academia! At least decades have been spent working on this research. Double blind experiments reveal that this is fact.
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
Is there any video / text with discussion on this topic?
dahnraelz 1 year ago
DEAN RADIN IS MY FUCKING HERO!
cricketjam 1 year ago
I wonder if the experimenter's expectation of the effect of events on random number generation is the driving factor of this experiment. Though it's still astonishing that they might affect the machine with their mind...
jessepoulin 1 year ago
This is very much like 'the secret'. Think positive and you'll be rewarded with great things.
darkbyke 1 year ago
Obviously there is a world wide psychic connection, that just happens to tap into TV events simultaneously around the world, hours before events happen, it is so obvious.
'Events would occur that we couldn't predict' But you should be able to predict some form of major event hours before now this gear is kicking off.
messianicrogue 1 year ago
Ah, the arrogant big head of americans.
The whole world was expecting OJ Simpson's trial verdict?
Barely anybody knows who the guy is outside US since the rest of the world couldn't care less about american football and most people who actually know the name of the guy know it vaguely and mostly related to how in america, if you are rich and famous enough you can get away even with murder...
tommytalks77 1 year ago
basically these people are using ur as experiments without our permission...wtf!!
Nfordmann 1 year ago
For those who doubt this...
We know gravity exists but we cannot explain how it works.
We are all one.
lightworkercsc 1 year ago
@lightworkercsc right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
@lightworkercsc youtube(dot)com/watch?v=2eVp0KUnRq8 :)
Nutzername36 1 year ago
@lightworkercsc
Gravity is the curvature of space time due to mass this is a very basic explanation if you want a better one try opening a science book...
im at a loss for how stupid this is
Leadman1989 1 year ago
This theory appears ridiculous yet plausible and understandable. However, what are the practical implications of a global consciousness interconnected with all of global matter? I can't think of any.
Dewillough 1 year ago
@Dewillough This raises the question: Does our thoughts matter or are we just matter....? Yes, our bodies are matter, but thoughts decides if we live in love or fear. This (and many other) experiences proves that our attitude/thoughts matter in a unified way. Witch means that we should care about what we do cause what we do to another we also do to ourself. Its about responsibility to create a more loving world.
fremmed1 1 year ago
@fremmed1 right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
@Dewillough I believe it.
cricketjam 1 year ago
@Dewillough - All great discoveries in science begin with people not being able to see the practical significance. When people begin to understand the implications of Dean Radin's research there will be significant changes in our society.
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
*indigo
that man is an early indigo child
MaBu888 1 year ago
@tttapmmman
It is most notable that Radin and Randi are anagrams of each other. Most synchronistic and indicative of a polarity, my friends/brothers/lovers. Much love and heterosexual indio etheric kisses to you all, you men you, you women you. Love awaits in the Now. Grasp only the threads so that you could bind them with your consciousness. Salutation concluded.
MaBu888 1 year ago
@MaBu888 that's fucking deep (the anagram) right on!
cricketjam 1 year ago
ATTENDERE INTENDERE ATTENDEMVS INTENDEMVS CREAMVS
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
PRONVNTIARE SCITIS INTVITISSIME
MaBu888 1 year ago
This is the kind of science that we need more of. Pushing the boundries. Science becomes religion when it stops moving forward. There is always more to discover.
Damienf77 1 year ago 13
@Damienf77 right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
@Damienf77
that is one of THE most ignorant statements i think i've EVER read... science exist to solve problems if we ever reach a point where all problems facing humans are solved (which i don't think we ever will) then science would stop... following unproven (probably unprovable) "pusedo science" for the sake of "progress" IS religion
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 And you're telling me how ignorant my statement is... why? If you're going to insult someone and say that their opinion is ignorant, you could at least spell check your own statement first. If you don't agree with me, fine... big deal. Your opinion of me and my choice of words changes nothing.
Damienf77 1 year ago
@Damienf77
what a surprise you aren't even open to conversation... this is a comment section you left YOUR comment and then i left a comment CRITIQUING your comment
that's how science is and more importantly that's how the human race is exchanging ideas and opinions openly and honestly
i will apologize if you took any offense but i meant no harm i just found what you said to be really stupid and i was in a bad mood
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Leadman1989 To name another persons point of view as stupid, is not a very friendly way to start a "discussion" now is it...
A discussion is the exchange of information that we can transfer to wisdom.
An argument is the exchange of ignorance that we allow to transfer into arrogance.
fremmed1 1 year ago
@fremmed1
well i did apologize was in a bad mood but good exchange overall it didn't devolve into pure insults and that's a win on the internet... lol
Leadman1989 1 year ago
@Damienf77 Tell that to the self appointed protectors of reason
richerite 7 months ago
@Damienf77 Why? So far it's nonesense. The study like it is now, doesn't say anything and therefore isn't accepted by science yet. Does nobody read wikipedia anymore?!
stauffap 6 months ago
@stauffap How is Parapsychology or the Global Consciousness Project nonsense??? Have you even critiqued these studies with an open, unbiased, skeptical mind or are you just accepting everything what Wikipedia or the so-called skeptics tell you???
The problem with Wikipedia is that some or most of the info isn't really realiable and the worst of it is that Wikipedia can be easily edited by anyone. Cognitive biases abound...
It's time for you to critique both sides of the same coin......
IceAges14Aces 5 months ago
@IceAges14Aces You're right and that's why i always read about the discussion on wikipedia and the changes that were made. Wikipedia is great because you can always find both sides of the coin. But come on, just look at the experiment and the results...sometimes the random number generator reacted before and sometimes after and event...and sometimes not at all. And sometimes the RNG gets highly unproable results without anything happening. What should that be proving? unconnnectedness imho
stauffap 4 months ago
@IceAges14Aces wikipedia is quick to reset any changes to the GCP entry, if it is even available for editing
JustinBarber 4 months ago
@Damienf77 Yeah! BOO for dogma and groupthink.
Fournier46 4 months ago
an error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it. learn from random number generators.
ete868 1 year ago
The problem with this whole line of experiementation (aside from the fact that the data is cherry picked and sketchy) is the fact that they assume it's an effect of conciouness when there is no real definition of conciouness and no way of proving or disproving that it is conciouness that is having an effect.
phookadude 1 year ago
@phookadude - You need to check out the earlier work that was done at Princeton Uni. They performed studies on individual volunteers who's attention was focussed on an REG (e.g. they were trying to consciously influence the outcome). This later research using EGGs is like a scaled up version of the earlier research.
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
that was very cool
jamesarongray 1 year ago
@jamesarongray right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
Dean's latest declassified research is blowing the cover off these pseudo skeptics, exposing them as biased cynics ! A scientific skeptic keeps an open mind which is lacking in many of the comments below. They are similar to the gullible that believe anything they are told, only in the cynics case they arrogantly swallow the folk tales as 'the proof' instead of studying genuine research from the specialists in this field. In this way the cynic is married to the gullible mind.
lomi1 1 year ago
Comment removed
lomi1 1 year ago
Everything comes together. I mean, you have that series called "The Secret" which comes down to: you can make your own reality. You also have that quantum mechanical effect that the molecules of water form up beatifully when exposed to the written word love and becoma a ugly mess when exposed to the written words hate and anger. This is yet another proof that our minds have a huge impact on the world. The only difference with other expiriments is that this one is scientific
Fangornmmc 1 year ago
@Fangornmmc
ups. The quantum mechanical effect was also scientific. Almost forgot that.
Fangornmmc 1 year ago
@Fangornmmc Don't belive that the stuff in the secret or "what the bleep do we know" has any basis in realisty. The water freezing into beautiful or ugly crystals is a BS artistic effort, "ugly" and "beautiful" crystal were picked out after the fact based upon the word. Quatum mechanics has absolutely nothing to do with "making your own reality" and anyone who says so is tryign to make thier stuff sound better by wrapping it with pseudoscience.
phookadude 1 year ago
Brilliant research where status quo, so called scientists fear to go ! Bravo Dean !
To those with cynical comments: (CIA) cynicism = ignorance + arrogance
lomi1 1 year ago
@lomi1 you're sad, seriously get a life.
Vernonpaddy 1 year ago
@Vernonpaddy love you brother ! ;)
lomi1 1 year ago
@Vernonpaddy right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
Heisenberg Principle at work. We effect what happens through our observation or intention.
aMUSEher 1 year ago
@tttapmmman right you are tap man.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
Comment removed
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
Comment removed
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
There have been plenty of other tests that seem to support some inter-connectedness bewtween everything, not a god, just a connection. The double slit experiment, entanglement theory, and chaos theory all seem to suggest a higher conscious or at least suggests that there is some hidden reality that we cannot observe. Yes, maybe this test has a variable unaccounted for but that does not mean we should discard the theory all together.
knightxc 1 year ago
This is a good example of academics falsely trying to find cause and effect relationships where they don't exist. So many countless doctoral theses written for the same reason never advance human knowledge because they are "reaching" for something that isn't there. If he'd publish his findings, I'm sure you'd find an error coefficient which is perfectly plausible and could not be attributed to anything other than normal variance.
terrapin52 1 year ago 2
Another lunatic along with John Hagelin. Clearly that guy is religious fuckhead tryin to support some liquid shit. I think that's what @nergvol ment by saying 'Bad science'. What??? GLOBALNONSENSE (joke) ;)
Singularum 1 year ago
Where do you get that he is religious? Why don't you respond with something that is actually halfway intelligence or halfway having to do with what he's talking about instead of calling him a fuckhead. So why don't you just not say anything until you really have something to say that actually accomplishes something.
AndyO1987 1 year ago
Secondly, what I find interesting about this project is that the idea of focusing attention in a meditative state to achieve order is exactly what a healer does to achieve healing in him/herself or in a patient in various alternative therapies -- with practice a healer can become quite powerful feeling almost like stronger forces are being harnessed from outside him/her. This project shows that we really are just part of a much bigger organism and what applies to the whole applies to the parts.
allthings509 1 year ago
@allthings509 faith healing or alternative therapies by definition have been proven to either not work, or not proved to work. All results are consistent with the placebo effect. In other words, if a medicine is proven to work, it ceases to be "alternative". The only evidence to alternative medicine working is anecdotal.
ChefFlick 1 year ago
@chefflik, several alternative therapies are and have been available on the UK's national health service for many decades, the reason is that they have been proven to be effective beyond doubt. The only reason drugs dominate medice is because the pharma industry is a billion dollar money maker which has total control over what is taught and how by medical schools. Also, doctors, like prostitutes, get huge amounts of money as sweetners to prescribe drugs.
What do you understand by placebo?
allthings509 1 year ago
Comment removed
AndyO1987 1 year ago
@AndyO1987 are those some random digits or actual d.o.b? Becouse for 22 you're pathetic and man just look at your channel.
Singularum 1 year ago
My opinion: His most significant word in this video is BIAS.
These experiments / studies have not been completed to the degree needed to prove that BIAS is not present in determining the outcome. There should be (at least) a double-blind examination conducted.
Otherwise - IT'S ALL BOLLOCKS!
Just another religio-fascist trying to force a belief on the skeptical through bad science.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 How would you know the details of the experiments from a 10min interview clip? You may be psychic or maybe you are a remote viewer. You seem to know things that no one could know from the information presented here. Wow. A real life remote viewer!
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon
Gee, aren't you an intelligent individual! If the experiment was conducted in the manner I suggested a TRUE scientist would have made sure that EVERYONE knew that. He didn't , hence the assumption. The most important thing is PROOF and this guy does not demonstrate it. It's a joke as far as science is concerned and I suspect the Institute of Noetic Science because of this foolishness.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 You are right! This interview must have been only 10minutes. I'm sure after this little clip they packed it all up and went home. He had nothing else to say . Of course if Dean Radin doesn't conduct his interview the way you want him to he must be a bad a scientist. You powers are great Candyliz. Search Dean Radin speaks at google here on youtube. You'll get all the names and places you need.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon
He's got an hour and a half Google Tech Talk video here on youtube if you're interested. Goes through a lot of different experiments.
vman456 1 year ago
@vman456 ?
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003
There have been plenty of independent studies done, several of which to try and prove him wrong, only end up arriving at the same conclusions.
Most of his examples are not from his own studies.
Skeptics are just as bigoted and arrogant as the religious nuts.
vman456 1 year ago
@vman456
1. What are they (studies) and where can they be found?
2. Being a skeptic has nothing to do with bigotry or arrogance.
3. Didn't he fail with James Randi? Or did he not accept the challenge (like all but one psychic)?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003
1) If you'd like I could PM you a link to one of the studies I managed to find?
2) It certainly does, when evidence is proposed and most skeptics even refuse to look at it, claiming they don't need to because it's bullshit right off the bat.
3) I don't know anything about that, but he had a valid counter argument as to why Randi is nuts.
The main point being, it would take 8 years of study on a single person and well over a million dollars. Larger sample population = better.
vman456 1 year ago
@vman456 PM away. I will look.
THE reason for the high degree of skepticism: no proof.
If it was real there would be global news coverage, etc. How do you explain THAT away?
Calling Randi nuts is simply deflecting examination. What's the valid counter-argument?
Everyone who's confronted me has no solid proof and only alludes to "studies & experiments - some by others" ... that's just not enough. Think about it. If it's real there should be evidence readily available somewhere in the world.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 - Theres a huge amount of proof over many years of investigation on this subject actually!
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
@Mrpjm200
Then WHERE IS IT?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 There is proof in the form of journal publications here: w.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.html
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 @Candyliz2003 (triple w).princeton.edu/~pear/publications.html
Mrpjm200 1 year ago
@vman456
Everyone wants to have the opportunity to believe in the fantastic - even an atheist like myself - but just saying it's so doesn't cut it. And getting angry at people who are not convinced doesn't change the outcome. There is all kinds of "evidence" to support the existence of The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and The Tooth Fairy but we all know better.They are fairy-tales for children. You are simply providing fairy-tales for adults and weak-minded people who need fantasy in their life.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 Through out history all human civilizations have found there to be an unseen consciousness that interact with the physical world. Take that stupid easter bunny, santa clause, spaghetti monster crap and take it out of here. It does not apply. Name one culture 2000 years ago that believed in the easter bunny. Name one that DID NOT believe a God. This is not fairy tales. You are ignorant. The people who mapped the stars are weak minded? You are the weak minded one.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago 2
@DoctorTachyon And throughout human history there have been those who question the fantastic beliefs others use as explanations for the unexplainable. Your premise that there was no civilization 2000 years ago that did not believe in a God is ridiculous! They also believed Earth was flat and the center of the universe. And how would you know for certain that there wasn't a people who simply believed in nature?
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 My point is your easter bunny example has no where near the foundation in history that the God belief does. Pls tell the rest of your atheist friends that its a stupid point. Stop using it. We are not theist bible thumpers here. We are discussing a belief that comes up over thousands of years in unconnected places around the planet. That is data. It deserves a closer look and proper respect. And this page is unrelated to God at all.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon
Dude, YOU are the one that brought God into the discussion.
Where is you data you mention. You and Radin and others here keep making these claims but you still have NOTHING to show for it.
The fact that humans have similar thought processes in unconnected places is not proof of anything other than the fact that humans have similar thought processes because - are you ready for it - THEY ARE HUMANS WHO HAVE THOUGHT PROCESSES. There's nothing magical there. Get over it.
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 When unconnected people have similar experiences that IS data. Search Dean Radin speaks at google for the experiments, controls, results and people who conducted them. Saying "oh people have similar thought processes" does not cover it. It is the skeptics cop out and has no backing from any study. "Oh it's in your head" type bull is not science. And it is you who brought up that stupid easter bunny, santa claus point to challenge spiritual/God beliefs.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon Wow the effects of these experiments are negligible, its the exception rather than the rule. Its like ghosts and unexplained phonomenas - the unexplained parts of science but can otherwise be ignored. There wil be no practical application really for this.
Vernonpaddy 1 year ago
@Vernonpaddy Regardless if they are negligible or not is beside the point. They are there. The unexplained parts of science can be ignores? Science doesn't ignore what it can not explain. It charges at the things it cannot explain. Whether there is practical applications are not are beside the point. Science is the search for knowledge.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon well tbh I'd like to see the opinions of other scientists, you seem to think your some sort of a visionary or something. there are lots of unexplained parts of science and lots of proposed solutions, your drawing conclusions too quickly
Vernonpaddy 1 year ago
@Vernonpaddy and you are disregarding too quickly. This is the undiscovered country of science here my friend. Keep an open mind, don't give into bias and dogmatic thinking. The religion of science is just as blinding as the religions of God.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@Vernonpaddy
Normally, scientists haven't mastered their consciousness beyond the mental level, so they have no say on spiritual and psychic matters, unless they have experiences. Although they do have a say on how well people do in artificially objective experiments where the emotionally activated effects of psychic phenomena are conveniently ignored. No reply necessary.
MaBu888 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon right on.
cricketjam 1 year ago
@DoctorTachyon
You still have no proof for these "powers" or for "god" for that matter. And I never said the people who mapped the stars were weak-minded. Our ancestors did incredible things and I don't diminish their accomplishments based on their faith. They didn't know any better because they did not have the information we have now.
Just imagine how different things will be 500 yrs from now. Even atheists fight for knowledge over superstition will seem "quaint."
Candyliz2003 1 year ago
@Candyliz2003 Our sciences are birthed from mystic roots. Astrology to astronomy alchemy to chemistry. The foundation is by scientist who found a very real connection between the spiritual and physical. "weak-minded people who need fantasy in their life" What of the ancient greeks? egyptians? Weak minded? These ideas of God are not from the uneducated classes of these civilizations. It is from the educated ruling class. We are not as smart as we think we are.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago
@ChefFlick
Well, how else would you describe a meditative trance increasing a healer's abilities? Of course it's a placebo, but how is that even relevant? Leadership, motivation, mental relaxation from the self, all placebos. It comes from you, no doubt.
vman456 1 year ago
Firstly, it is already scientifically established that the brain anticipates events immediatly before they happen, so, could this explains the 9/11 phenomenon Dean is talking about where the machines register order from just before the event. I believe so.
allthings509 1 year ago
@allthings509 could you please provide any link to support this?
ChefFlick 1 year ago
@cheflink if you want me to do some research digging for you you can pay me at $100/hour and I will happily oblige, otherwise get off your stupid lazy ass and research what you need yourself.
allthings509 1 year ago
Considering consciousness is not a physical phenomenon it makes it difficult to measure with scientific instruments but doesn't entirely make it bad science
decepticonsofnwo 2 years ago 8
the fact that conciousness is CURRENTLY not a measurable physical phenomenon doesn't mean that its NOT a measurable physical phenomenon.. if you can't admit this is possible have a nice life. for every monumental scientific discovery there's been 1000's of 'scientists' beforehand saying its not possible or 'bad science'. Its anomolies research with no hypothesis for gods sake! why would that be bad science? the search for skepticism over this idea is the opposite of what should be happening, imo
amplex1337 2 years ago 11
@decepticonsofnwo its a physical phenomenon....of course, and biological
piperogusano 1 year ago
@decepticonsofnwo
Thought technically does have physical substance to it. I guess you could say you are manipulating matter with your thoughts alone, just at that micro level.
vman456 1 year ago
@decepticonsofnwo yay, thankyou!
greenelf12 1 year ago
Bad science
nergvol 2 years ago
If your interested in psi I made a couple of short films you may like :)
metaRising 2 years ago
I'm Very Confused?! ummm.....
JasonH42000 2 years ago
webbot project
a project who predict the future
Using linguistics from the internet
You will be astonished what is going to happen in the future!!!
WEBBOT ON YOUTUBE!!
YourFuture2012 2 years ago
how does one determine whether randomness goes down?
i ask because, like scientists should, i would like to repeat the experiment. how does one define a decrease in randomness?
revolutiongames2004 2 years ago
Alright, i have performed one iteration of 100 trials, remaining unbiased, and following what little instruction the video established. The random device "followed my will" 52 times, a number just above the expected 50. we all agree that 52 is greater than 50. but not by a statistically significant amount. To be statistically significant at the 5% range, we should be greater than 52.5, we are not. i invite you to try the experiment yourself, but dont waste your time one it.
revolutiongames2004 2 years ago
I don't think randomness can be explained with the current scientific sterotypes and normes.
The classical scientific method is to fond of it's numbers and scales to be able to explain things that exceed these culturally set "rules".
Dean Radin is one of few visionaries who seeks to ascend beyond this trivial dabbling.
davidthemann 2 years ago
By definition random is random. Scientific method is a well established technique for observing phenomena dating back over 1000 years. You cannot talk about proof without first analyzing data. You might as well consider this a religion as it cannot be approached scientifically. That is in no way a degradation of religion, all it means is that you cannot approach them the same way.
How can one begin to talk about proof of causality without proper data?
revolutiongames2004 2 years ago
If you flip a coin 1,000,000 times, and each time it lands on heads, that is a common sense decrease in randomness.
I would think any average scientist would look for something that.
Nathan54AB 2 years ago
Common sense definition? That means nothing. There must be words and a logical definition before you can make your case to the scientific community.
Look up statistical hypothesis testing, and restructure your inquiry to follow its guidelines. Once you follow those rules correctly, you can perform experiments like this and have a place within science. As far as I'm concerned they have not defined their criteria correctly and I'm doing what I should be doing in question that.
revolutiongames2004 2 years ago
i thought at first that the influence is a spike in telecommunications... everyone is calling and turning on the news and using the internet at the time of a major event. Massive use of electronics would alter the magnetic fields and be able to effect a small "random" number generator. but how do we explain how the shift happened just BEFORE a major even like 9-11
Electronics is what causing the deviation
dddtorro 2 years ago
in one of his other interviews, he explains how all of his random number generator systems are completely shielded from any kind of electronic - electromagnatic - frequency type of interferences
GhostInTheShell09 2 years ago
Fail.
Nathan54AB 2 years ago
It's unfortunate that Radin's claim gets thrown into the Trolls and Boogeyman basket. I've talked to people about the GCP, and unexpectedly, their seems to be quite a bit of confusion and difficulty in understanding all of it.
zadeh79 2 years ago 4
0:00 - 1:35 - After loads of data wishing for heads and tails works. None of this data is shown.
1:36 - 2:31 - Who did these tests of randomness? Where were they held? Where is the data?
2:32 - 3:51 - "We can infer that there is mental coherence" Translation: there is no measurable link between wishing and manipulation of data.
3:52 - 5:56 - "significant deviation towards order" Translation: Nothing we can measure beyond common, everyday apophenia.
Xerock 2 years ago
5:57 - 7:50 - "Strange Non-Random effects" Wouldn't that be referred to as "Random"? Also it goes back to orderly after 9/11.
7:51 - 9:42 - Maybe its the mind. Maybe its not. Gee genius, maybe before you attempt to say "its the mind" you should study the brain and find out how the mind actually works in an individual.
Congratulations people. You created an electronic Ouija board and produced a lot of correlative evidence that evidences NOTHING.
Xerock 2 years ago
Xerock
It's all made up? There's no chance he's telling the truth? He's either dumb, or lying. Interesting method of peer review we got going on here.
What would it take for this information to be taken in objectively? Perhaps if he was backing up what you already believe? What if he's not making it up? What if his data is correct?
DoctorTachyon 2 years ago
Considering Radin's only response to his critics was to call them prejudiced dogmatists and has provided no data or formal definition as tro what counts as a "shift towards order", then yes, he's a first rate crackpot who has nothing to support his claim.
I mean, seriously, he provides nothing here but the promise of fantasy come true.
Xerock 2 years ago
and your response is to call him "crack pot" so now you're even. Insults doesn't deal with claims either way. My question to you: is what if his data is correct? Because he doesn't do a full presentation in an interview does not mean it is flawed. Lets just saw this man did the work, got the results, and is being honest about them. Can you be objective for a moment?
DoctorTachyon 2 years ago
Dean Radin is a crackpot by his own actions, not just by how he reacts to other people criticizing his work.
Science is not about faith. I am under no obligation to "just say the man did the work." There are these little things called methodology and publishing data. No one has to take this fool's "word for it" if he can't figure that part out.
THAT IS BEING OBJECTIVE. No objective mind has to placate to "what ifs" just because you really want to believe otherwise.
Xerock 2 years ago
Crackpot by his own actions? Conducting and experiment then telling people about it? It's an interview. When's the last time you saw someone bring along charts and streams of data from a 50 year period of study. The man is obviously an intelligent and sane man. If you wish to dig deeper search it out. You have made up your mind on the matter. You take to name calling any one we disagrees with you. You are not being objective.
DoctorTachyon 2 years ago 3
50 year period of study? Oh really? Considering that he's only 57 yrs old, that would be quite a feat.
I hold all scientists to the same level of criteria. Those, like Radin, who who go as far as he has off the deep end of rational science earn the title crackpot on their own.
Xerock 2 years ago
Crackpot because he did a study that's not "rational" science? Who's the crackpot now? You write him off on the topic he is looking into. 50 is what he said. He also said he was not the only one doing the research.
The skeptics prejudice, close minded, and hostile reaction to these types of scientists remind me of another group of people... you and the religious are more alike than you think.
DoctorTachyon 2 years ago 12
Being open-minded does not mean being gullible.
Does Dean Radin know what part of the brain connects people with each other? No.
Does Dean Radin's notion have any direct biological evidence that the numerical fluctuations, if they exist, are directly related to the influence of the human mind? No.
Dean Radin's conclusions are all correlation and absolutely no causation. Acknowledging this flawed logic is neither irrational, dogmatic nor being non-objective.
Xerock 2 years ago
Gullible. Radin states in other videos that he is not saying how these thing happen, rather that they are happening.
If I'm understanding your logic, a man must know HOW something happens before he can say that SOMETHING has happened.
Nothing gullible here. He did an experiment, found results. I say interesting. You say crackpot. But where is your evidence and study to prove his claims wrong?
Once again, a man can't be wrong just because he holds a view different from yours...
DoctorTachyon 2 years ago
@DoctorTachyon
He's looking at the randomness of random generators over a very small sample, with no conscious effort by anyone to affect them. He's offered no real mechanism for how they could even affect the results, and as far as I can tell, has not submitted his data for scrutiny by others.
Dismissing someone because they don't submit their studies for peer review isn't even close to being "religious". But slavishly defending such tripe is.
ikvsabre 1 year ago
@ikvsabre This is an interview cut into a 10min clip. You want details? And how would you know he has not submitted his work for peer review from this clip? Search Dean Radin speaks at google here on youtube or on my page. You will find names, places, and all the other information you need. Now the question is are you brave enough to leave your bias at the door and deal wit the data honestly? Probably not. You skeptics are really like the religious. I've done this dance many times.
DoctorTachyon 1 year ago