forestofemptiness Posted November 11, 2010 (edited) Here's an article to excite the believers and to be dismissed by skeptics: Backward Memory Study The paper Edited November 11, 2010 by forestofemptiness Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted November 12, 2010 I once read a cool book called Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point (or something like that) by an Australian scientist of some sort. It talked about the symmetry of time and how most experience and measurement of asymmetry relative to time may be more a function of our perception rather than any absolute asymmetry. Very interesting stuff and similar to this paper. Then there are the experiments that seem to show that our neuro/musculo/skeletal system takes action before we are ever consciously aware that we've decided to act. For all of our knowledge and investigation, there will always be mystery. And BTW, I try to maintain a healthy skepticism. Nice post forest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sloppy Zhang Posted November 12, 2010 There's some interesting psi research stuff out there. However, from most of what I've seen, it seems to be done by analyzing large groups of people. So most of the time, on an individual level, there isn't much more outside regular chance that's occurring, but when you consider how often and how many people are doing "just a bit more" than what chance would allow, it seems like something is happening a bit more massively. Of course, skeptics can and do argue (and I figure, rightly so) that a lot can be said for the manipulation of numbers and how you present the data. But there are lots of good counter arguments for the supporters and why the calculations are all valid. I believe that it is possible. However, that's exactly why I remain skeptical, because it's VERY easy to WANT to believe something so much, that you see it even when it isn't there. Attached is an interesting set of articles I came across a while ago. The first is a meta-analysis showing how psi effects can be present. The second is a response to the first article from a skeptical viewpoint that is critical of the firs one's findings, and the third section is a response to that response, addressing those criticisms. psi scientific article.pdf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goonis38 Posted November 12, 2010 Hey there, I know this... There are all different types of God given gifts. Everyone that has one is not a fortune teller. Some have other gifts... We can't just lump everything up into one pill and make it work... People that have gifts tend to hide them and feel different and weird, and that people are going to make fun of them. Call them crazy, or just plain weird. This has been going on since the witch burnings. 'PEOPLE HATE WHAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND" and thats a fact, we on this forum understand this. We are all a little different than the so called normal people... I decides a long time ago, I don't want to be normal, they can keep there normal and be happy with there heads stuck in that sand... I myself, I'm going to look, and learn, and try and understand what I am to understand... And you don't have to push these things, they just come naturally. What is unnatural is holding your self back for 20 years like I did. Because I thought I was weird or different and some how I was wrong for that... At almost 40, I have learned to love myself... And life is an adventure, you never know whats down the next rabbit hole as the original poster of this thread was talking about "Alice and Wonderland" Great movie and true lesson for a lot of us... Take care all Melanie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forestofemptiness Posted November 13, 2010 (edited) These experiments were designed to be simple and easily reproducible exactly because of this. There's some interesting psi research stuff out there. However, from most of what I've seen, it seems to be done by analyzing large groups of people. So most of the time, on an individual level, there isn't much more outside regular chance that's occurring, but when you consider how often and how many people are doing "just a bit more" than what chance would allow, it seems like something is happening a bit more massively. Of course, skeptics can and do argue (and I figure, rightly so) that a lot can be said for the manipulation of numbers and how you present the data. But there are lots of good counter arguments for the supporters and why the calculations are all valid. section is a response to that response, addressing those criticisms. Edited November 13, 2010 by forestofemptiness Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
