Does Anyone Believe In Psychics? [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

Cumulonimbus

05-14-2005, 09:24 PM

I believe that humans are born with an intuition - a sixth sense. I think it's greater in some than in others, or others are just too stubborn to realize it. It's the so called "gut feeling" I speak of.

I'm only convinced because of personal experiences. I randomly predicted and drew a Queen of Hearts in front of my whole football team on the first try. The next week, I was telling my girlfriend about that incident, and so just messing around, I tried it again. I felt through the deck with my eyes closed and pulled the six of spades. Then I freaked out and threw the cards everywhere.

Since then, I can't get that feeling I get when I drew those cards. Its like the image appears in your head. I don't know what happened to it or if it was pure luck or not - but I have a strong feeling it wasn't. I've done many other amazing things since then, things usually tested on me by my friends. The funny thing is, I always know when it's gonna work, and I announce that it will. It's that feeling.

But as far as Cleo and other psychics like that, they're full of sh*t.

PairTheBoard

05-14-2005, 10:31 PM

Was anybody else here watching the night years ago when Uri Geller appeared on the Johny Carson Tonight Show?

PairTheBoard

chesspain

05-14-2005, 10:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Was anybody else here watching the night years ago when Uri Geller appeared on the Johny Carson Tonight Show?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hasn't Uri Geller been exposed as being a fraud?

Guthrie

05-14-2005, 10:41 PM

Yes. The supporting evidence is overwhelming. Unfortunately it has to be filtered through all the charlatans.

From my own personal experience:

1. On November 22, 1968 I saw this plane crash:

plane crash (http://www.airliners.net/articles/read.main?id=1)

However, I was about 90 miles away at the time, looking out over Monterey Bay from my window at Ford Ord. I jumped up and called a co-worker over to see the plane crash. She couldn't see anything. Neither could I then, but I told her I clearly saw a four-engine jet make a water landing in the bay. The next morning she put a San Francisco paper on my desk with the story about the plane landing in the bay, at exactly the same time I saw it in another bay 90 miles away.

2. Late eighties, Dallas. I come out of a movie theater, see my car and absolutely know that someone has stolen my hubcaps. I could clearly see two of them as I approached, so I walked around the car and sure enough, the two on the other side were gone. The cops thought I was nuts.

There have been lots of others, but these two stand out.

bluefeet

05-14-2005, 11:19 PM

lol...if you ask my mother? yes.

she claims that when i was home sick as a child, she would play a 'game' where i would guess what card she was holding - with alarming success.

honestly, i don't no that i believe in such things, but i do experience 'deja vu' quite regularly. the funny thing, is that it seems to occur JUST this side of the present. a little scary when it's happening - always ending up dizzy afterword. eh....maybe a brain tumor /images/graemlins/wink.gif

the only true specific example occured in 10th grade health class. we were studying the topic of 'coping with death' when i was struck with an overwhelming feeling that something bad had happened. so much so, that i asked to go to the restroom just to get out of the room. a few minutes after i returned, i was called down to the office. my mother was on the phone telling me one of my best friends was killed in a car accident on his way to (another) school.

weird stuff......

bluefeet

05-14-2005, 11:27 PM

funny you mention the card guessing.....similiar to the game i played as a kid, i have on occasion done this at the casino - where i play quite a bit of blackjack.

i understand where randomness and luck will surely meet, but like you said...when i do actually speak up (rarely) - it's because i actually 'feel' something. it gets quite a rise out of the dealer and other players. nothing like a "8 of clubs" announcement before it hits to stir the table up.

now if i could just perfect this trick, i could quit my day job /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Shakezula

05-14-2005, 11:40 PM

oh, it's no doubt that there are many frauds out there, and some real enough. Too many accounts of such activity reported to dismiss straight off-hand, don't you think? It seems the possibility is there, and who knows?---only using less than 10% of the brain, maybe the other undeveloped percentage holds the key to that type of experience...It's an idea to consider nonetheless, and one not so far-fetched as to be out of reach.

Stuey

05-15-2005, 12:19 AM

I know I am not psychic. I don't know what other people are capable of but I put the odds of anyone being a true psychic to be so slim it is not worth me considering. Sorry and please don't take this as a attack on others it is just what I believe. I have no proof.

I have a card story also. I cheat to cut aces, I palm the ace and can cut as many as I like. I don't do it for money, just to show off to girls at parties and such.

So I'm doing this and people start watching me really close to find out my trick. But they can't figure it out but they know me to well and take the cards away from me. They tell me they will hold them and I have to tell them when the ace is on the top of the deck. So they shuffle them and start taking the top card off and putting it on the bottom. After 10 or 15 cards I say stop thats a ace. And dam if I wasn't right.

They wanted me to do it again but I refused. I told them it is not something I should play with often. It makes me get a sick to my stomach feeling I said. To this day and this is years ago I have retired undefeated. I am never the dealer in our poker games yet I still win more than my share and on those nights I always seem to have a upset stomach. Go figure.

David Sklansky

05-15-2005, 12:52 AM

One of the interesting things about psychics is how altruistic they are. If I was one of them I'd be at the crap table. But they all know that is wrong.

PairTheBoard

05-15-2005, 02:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Was anybody else here watching the night years ago when Uri Geller appeared on the Johny Carson Tonight Show?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hasn't Uri Geller been exposed as being a fraud?

[/ QUOTE ]

Carson is the one who exposed him on his show. Carson insisted on supplying the spoons to bend and watches to fix. Uri suddenly complained about a "lack of power" at that particular moment. It was funny as hell. Geller had fooled researchers at Stanford but he couldn't get over on Carson who had a life long interest in magic. I think Penn and Teller mentioned this on one of their shows.

PairTheBoard

PairTheBoard

05-15-2005, 02:19 AM

I once went to a lecture given by a self proclaimed Satanist seeking disciples for his religion. He claimed he had power over the physical world, could affect the weather and other such things. Afterwards I asked him why he didn't go to Las Vegas and make a fortune directing the dice to do his bidding. He said he'd be happy to give it a try if I'd put up the cash.

PairTheBoard

Al Schoonmaker

05-15-2005, 02:40 AM

There is not one bit of scientifically credible evidence that "psychics" have any power. Read my "ESP is nonsense" at cardplayer.com.

Regards,

Al

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 03:00 AM

Actually, the only using 10% of our brian thing is a myth. If you don't believe me ask a psychologist. Or just think about this, if we only used 10% of our brain then how come 90% of the people who get shot in the head don't recover.

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 03:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There is not one bit of scientifically credible evidence that "psychics" have any power. Read my "ESP is nonsense" at cardplayer.com.

Regards,

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, and I absolutely agree.

BigBaitsim (milo)

05-15-2005, 03:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
oh, it's no doubt that there are many frauds out there, and some real enough. Too many accounts of such activity reported to dismiss straight off-hand, don't you think? It seems the possibility is there, and who knows?---only using less than 10% of the brain, maybe the other undeveloped percentage holds the key to that type of experience...It's an idea to consider nonetheless, and one not so far-fetched as to be out of reach.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use 100% of my brain, as do most people. The 10% figure is nonsense.

Zeno

05-15-2005, 03:25 AM

Johnny Carson was good friends with James Randi (The Amazing Randi) who may have advised him but that is speculation on my part. In the recent issue of Skeptical Inquirer(May/June 2005) James Randi wrote a tribute to Johnny and how sad he felt at Johnny's passing.

As an aside, James Randi wrote an excellent book called Flim-Flam! which exposed Psychics for the frauds they are, along with a number of other popular delusions.

-Zeno

PairTheBoard

05-15-2005, 03:44 AM

Zeno -
"Johnny Carson was good friends with James Randi (The Amazing Randi) who may have advised him but that is speculation on my part."

Yea, that sounds right. Carson may have even mentioned Randi's assistance on the show that night. I can't remember.

Also, I'm not sure Geller actually did fool researchers at Stanford. He may have just convinced people that he had as part of his self promotion.

PairTheBoard

Shakezula

05-15-2005, 06:53 AM

Noone has had a dream of an event taking place and then have it come true a few days later? Has noone ever been able to guess exactly what their spouse was thinking, in some quiet moment together at home away from outside distractions? Has noone ever guessed who was calling on the telephone when it began to ring? Has noone ever had a feeling of certainty that a particular person was coming to visit that same day, then find themselves greeting that same person at their door? Has noone ever had a so-called "vision" or seen images with their eyes closed?

Unfortunately, there are many distorted (and silly) ideas connected with such experiences: as if some people could possess a dark and mysterious power that noone else could possess; as if some people could have supernatural influence over others; as if some could see into the future and foretell dire events to come; as if someone could look into the invisible soul and read a person's mind----jibberish, pure polly-anna nonsense.

Fear of the unknown helps to keep a tight-wrap on psychic experience, so there is no need to worry. Add to that fear, all the foolish ideas that became popular over the years regarding the slightest hint of psychic activity, and we are well under way in burying any potentials that may exist within ourselves as human beings capable of perception.

Personally, having kept a meticulous record of my experiences with...repeating coincidences, after accumulating so much data and finding the proof within the evidence of my own experience, I can hardly dismiss psychic activity as being an illusion, garbage, off-hand coincidence, or a truck-load of cowdung...

The 10% of the brain comment: Laughing, I would say that I guess I shouldn't believe everything I hear or read....

tek

05-15-2005, 07:16 AM

I believe there is something to psychic ability (beyond intuition, which I totally trust in myself).

A few years ago I attended a weekend workshop. It was kind of new age. We did various excercises, one of which was to 'do a reading' for someone at random.

The person I 'read' was actually not at the workshop until that excercise. I did not know him and had not seen him before. He was dressed in regular clothes and had nothing distinguishing about him.

My reading was that he sits in a house with four doorways, but no physical doors. The wind blows through and there is a domed roof on the house.

His comment was that he is into Native American philosophy, and that his dog has a doghouse with a domed roof. His dog had been sick that week and he was worried about him, hence my picking up something abou the dog in my reaing of the guy.

It was pretty wierd, especially since he was giving me funny looks duting the reading. At first I thought I was totally way off...

I can't do stuff like that all the time, but can get good general reads on people and do believe that some people have better developed abilities at this, but not to the extent that they can just do it instantaneously for every person who comes by.

Intuition, on the other hand is something that everyone has the ability to do and develop if they let themselves.

Shakezula

05-15-2005, 07:31 AM

that was very interesting.

to apply it at the game-table would definitely be of some added benefit. of course the fast-pace action isn't exactly the type of environment in which that kind of activity would flourish naturally or easily. still, it could after some amount of time is spent in the same seat, or if one is well accustomed to the fast action and the distractions that are all around.

some people don't believe in any such psychic activity. that's fine, it isn't necessary. some people do feel comfortable or attracted along those interests. that's fine too. everyone is different, and has a different way to approach personal experience. opinions vary; maybe they should, in order to create discussions.
_______________________
"The true brotherhood of man can only be acheived by allowing the freedom of thought, under the banner of cooperation."

chesspain

05-15-2005, 12:56 PM

First, I read this:

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, having kept a meticulous record of my experiences with...repeating coincidences, after accumulating so much data and finding the proof within the evidence of my own experience, I can hardly dismiss psychic activity as being an illusion, garbage, off-hand coincidence, or a truck-load of cowdung...

[/ QUOTE ]

Which was immediately followed by this:

[ QUOTE ]
...I would say that I guess I shouldn't believe everything I hear or read....

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the caveat!

Al Schoonmaker

05-15-2005, 01:14 PM

Your "meticulous records" almost certainly are FAR less meticulous than any scientist would accept. In fact, you don't even understand what scienfific controls are. If you had any understanding of scientific methodology, you would know that a sample size of one means that the results are meaningless. Would you believe that 72o was a winning hand because Harry told you he made money on it and showed you his records?

Dr. Rhine of Duke University was able to fool many people for a long, long time that his research proved the existence of ESP. But the ONLY way he did so was by refusing to use proper controls. Every time the controls improved, the effects became smaller. When the controls were scientifically acceptable, the effects disappeared.

There is a great deal of research supporting the position that ESP is nonsense. There is NO scientifically acceptable research that says it exists. As one cynic put it, "ESP means Error Some Place."

In another thread someone wrote that the controls demanded by Randi were excessive, and that he refused to pay because of a trivial violation of procedures. In science there is no such thing as a "trivial violation." You either do it right, or your results are ignored.

The FDA has the most meticulous proceedures that are politically possible, and it still makes mistakes. You read about them all the time. They use samples of thousands of people, and they still can't guarantee that the drugs we take are effective and harmless.

If you think that your personal records are worthwhile evidence, I urge you to study scientific methodology. It will open your eyes.

Regards,

Al

Zeno

05-15-2005, 02:55 PM

Excellent post Dr. Al.

[ QUOTE ]
I urge you to study scientific methodology. It will open your eyes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well put - but remember Al, seeing the world through half-closed eyes or eyes wide shut or the mist of wishful thinking is so much more comforting.

Which is all the more reason I am glad you are injecting some rationality into this thread. Bravo.

-Zeno

magiluke

05-15-2005, 02:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
One of the interesting things about psychics is how altruistic they are. If I was one of them I'd be at the crap table. But they all know that is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite honestly, when at the craps table, I tend to get gut feelings (which are almost always correct, especially when I am the one throwing), the only thing is that they are after the dice are already thrown, and it's too late to pick up my bet/place a new one.

If only I could train that =D

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 03:13 PM

Or maybe you guys were both at this workshop and you wanted it to be true, so then you took a very vague comment and he made it fit to his life. This seems to be what is really happening, it's like when a psychic says "you have someone in your family with an S in their name that died, right?" Well, of course someone who wants to believe this (like someone who would go to a psychic) will be able to find someone in their family that fits this discription. If the person was really a psychic why wouldn't they say "you had an uncle named Steve that died when he was 49 years old in a car accident."

purnell

05-15-2005, 03:19 PM

Yikes. For real, I had an uncle named Steve who died in a car accident, and he would have been 49 this year. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 03:23 PM

Oh sh*t I must be psychic. I guess I was wrong about psychics being false. I think I should quit playing poker and instead make $$$ off psychic reads. I guess either way I'd be taking money from the poor.

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Jordan Olsommer

05-15-2005, 03:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Was anybody else here watching the night years ago when Uri Geller appeared on the Johny Carson Tonight Show?

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw it, but in a video I downloaded. It was hilarious - James Randi advised the Carson show not to let Geller or his assistants near any of the items before he went on, and surprise surprise, he couldn't bend sh*t when it was time (of course, that didn't stop him from making up all sorts of excuses like "I don't feel strong tonight")

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 03:35 PM

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I gotta see this, where can I watch a copy of this?

Jordan Olsommer

05-15-2005, 03:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]

In another thread someone wrote that the controls demanded by Randi were excessive, and that he refused to pay because of a trivial violation of procedures. In science there is no such thing as a "trivial violation." You either do it right, or your results are ignored.

[/ QUOTE ]

To the best of my knowledge, his "experiments" (or actually, "pre-trials", because to my knowledge nobody has even passed an impromptu test to even qualify to set up a true experiment under proper observing conditions) have been more than reasonable, and not demanding at all (unless a disgruntled psychic chooses to define "demanding" as "demanding that I do what I claim to be able to do").

For example, someone came to him for the Million Dollar Prize claiming that she could see peoples' "auras". Randi asked if she could see his aura, and she said yes, it was bright purple with a yellowish tint around the edges or some such. Then he held a magazine in front of his face and said "can you still see my aura?" and she said that she could see it shining above the magazine. So then, Randi says, if I were standing behind a wall only slightly taller than I am, you'd be able to tell where behind the wall I was standing based on where my aura was?

Needless to say, she promptly left. :P

There are other amusing cases of well-meaning amateurs applying for the million dollar prize (the man who claimed to be able to glow in the dark yet was nothing more than an extremely deluded fellow, or the woman who thought she could communicate telepathically with her goldfish because everytime she ran to one side of the room, the goldfish swam to that side of their tank - Randi put a piece of opaque paper over the tank so the fish couldn't see where the woman was running, and that was the end of that), none of which I have ever read seem to imply that Randi is excessive in his demands (not to mention the fact that there's not a whole hell of a lot of incentive for someone to fudge things when arguing against paranormal phenomena - people don't generally want to believe in a cold, rational world in the first place! It's much more pleasant to believe that John Edward can contact our lost loved ones and let us know that they're doing alright)

So in short, if anyone out there believes in psychics or believes that they have psychic powers, come pick up your million dollars (http://www.randi.org). Otherwise (and I say this with all due respect to those of you who believe in psychics), shut the f*ck up. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Little Fishy

05-15-2005, 04:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I guess

[/ QUOTE ]

Step 1 to becoming psychic replace "guess" with forsee

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 04:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess

[/ QUOTE ]

Step 1 to becoming psychic replace "guess" with forsee

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, I'm gonna need that one, thanks for the advice.

purnell

05-15-2005, 04:15 PM

Whether or not psychic phenomena exist, "STFU" is good advice for those who believe they have psychic abilities. If you have this power, or freedom, or whatever, why would you invite scrutiny? What more could be gained by "proving" yourself to be psychic than that which you can get using your "power"? The downside (scrutiny, reporters, loony groupies, etc.) makes "coming out" as a psychic a bad idea, IMO, and that is why real psychics, if such people exist, are not on TV selling it.

Jordan Olsommer

05-15-2005, 04:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess

[/ QUOTE ]

Step 1 to becoming psychic replace "guess" with forsee

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, I'm gonna need that one, thanks for the advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, the things you forsee have to be a) Very Great Events, and b) given in very vague descriptions /images/graemlins/tongue.gif "I see...a great disaster will come - many will die" Yeah, which one? Take your pick - hurricane, earthquake, famine, flood, blizzard, tornado, plus as a bonus you've got your occasional freak superdisaster like the tsunami that comes every so often; sort of like a psychic jackpot that not only makes what you predicted "correct", but it increases demand for your services to boot!

F'n scumbags.

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 04:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess

[/ QUOTE ]

Step 1 to becoming psychic replace "guess" with forsee

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, I'm gonna need that one, thanks for the advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, the things you forsee have to be a) Very Great Events, and b) given in very vague descriptions /images/graemlins/tongue.gif "I see...a great disaster will come - many will die" Yeah, which one? Take your pick - hurricane, earthquake, famine, flood, blizzard, tornado, plus as a bonus you've got your occasional freak superdisaster like the tsunami that comes every so often; sort of like a psychic jackpot that not only makes what you predicted "correct", but it increases demand for your services to boot!

F'n scumbags.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is great, I am learning the ropes about how to become a psychic. I guess it's one of those things that can be taught/learned.

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Jordan Olsommer

05-15-2005, 04:22 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Whether or not psychic phenomena exist, "STFU" is good advice for those who believe they have psychic abilities. If you have this power, or freedom, or whatever, why would you invite scrutiny? What more could be gained by "proving" yourself to be psychic than that which you can get using your "power"? The downside (scrutiny, reporters, loony groupies, etc.) makes "coming out" as a psychic a bad idea, IMO, and that is why real psychics, if such people exist, are not on TV selling it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree, except that you'd be able to spot psychics a mile away regardless of whether or not they chose to talk to the press - they'd be the multi-billionaires who never fail at anything, ever!

Or of course they could just slide under the radar and keep the power that they have (which could give them anything and everything they could ever want) under wraps. Because, of course, we all know how superb human beings are at being able to deny themselves in such ways....*crickets chirp*

It's like when people talk about how someday time-travel into the past will be possible and wouldn't it be awesome because we could go hang out with Abe Lincoln, yada yada yada. Well if time travel into the past ever gets invented, then why aren't time travelers from the future hanging out with us right now, genius? Maybe we're just not as cool as Abe Lincoln.

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 04:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's like when people talk about how someday time-travel into the past will be possible and wouldn't it be awesome because we could go hang out with Abe Lincoln, yada yada yada. Well if time travel into the past ever gets invented, then why aren't time travelers from the future hanging out with us right now, genius? Maybe we're just not as cool as Abe Lincoln.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Thats a good point, which I never thought of.

Little Fishy

05-15-2005, 04:29 PM

well if the technology for time travel exists in the future than it should also exist right now, because future time travelers would come back and then we'd inevitably get the technology from them and then we'd be able to time travel now, so the better question is "if time travel is going to happen then why aren't we talking to abe lincoln right now?"

Jordan Olsommer

05-15-2005, 04:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]

This is great, I am learning the ropes about how to become a psychic. I guess it's one of those things that can be taught/learned.

LOL /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, James Randi proved that it could be learned. He took a painter from Florida and taught him various charlatan techniques and sent him around the globe under the moniker of "Carlos", the reincarnation of some ancient warrior. And by making extremely vague statements combined with a dash of magicianship (he said that right before he "channeled" Carlos, his heart would stop, so an Australian news team [thinking that they were real Bloodhounds for Science, no doubt] had a nurse keep an eye on his pulse before he "crossed over", and sure enough, there was no pulse right before he transformed. The culprit? A tiny rubber ball that he had underneath the armpit of the arm where the nurse was taking his pulse - Randi taught him how to make no pulse register in that arm simply by squeezing the ball underneath his armpit - he still had an actual heartbeat, of course, just not in that particular arm at that particular moment /images/graemlins/smile.gif), he had the Australian press at least eating out of his pseudo-psychic palm. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

PokerProdigy

05-15-2005, 04:32 PM

Oh my God, this stuff is hilarious, and it just keeps getting better and better.

Shakezula

05-15-2005, 05:17 PM

"Thanks for the caveat!"

Your welcome. It's no problem. I was trying to be humorous afterall, in a self-effacing way.

IMO, it does help to not take everything so serious, although it seems some chords were struck in this thread. It appears that many have opinions about this subject, some who agree and some who disagree. It is fortunate that we have such a variety, otherwise we may grow complacent and bored, become filled to the brim with assumptions and preconceived notions, lose curiosity and wonder amidst the unending activity of nature and the world in which we live, find no self-fulfillment or joy in our individual lives, or maybe even feel that life has no other meaning or purpose beyond the obvious particulars of the day. To seek answers would be beside the point, if we all agreed on everything. We would pat ourselves on the back as we congratulate ourselves on knowing what we know. No mystery or wonder could exist if we all know everything already. Humorously I would say that curiosity killed the cat, as the saying goes; fortunately, it has nine other lives in which to try again...

mostsmooth

05-15-2005, 07:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
well if the technology for time travel exists in the future than it should also exist right now, because future time travelers would come back and then we'd inevitably get the technology from them and then we'd be able to time travel now, so the better question is "if time travel is going to happen then why aren't we talking to abe lincoln right now?"

[/ QUOTE ]
i dont believe time travel will ever be possible, but the current theory is that time travelers cant travel back past the point in time the time machine was created. if theres on created in 2008, they cant go back to 2007, we have to wait to get to 2008 to start seeing people from the future.

magiluke

05-15-2005, 09:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i dont believe time travel will ever be possible, but the current theory is that time travelers cant travel back past the point in time the time machine was created. if theres on created in 2008, they cant go back to 2007, we have to wait to get to 2008 to start seeing people from the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just curious where this fairly wierd theory comes from. It just doesn't make sense; do you have any facts that you are basing this on, or is it just your imagination?

Also, time travel doesn't actually need a 'time machine' to work. There are various theories that I've read about involving wormholes/manipulating spacetime. I'd cite the books/webpages that I read them from, but I can't remember anything other than 'The Physics of Star Trek" (very neat book).

mostsmooth

05-15-2005, 09:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i dont believe time travel will ever be possible, but the current theory is that time travelers cant travel back past the point in time the time machine was created. if theres on created in 2008, they cant go back to 2007, we have to wait to get to 2008 to start seeing people from the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just curious where this fairly wierd theory comes from. It just doesn't make sense; do you have any facts that you are basing this on, or is it just your imagination?

Also, time travel doesn't actually need a 'time machine' to work. There are various theories that I've read about involving wormholes/manipulating spacetime. I'd cite the books/webpages that I read them from, but I can't remember anything other than 'The Physics of Star Trek" (very neat book).

[/ QUOTE ]
maybe i should have said a current theory
im pretty sure i read about this in one of my books
i may or may not look it up

mostsmooth

05-15-2005, 10:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i dont believe time travel will ever be possible, but the current theory is that time travelers cant travel back past the point in time the time machine was created. if theres on created in 2008, they cant go back to 2007, we have to wait to get to 2008 to start seeing people from the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just curious where this fairly wierd theory comes from. It just doesn't make sense; do you have any facts that you are basing this on, or is it just your imagination?

Also, time travel doesn't actually need a 'time machine' to work. There are various theories that I've read about involving wormholes/manipulating spacetime. I'd cite the books/webpages that I read them from, but I can't remember anything other than 'The Physics of Star Trek" (very neat book).

[/ QUOTE ]
you can see what im talking about in "time travel in einsteins universe" by j.richard gott, pg.107-109. talks about "cauchy horizons" blah blah blah
the book is from 2001, but im guessing not much has changed in the field of time travel since then. also, its probably a beginner book, but what the hell do i know
the book talks about all types of ideas for time travel, including the wormhole ideas

magiluke

05-15-2005, 10:46 PM

That's cool, I was just curious; it's a theory I haven't heard before. I'll have to check it out... Thanks...

reubenf

05-15-2005, 10:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I'm just curious where this fairly wierd theory comes from. It just doesn't make sense; do you have any facts that you are basing this on, or is it just your imagination?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably sci-fi. I've thought of it myself. I've thought, maybe you have to build a time machine to come back to. So you can't go back in time to a time before you built the "arrival" end of the time machine.

Of course I thought it in relation to fiction, not with any delusions of basis in reality. This was when I was 14, right after I promised myself that if I ever had access to a time machine, I'd go back to -right that instant- to tell myself about it if that was possible. I waited a few seconds, and when the future me did not appear, I concluded that either I would never have access to a time machine, or it would not be possible to go back to that particular time/space.

tek

05-16-2005, 10:53 AM

He was known by others who saw him at previous workshops who corroberated my reading. As I stated, I did not know him previously.

And yes, unfortunately for him my reading did not give any guidance or useful information. But from a poker playing perspective, finding a way to hone this into making good reads on people at the table is all I care about. I'm not going to apply for a job with the psychic friends network. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Jordan Olsommer

05-16-2005, 01:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

My reading was that he sits in a house with four doorways, but no physical doors. The wind blows through and there is a domed roof on the house.

His comment was that he is into Native American philosophy, and that his dog has a doghouse with a domed roof. His dog had been sick that week and he was worried about him, hence my picking up something abou the dog in my reaing of the guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless he sits in his doghouse, and unless his doghouse has four doors for some reason (maybe the dog needs a way to escape when the cops come around or something), this is another case (albeit a relatively remarkable one) of the person sort of fashioning what the reader says into something that makes sense to their lives.

"Professional" psychics like that idiot John Edward (I've never really thought intensely about whether I believe in the death penalty or not, but if I did, he would be my strongest argument in favor of it) do this all the time. They say something that is incredibly general, like "He keeps telling me something about 'being coached', how he was always 'being coached'" and then the person who is "receiving" this reading searches through their memories and inevitably finds something that fits the scenario (who hasn't been coached at one point or another? Sports teams, teachers, mentors - you show me someone who's never been coached, and then I'll be impressed) and leave the reading saying things like "wow, he totally knew how much my dad's teacher meant to him in seventh grade", when all he did was make a statement which if you look at it closely, is very generalized.

Like I said, your case is relatively remarkable because the BS-artists who claim to be psychics would never say something this specific because, well, then someone would be able to call them on their BS /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

I think if there were something to psychic ability (or alien encounters, or crystal energy vortices or whatever the hell the new agers are trying to sell), it would show up with evidence and not just anecdote. For instance, why do psychics always fumble on the names of deceased loved ones? He just said he's "got her right here beside me", and now she won't tell you her name? She'll only give you a few letters, or a syllable, and even that might not be correct?? What the....argh.....alright, that's it - JOHN EDWARD, RIDE THE LIGHTNING!

*zap*

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Shakezula

05-16-2005, 02:24 PM

I agree that Mr Edwards is the biggest "douche in the universe". And I agree that statements of generalities do not prove anything. The manner in which for example Tarot card are read is nearly the same as a mulitple choice question with three possible answers, with none of the answers being wrong. One of the them will apply to anyone at any given time. I dislike the idea behind them for that reason, even though it may be possible for someone with a dash of intuition to hone their ability to "read" a person and/or their situation. Still, I think it is too much guess-work involved. But a tool nonetheless; a silly one to me, what with all that nonsense about swords and hanging men and a bunch of cups. Definitely old school. Very old school.

peachy

05-16-2005, 08:21 PM

yes i do...cause ive had a few things happen to me a number of times that cant be explained any other way

there r too many parts of our mind that r untapped to rule this out

DiceyPlay

05-16-2005, 09:03 PM

Have you ever seen psychic detectives on TLC or TDC? Do you think that's fabricated for entertainment or conspiracy? Is it possible there's something out there that doesn't pass double reverse blind correlation testing but still exists? I sure don't know, but I'm not willing to state it doesn't exist just because it can't be replicated in a controlled environment. May be it can't exist is a controlled environment - somewhat like the heisenberg(sp) uncertainty principle; you can't know where a sub-atomic particle is and how fast it's going at the same time.

But I think dead people night give off a lot more vibe then plastic cards - even though I haven't tested that. And they are both dead.

Just food for thought - hopefully.

-DP

PokerProdigy

05-16-2005, 09:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They say something that is incredibly general, like "He keeps telling me something about 'being coached', how he was always 'being coached'" and then the person who is "receiving" this reading searches through their memories and inevitably finds something that fits the scenario (who hasn't been coached at one point or another? Sports teams, teachers, mentors - you show me someone who's never been coached, and then I'll be impressed) and leave the reading saying things like "wow, he totally knew how much my dad's teacher meant to him in seventh grade", when all he did was make a statement which if you look at it closely, is very generalized.

I think if there were something to psychic ability (or alien encounters, or crystal energy vortices or whatever the hell the new agers are trying to sell), it would show up with evidence and not just anecdote. For instance, why do psychics always fumble on the names of deceased loved ones? He just said he's "got her right here beside me", and now she won't tell you her name? She'll only give you a few letters, or a syllable, and even that might not be correct?? What the....argh.....alright, that's it - JOHN EDWARD, RIDE THE LIGHTNING!

*zap*

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly

Shakezula

05-16-2005, 10:10 PM

I don't think that psychics can't speak to the recently deceased. After careful consideration, I think that any who make such claims are however providing a service, albeit a misleading one, to those who are still feeling pain from their loss, who are worried and filled with doubts and remorse, and still clinging to the memories of their dearly departed. To give to them some closure with their past relationships, and to help them begin the grieving process and come to terms with their loss---people even pay to have this done for them. It is very unfortunate that those who have had to face the death of someone close to them are taken advantage of during their despair and loss, but it may do some small amount good in the end. The people who have these false "readings" do feel better afterwards, and maybe that is enough to help them begin to heal from their loss.

PokerProdigy

05-16-2005, 10:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that psychics can't speak to the recently deceased. After careful consideration, I think that any who make such claims are however providing a service, albeit a misleading one, to those who are still feeling pain from their loss, who are worried and filled with doubts and remorse, and still clinging to the memories of their dearly departed. To give to them some closure with their past relationships, and to help them begin the grieving process and come to terms with their loss---people even pay to have this done for them. It is very unfortunate that those who have had to face the death of someone close to them are taken advantage of during their despair and loss, but it may do some small amount good in the end. The people who have these false "readings" do feel better afterwards, and maybe that is enough to help them begin to heal from their loss.

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew it, you're John Edwards /images/graemlins/grin.gif

P.S. I guess what ever helps you sleep at night John

Jordan Olsommer

05-16-2005, 10:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever seen psychic detectives on TLC or TDC?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I think that show idea is quite possibly a new low for humanity.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that's fabricated for entertainment or conspiracy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's pretty much fabricated for entertainment. But this is to be expected - who is going to watch a show called "Psychics Failing Miserably at Helping Detectives"? People prefer to believe in that sort of crap.

[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible there's something out there that doesn't pass double reverse blind correlation testing but still exists?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, but just because it hasn't passed your "double secret probation" test doesn't mean that that must mean it does exist.

[ QUOTE ]
I sure don't know, but I'm not willing to state it doesn't exist just because it can't be replicated in a controlled environment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, not only do we not have one shred of evidence that it does exist aside from anecdote (which is inadmissable in science), but it has failed over and over and over and over and over again when you try to do it in a controlled environment. Why does it fail? I guess that would be up to the psychic apologists to say (maybe peoples' otherwise-functioning psychoflexitive powers get short-circuited by the presence of white lab coats). Why do people still continue to believe in it, despite the fact that no psychic has ever done better than chance? Well, because it's pleasant, that's why. It's lovely to believe that we contact our lost loved ones. But that's just not the case - psychics can't tell anything more about dead people they don't know than chance would suggest, Uri Geller was a fraud, "pet psychics" can't even tell you what your pet's name is (which would be the one word if any that is lodged in your dog's little doggie-brain) and the "psychic detectives" are just wasting my (and your) tax money (not to mention the police force's time, which in a kidnapping or serial killing case, is kinda sorta...valuable?)

[ QUOTE ]
May be it can't exist is a controlled environment - somewhat like the heisenberg(sp) uncertainty principle

[/ QUOTE ]

But Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle does exist in a controlled environment - how do you think they validated it in the first place?

[ QUOTE ]
But I think dead people night give off a lot more vibe then plastic cards - even though I haven't tested that. And they are both dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got me there - maybe all the maggots rooting around inside their corpses give off a small amount of heat, so I guess the final score would be dead humans - a little, plastic cards - 0.

Here are a couple of quotes I think might be informative in this case:

"In any high-profile murder case or disappearance, the psychics will come crawling out of the woodwork. On a number of occasions, I've tried to work with psychics, just to test them, and see whether they added anything useful to a case perhaps whose outcome I already knew. And every time I've been sadly disappointed and found they were not helpful at all. The psychics were no better than chance, they offered nothing useful to the investigations. We often used to think 'well, maybe it's not harmful at all'. But the truth of the matter is, if investigators get derailed by this stuff and go off on some wild goose chase, then what ends up happening is perhaps the offender has the opportunity to offend again, and perhaps kill somebody else."
- Dr. Chris Mohandi, Police Psychologist

"When my daughter was missing, numerous individuals came forth, said they were psychic detectives, said they had a history of having found children, and offered to help find my child...I mean, I was a desperate parent, I would do anything to get my child back, and those are the fears that they prey on. They know that people are grasping for straws, and they put a hand out and offer the straw. So it was great for a little while, because we thought that maybe this was finally the break that was going to close the case. But it never happened! Not only did it never happen in our case, it never happened in any case! No psychic detective has ever recovered a missing child. You will find no cop in America who will tell you that the case was finally broken by the prediction of a 'psychic detective'."
- Mark Class, father of kidnapping victim Paulie Class

Harmless my ass.

Shakezula

05-16-2005, 11:04 PM

oops---change that first line to: I dont think that psychics can speak to the deceased. Or, I think that they can't. (Too much editing of my posts, trying to write clearly and such, caused me to put a double-negative in my sentence structure, which I would never do. I hope it wasn't a Freudian slip however. Of course they cannot speak to the deceased. The dead have enough to do if there is such a thing as the afterlife, which I think there is. Too much to do than spooking with some silly fraud. Man, I hope that wasn't a Freudian slip. I gotta go do some heavy self-analysis if it was...)

ERHutchison

05-16-2005, 11:26 PM

It is fair to say that ESP (or any other anomalistic phenomena) must be verified by disinterested experimenters, using carefully constructed tests, before it will have any broad academic or scientific acceptance. And this, despite well publicized claims to the contrary, has never been done.

There is a well accepted scientific principle that, when reduced to its essence, states that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." If, for example, you tell me that you have a dog for a pet, I would regard that as a rather commonplace arrangement and would be willing to accept this statement without too much proof--perhaps a photo of you and Fido together would suffice. But, if you should tell me that you have a unicorn at home, I would consider that a rather remarkable claim, and would want to go to your home and feel the horn or otherwise subject your claim to a great deal of scrutiny. We are always justified in requiring absolute proof when people make extraordinary claims.

Parapsychology has never offered this type of proof and, consequently, it enjoys very little esteem among academicians and scholars, most of whom view it as a pseudoscience.

Paraphrasing Voltaire: "The first psychic was the first rogue who met the first fool."

I have written a book explaining how so-called psychics perform their "tricks." The interested reader can check it out at: http://ehutchison.homestead.com/Northpointe.html

Edward Hutchison

Jordan Olsommer

05-16-2005, 11:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think that any who make such claims are however providing a service, albeit a misleading one

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny how you never hear anybody say that about a plumber who didn't do his job.

ERHutchison

05-17-2005, 12:23 AM

Alan Schoonmaker's article is a great summary of this topic:

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/printarticle.php?a_id=13168

Jman28

05-17-2005, 01:25 AM

I thought the question was whether or not you believe in 'physics' and I was gonna laugh at you.

Now that I learned to read, I can't laugh.

DiceyPlay

05-18-2005, 02:01 AM

I didn't say I believe ... read my post again dummy.

I'm not willing to dismiss something simply because it's existence hasn't been proven.

There's no hard evidence of extra-terrestrial life. Are you ready to say it doesn't exist? What about the Drake equation?

I'm using the heisenberg uncertainty principle as a metaphor where something happens that is unforseen, remarkable and unintuitive.

May be the sixth sense can't exist in controlled environment. I don't know PERIOD.

But I guess you're superman and know everything and this is just so trivial and obvious for you.

Good luck.

MicroBob

05-18-2005, 02:25 AM

When I go to New Orleans there are many psychics at Jackson Square who will tell you your fortune for $20 or something.

So yes....i believe in psychics. I've seen them.

I don't know if they can really tell your future though.

More seriously - I've had my fair share of experiences (deja-vu's, etc) and I also believe that there are areas of the human-mind we can only begin to fathom.
Some may have a better ability to tap into those areas more than others.

I don't believe that Phil Hellmuth is psychic though (as he seems to claim in different parts of his Bad Beats and other stories book or whatever it's called).

I also don't believe that he can see into my soul.

However....if Mason said that he was able to see into my soul I would believe him.

Jordan Olsommer

05-18-2005, 03:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not willing to dismiss something simply because it's existence hasn't been proven.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither am I, but I'm not willing to give credence to someone arguing that something exists because it hasn't been proven not to. That's ridiculous. And if you don't think so, then you're essentially saying you're not willing to dismiss the argument of someone who claims that a cabal of unicorns who hide behind the sun are the ones who really control everything in the universe. Is it possible? Sure - we don't know everything. Does that mean we give credence to someone who argues something like that (or like ESP) with no supporting evidence? Of course not. To do otherwise would be to become tolerant to the point of complete and utter meaninglessness.

[ QUOTE ]

There's no hard evidence of extra-terrestrial life. Are you ready to say it doesn't exist? What about the Drake equation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny you should ask that, because I just watched the episode of "Cosmos" that has to do with this exact topic. Allow me to fire up the DVD again and give you Carl Sagan's own words on this topic:

"There are still people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, or even sexually abused or even impregnated by them. Best selling, purportedly serious books have been written about such claims. But the critical fact remains that all we have still is just anecdote - there are no close-up photographs, no artifacts, nothing that would convince a skeptic. All there are are stories. And stories just aren't good enough on a matter of this importance. I'm still waiting for hard evidence."

To most people, saying "extraterrestrial life doesn't exist" is essentially the same as saying "there has been no evidence found supporting the existence of extraterrestrial life." This is mostly for concision, and it's generally accepted because the burden of proof is on someone who believes in the psychics or the UFOs, not me - if some supportive evidence comes in, I'll change it to "there is some evidence in support of ESP, but nothing conclusive" or something similar. Until then, it doesn't exist.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm using the heisenberg uncertainty principle as a metaphor where something happens that is unforseen, remarkable and unintuitive.

[/ QUOTE ]

You used it to compare to psychics, saying that maybe they, like the Uncertainty Principle, can't work in a controlled environment. First off, like I said in my reply, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle can only be seen in a controlled environment (you can't really hurl particles into each other at high speeds in the middle of a field with a chemistry set; you need a cyclotron, and thus a controlled environment). Secondly, I'm assuming now that you've attempted to clarify this that you mean psychic phenomena are like Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in a different way; namely that if you try to observe them, they go away. Wonderful. Except for one little thing - there's a reason why the act of observing a particle "destroys" information; because the only way to observe a particle is to basically hit it with another particle! Nothing magical or mystical happens to account for this information loss; its a direct consequence of the method you use to measure a particle's location or momentum. How could you possibly compare this to psychics? What, does lab air conditioning hit their psychic-rays at 180-degree angles and neutralize them?

In other words, think about it scientifically instead of in a mealy-mouthed "hey, anything can happen" way of using words but still saying nothing: If psychics can't perform in a lab, why can't they perform somewhere else? Why couldn't they perform if it was a scientist going incognito to one of John Edwards's show tapings? What's the argument then - that the scientist was giving off Evil Scientist Rays which neutralized John Edwards's Talking To Dead People Powers?

Your analogy just smacks of Modern Physics Abuse Syndrome (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=478071) to me.

[ QUOTE ]

May be the sixth sense can't exist in controlled environment. I don't know PERIOD.

But I guess you're superman and know everything and this is just so trivial and obvious for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

All I'm asking you to do is use your common sense! ask questions! OK, let's look at the scenario again: John Edwards's Super-Duper Dead Person Psychic Hotline seems to operate in his studio, but doesn't work anymore once you get into a controlled environment. Well, what changed to cause it to stop working? The environment? OK fine, let's do the test in his studio. Oops, still doesn't work. What's still changed? The presence of the scientists? OK fine, we'll take the scientists away and do the study double-blind. Nope, still not working. What's still different? Ah, it's that the people he's trying to read are complete strangers. Now let's give him some people he has a tiny bit of knowledge about, and let's give him a lot of those people in one room so that when he says "I'm getting a 'J'....'J'?" he's bound to hit something. Hey, whaddayaknow? His powers are working again! Who woulda thunk it? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

See? That took two minutes, and it didn't require any superhuman abilities whatsoever - just the application of common sense.

CORed

05-18-2005, 06:54 PM

I think that the fact that casinos, racetracks and sportsbooks are profitable is pretty good evidence that psychic powers don't exist, or are extremely rare if they do.

David Sklansky

05-19-2005, 04:06 AM

"I think that the fact that casinos, racetracks and sportsbooks are profitable is pretty good evidence that psychic powers don't exist, or are extremely rare if they do."

Although there are fancier arguments, this one should suffice.

PokerProdigy

05-19-2005, 09:54 AM

Jordan Olsommer

05-19-2005, 07:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
One of the interesting things about psychics is how altruistic they are. If I was one of them I'd be at the crap table. But they all know that is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just it - if a "psychic" were at all altruistic, he'd be at the crap table winning millions for starving kids!

On a related note, crap table? Psh. If I were psychic, you'd find me at the keno counter. Much more efficient /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Cumulonimbus

05-20-2005, 02:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
"I think that the fact that casinos, racetracks and sportsbooks are profitable is pretty good evidence that psychic powers don't exist, or are extremely rare if they do."
Although there are fancier arguments, this one should suffice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is good evidence that scam artists like Cleo and others are not psychic. But it does not account for those out there who have experienced psychic revelations, for these people know that it's something they cannot control. They cannot predict everything, only certain "random" events - these events usually don't include what horse is going to win a race or what the lucky lottery number will be. So, what you say is evidence leading to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a "perfect psychic." But it's almost ludicrous to believe in such a being anyways. Your "evidence" does not disprove the existance of real day-to-day psychic intuition.

Jordan Olsommer

05-20-2005, 02:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
They cannot predict everything, only certain "random" events - these events usually don't include what horse is going to win a race or what the lucky lottery number will be.

[/ QUOTE ]

So wait - they get credit for every prediction that they make that comes true, and they get to throw out all their incorrect ones too? Truly miraculous. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

That's a great one: "I am a psychic, but stuff just comes to me randomly and sometimes it's wrong and it's completely incompatible with lottery numbers, horse races, or anything else where there's a clear right and clear wrong answer."

[ QUOTE ]
So, what you say is evidence leading to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a "perfect psychic."

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd settle for one who could predict things with a greater accuracy than chance, personally.

[ QUOTE ]
But it's almost ludicrous to believe in such a being anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Almost as ludicrous as a "psychic" who gets to pick and choose which predictions she's made that actually get counted.

Cumulonimbus

05-20-2005, 05:10 AM

There's no "picking and choosing" when there's nothing to be gained from it for the psychic. I can attest because I really don't care when I do some of the amazing things I've done using my intuition. I don't like the attention, plus most people are skeptics anyways. So what is there to be gained by claiming I'm a psychic?

Plus, you're completely ignoring some of the older posts about this intuition. I, as well as others, know when we're going to get something right before it happens. That's the intuition. It's not like we randomly guess and get things right because of variance. I wouldn't be wasting my time posting on this forum if that were the case. If you don't believe in it, that's fine - just shut up. It's a concept that is obviously hard to explain to someone who cannot experience it for themselves.

bernie

05-20-2005, 05:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There is not one bit of scientifically credible evidence that "psychics" have any power. Read my "ESP is nonsense" at cardplayer.com.

Regards,

Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Psychics? I agree. But I think there is something to intuition. It's just that it can't be harnessed. It's spontaneous. Sometimes someone can sense something happening somewhere or whatever.

Then again, much of it is likely the subconcious doing the probability problem of some sort without one conciously knowing it's perfoming that task.

But also, Im sure not all the possible evidence has been presented. Im not sure you can put intuition in a mathematical form if one is to explain it.

Somethings can't be explained any other way and no scientific evidence has explained it otherwise either.

b

Jordan Olsommer

05-20-2005, 05:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There's no "picking and choosing" when there's nothing to be gained from it for the psychic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except media exposure, maybe a book deal or two, contact work "helping" the police, or just your friends' thinking that you're cool.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the attention, plus most people are skeptics anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horsesh*t. The average person laps this psychic crap up.

[ QUOTE ]
I, as well as others, know when we're going to get something right before it happens. That's the intuition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome. Pick up your free million dollars here (http://www.randi.org/).

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't believe in it, that's fine - just shut up.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[ QUOTE ]
It's a concept that is obviously hard to explain to someone who cannot experience it for themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah funny how it never works in a controlled environment - the more we try to see it, the more elusive it becomes, like trying to grasp a wet bar of soap. There are two possibilities for why it is impossible to get "psychics" to get their powers to work in a controlled setting: either a) psychic powers are so incredibly mysterious as to violate every single natural physical law that we know of (thus guaranteeing the first person to ever prove that they had this ability at least a Nobel Prize); or b), it's bullsh*t.

Gee. I wonder which one is more likely.

PokerProdigy

05-20-2005, 09:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's no "picking and choosing" when there's nothing to be gained from it for the psychic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except media exposure, maybe a book deal or two, contact work "helping" the police, or just your friends' thinking that you're cool.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the attention, plus most people are skeptics anyways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Horsesh*t. The average person laps this psychic crap up.

[ QUOTE ]
I, as well as others, know when we're going to get something right before it happens. That's the intuition.

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome. Pick up your free million dollars here (http://www.randi.org/).

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't believe in it, that's fine - just shut up.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[ QUOTE ]
It's a concept that is obviously hard to explain to someone who cannot experience it for themselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah funny how it never works in a controlled environment - the more we try to see it, the more elusive it becomes, like trying to grasp a wet bar of soap. There are two possibilities for why it is impossible to get "psychics" to get their powers to work in a controlled setting: either a) psychic powers are so incredibly mysterious as to violate every single natural physical law that we know of (thus guaranteeing the first person to ever prove that they had this ability at least a Nobel Prize); or b), it's bullsh*t.

Gee. I wonder which one is more likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly /images/graemlins/grin.gif

This is what I've been talking about all along.