Added: 3 years ago
From: budabua
Views: 324,133
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (4,155)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Dangit, It's a shame that he's not very manly because i always thought he kicked ass.

  • I believe in the existence of telekinetic and psychic power, by which I mean, the existence of non-local consciousness (that's why I am a SLIGHT believer in ghosts, and a moderate to strong believer in aliens).

    But, it is absolutely complete BULLSHIT that ANY human being knows how to "practice" telekinetic powers, because there is nothing they know how to "practice". Similarly, no human being can control psychic thoughts in ANY practical way.

    At rare random times, a psychic thought pops

  • @mphello into a human's mind (a thought about a distant place that the human has never been, etc). These non-controllable psychic thoughts constitute some tiny fraction of all our non-controllable conscious thoughts, and hence be barely observable, are a small fraction of ALL our thoughts (both controllable and non-controllable).

    It is a fundamental tenet that only advanced technology that comes about from the collective biological, social, technological evolution of an entire species

  • @mphello and the long hard work of scientists, mathematicians, and engineers to create new tools and probes, will be able to harness the supernatural powers of today in any practical meaningful way. By "supernatural powers" I mean those phenomena (like interstellar or interdimensional travel by aliens, ghosts, telekinesis) which we glimpse at only extremely rarely under totally uncontrolled unexpected times and for which we do not yet have adequate scientific explanation.

  • Comment removed

  • @mphello Where have I disagreed with Randi? I haven't disagreed with him at all. If anything I have stated loud and clear that he is rather correct in his statements. Perhaps this conversation was over before it started as well?

  • JAMES RANDI IS AN IDIOT, HE FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THE RUSSIAN LADY HAD PEOPLE WATCHING HER PLUS THEY COVERED THE OBJECTS WITH SEE THROUGH GLASS AND SHE STILL MOVED THE OBJECTS.

  • @johnydubz The fact that Nina Kulagina moved covered objects and was supposedly scrutinize by U.S.S.R. scientists doesn't justify your case since there are cases of scientists being fooled by conjurers.

    Speaking of the latter, scientists aren't "anti-nonesense or perfect people" they make mistakes just like us whether it is their investigations in the paranormal, conventional research, etc...

  • @IceAges14Aces Very true and sadly a good many that post on this topic and others like this one, don't understand that fact. 

  • @johnydubz The cover has been explained many many times over read more of this thread.

  • So what's the point of this video? Telling us that if an effect can be faked, then it can't be real? That would be a ridiculous claim. Every effect can be faked, that's what Hollywood is built from. This woman Nina Kuligina may have been cheating or not, but this video provides nothing to resolve this question. The only thing that is proven is that Randi is able to do the same by a trick - but that's what I would have expected from a professional magician, anyway. :)

  • @LaughingStock71 exactly!

  • @LaughingStock71 Best summary of what this video proves and doesn't prove ever!

  • pity randi didn't talk about the filmed meeting some years later of nina performing PK in her house when a group of skeptical scientists went to her house uninvited...tut tut....

  • @Conneisseur2 That case has been explained over and over. 

  • @ssako100 Correction: you need a douchebag...

  • rs1963 needs a douche

  • Use the force Luke!

  • Nova just got PWNED!

  • Let's see if he can do it with a box around the items

  • @ecilopadkcuf Lets see you read more of this thread. That has many explained well over 100 times.

  • @RS1963 Not to mention that the U.S.S.R. also possessed biological weapons during the cold war era, so it is quite possible the Soviets used biohazard weapons to fake telekinetic weapons (e.g. stopping a frog's heart) This, of course, is just speculation...

  • @IceAges14Aces Granted not everything was made up. There are somethings that Russia will still not admit that they had or didn't have or do certain things during that time. The same goes for the U.S. as well. Speaking of the Cold War era maybe it should have never ended. In some ways we may have been much safer back then. Than we are now.

  • James Randi shows some signs of being retarded.. the PK experiments with the Russian lady Nina Kulagina were tested over and over again in 100s of controlled scientific experiments (also in glass containers) witnessed by a countless number of scientists.. And his whole argument is based on fishing wire? America really had nothing to worry about in the cold war if the KGBs invested interests were based on some house wife fooling them with fishing wire. ACHEMS RAZOR Randi.. think about it.

  • @DjProducerDanCole Again the tests were very flawed. Scientists if they even really were. do not know how to protect against trickery when it comes to testing so called psychics. The glass cover has been explained over and over again. So the point you are trying to make is a dead one. It was not even viable in the first place.

  • @RS1963 Im sorry? the tests were very flawed?? or did you just make that up as getting all information re the control conditions of the tests is extremely difficult.. My point is Randi behaves completely hypocritically by presuming anything and dismissing something without proper investigation which he has not done.. and the best argument he had was thin wire which didnt even consider all aspects of the supposed trickery in the videos he was debunking.. poor show to say the least.

  • @DjProducerDanCole . I guess there isn't any reason to discuss this with you then is there? No matter what I say you may just want to argue and only see one side.

  • @DjProducerDanCole Also all the films of Nina were made during the cold war. it was all part of the Russian propaganda machine. So that should show you right there that you have no idea on what you are talking about.

  • @RS1963 are u serious?? The Russians had 1000s of Nukes apparently aimed at US targets according to their so called propaganda films.. was this untrue? The USSR had a genuine interest in miss Nina (see interviewed scientists post cold war). Propaganda? most of her biggest critics were Russian tabloids claiming her to be a cheat (without further investigation) same as Randi has done.. The interest came from a buzz in the scientific community about a possible new area of science to study.

  • @DjProducerDanCole @RS1963

    Will you two stop fighting? My head's about to explode, because I don't really know WHAT to believe. I don't have the means (time, money, proper library access) to research where the tests in Russia were published or to recreate the tests. Just because *I* don't know doesn't mean others don't know more than I do. Can these tests be recreated with anyone? Or, does one need a Nina Kulagina (who I assume is dead)?

  • Comment removed

  • @mphello Fighting with who? The person you posted the name of? That conversation was over before it started. Hence the reason you have not seen anymore replies from me to him.

  • Hey.. you stupid james randi, why don't you move objects by your mind in a glass bow or something like her?? So stupid

  • @haolovemaria He debunks people, dumb-ass.

  • @haolovemaria Hey stupid haolovemaria. Why don't you read more of this thread where the cover has been explained?

  • that beard makes this worth watching. 

  • @RS1963 Well, what I know throughout my experimentation with psi-wheels is that convection currents are much more effective in a large glass than a small glass due to the massive air inside compared to the air inside a small glass. I'm not sure if a house where air doesn't go up in the attic has any affect on the psi-wheel, but I'll test that later. Someone called a psi-wheel, "Crooke's Radiometer" but its not really a crooke's radiometer. (see my videos btw)

    Merry Christmas :-)..

  • how to telekeisis youtube.com/watch?v=-J53-MaPDR­M&context=C3fe7f5eADOEgsToPDsk­JmNwy7n3QvKpZ8Wujb2OGN

  • @Sparkol246 The link doesn't work. the video that you have of you and the PSI wheel is very questionable in so many ways.

  • @RS1963 Speaking of psi-wheels, I began experimenting on them and to be honest, I find it incredibly hard to get the wheel spinning via conventional means in my practice under a glass. I've been practicing for 4 days and the wheel didn't move a single inch. I even left it on the closet with the light on all night and it still didn't move, even in the morning. The only way I can move it is by purposely blowing on it or cupping my hands on the glass (Convection)

    What are your thoughts???

  • @IceAges14Aces It would depend quite a bit on how thick the glass is. What the surface is that the mouth of the upside down cover is touching. It could just be that there isn't enough space between the mouth of the cover and the surface to allow for a simple breath to pass underneath. There are other factors too I'm sure that could be entering into it. Now if all of a sudden you get the wheel to move while it's the the location that you have had it all this time... continued

  • @IceAges14Aces Maybe there would be a chance of something else going on. But it wouldn't be enough for me to say you have a gift. Climate issues maybe at work even then. Hard to say for sure but you do bring up an interesting discussion

  • Hatersssssss

  • @NessTherapSolo That was a well thought out and intelligent comment. NOT

  • I have a video response with me replicating this effect under a glass bowl with a ball bearing

  • @commanderrevilo

    They've shown how that's done too

  • yeah, but the program about her said that when she would do such acts she would put lots of mental force into, she also test with objects inside glass boxes? xD

  • you can dress up as santa, but I WON'T sit in your lap and talk about whatever comes up!

  • Well, I am skeptical as well but I'd like to see it be done inside of a glass box. If you already have a video, show me, please.

  • FUCKING IDIOT SHE DID IT UNDER A GLASS BOX

    EXPLAIN THAT?

  • @EnjoyLife4ever1000 what, the girl in the video did?

  • Comment removed

  • @EnjoyLife4ever1000 Read more of this thread the cover has been explained over a hundred times

  • @EnjoyLife4ever1000 If you were as good to read a little bit as you are as good at swearing you wouldn´t need to have it spelled for you

  • @EnjoyLife4ever1000 the vid in the link you sent me is removed.

  • @RS1963 Well-said :).... You truly do understand the nature of skepticism! Exactly! Skepticism is not bigotry, but a position of interrogating, critiquing both sides, and searching for the evidence/truth. A true skeptic doesn't believe in X (just an example) yet the skeptic doesn't say its bullshit unless there is evidence to conclude so. Skepticism is all about the evidence.

  • @RS1963 I know what you mean. I actually read your comments as well as his last week and his contradiction, ambiguity, and vagueness were quite frankly self-evident by the look of his comments. I don't know where he got these far-fetched, vague ideas that tk exist, yet paranormal doesn't, meditation/yoga is harmful, etc. You're right..he is a hypocrite...

  • @22mar79 Care to elaborate on how exactly meditation/yoga is harmful for a human body? I used to practice transcendental meditation and my awareness in the environment dramatically improved. How is that harmful? How do you know TK is a physical phenomena? Where is the evidence??

  • @IceAges14Aces He claims that all religion, or anything spiritual in nature is evil. He went on many rants about that a week ago yesterday to me. I'm not sure he's all there really. He starts off fine but then takes a nose dive into rants that have no logic or even rational.

  • TELEKINESIS is real, but i don't know how the hell james can does that

  • @haolovemaria The same way that Nina K did. It's a trick

  • @haolovemaria He uses a special type of thread that magicians call "invisible thread". It is nearly impossible to see. He has it looped between his fingers and simply pulls the pepper pot towards him. The matches only move because they are being pushed by the pepper pot.

  • @haolovemaria Try it, it's not that difficult. You have to be charged with energy, otherwise you'll have headaches and feel exhausted later. But if you meditate in order to be charged with energy and try it, it can easily happen. It's all a physical phenomena, nothing extraordinary at all. By 'meditate' I don't mean in the classical sense, doing yoga and meditation continuously is harmful for the body, but meditation charges the body with energy, so you can try to move something later.

  • i wish telekinesis is real, but we know its not

  • @Knuckles194 I'm very skeptical but I won't say that it isn't real. I can say I haven't seen any proof of it existing as of yet. Other than that I can't say if it doesn't exist for sure.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @22mar79 If you are so dead set against any Religious or Spiritual activity you wouldn't be proclaiming faith in Yoga, and Meditation. You are as I said a hypocrite. You say one thing yet do another.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @22mar79 How am I being a hypocrite? Oh that's right because I can  prove what I have said. You can't. Also I have not said what if any religious beliefs that I do or don't follow. If I do believe in any faith unlike you I don't say that those who do or don't should die. So again you are in fact a hypocrite. You don't do what you say you do. You do complain about those that do.

  • Comment removed

  • @RS1963 Here in this video, for example, Randi 'explains' how she could move the object on the table when it's not isolated by a bowl or a glass box, but he doesn't 'explain' how she could move it that way, isolated. Check the videos out and see by yourself, he 'explains' only what is 'explainable' according to magicians' own tricks and not the whole of her experiments. There are videos showing things without the need of tricks. Check this out, read the highlighted comments:

    watch?v=aa1_EEShWWU

  • @22mar79 Randi is correct and you are wrong. Pure and simple.

  • @22mar79 Again nothing in that video was real.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @RS1963 And this too:

    watch?v=afkDRq8UHeE

  • @22mar79 Again it is fake. Nina K. and so far all of those like her have been and are fakes. There maybe someone that can really do these things. Here is a hint none of them I repeat NONE OF THEM ARE ON YOU TUBE.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @22mar79 By the way. Have a very Merry Christmas, A Happy Easter,

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @22mar79 Regardless of if you can do any of this or not. You"re not making yourself look good. Just with the calling other people liars who believe in such things doesn't help you either.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @RS1963 Frankly, I don't see how you could agree OR disagree with me on anything: going over your comments, I see you make strong statements against claims of telekinesis and then other posts strongly against James Randi.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed