Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are visions from God, or the Devil or indigestion?
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 31 of 41 (36716)
04-10-2003 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Peter
04-09-2003 8:55 AM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
I understand there's a phenomenon called the "Ganzfeld"(sp?) effect where people experiencing sensory deprevation have greater-than-chance success at "recieving" pictures and messages mentally from senders in the next room who concentrate really hard.
Of course it smacks of pseudoscience so it's hard to attract funding. Plus no one's been able to put forth any kind of mechanism or explanation for the effect. But it's certainly not "talking to the dead", or reading minds, or any John Edwards stuff.
Just what I've heard, anyway.
------------------
Epimenedes Signature: This is not a signature.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Peter, posted 04-09-2003 8:55 AM Peter has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by NosyNed, posted 04-10-2003 8:49 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 35 by nator, posted 04-15-2003 9:05 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 32 of 41 (36728)
04-10-2003 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by crashfrog
04-10-2003 6:12 PM


Ganzfield
You may want to peruse this site for information on this effect.
Page not found | Skeptical Inquirer

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by crashfrog, posted 04-10-2003 6:12 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 33 of 41 (37072)
04-15-2003 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Peter
04-09-2003 8:55 AM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
quote:
I'm not sure that some of your comments cannot
be reflected back.
?
quote:
I am sure that not ALL who claim to be psychic have undergone
laboratory assessments,
I am sure of this, too, despite there being a $1,000,000 prize to anyone demonstrating their stated abilities under standard wxperimental protocols.
quote:
so the best that can be said
(dispasionately) is that such individuals do something
which we do not entirely understand at present.
No, it is often very well-understood if examined critically. They are observed in the act of cold-reading. Their subjects remember the hits and disregard the misses, and also feed the cold-reader information which helps them. It is a very-well understood phenomena that illusionists and magicians have used for a long time, and charlatans and the self-deluded have also used for a long time.
Just because every single self-proclaimed psychic has not been tested doesn't mean they are all self-deluded or frauds. However, the fact that not a single one who has been tested has been able to do what they said they could do, combined with the fact that cold-reading can appear as psychic ability when controls are not in place, tends to weigh heavily against the idea that psychic ability is real.
See this for more information:
cold reading - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
Error 404 - Australian Skeptics Inc
quote:
Have you, for instance, heard of remote viewing ... several
government agencies have active programmes in these areas
(allegedly).
Yes, I have heard of remote viewing, and it has not been demonstrated to be a real phenomena under controlled conditions.
Governments are filled with politicians, not scientists nor skeptical thinkers, so it does not surprise me that some would be attracted to RV.
See this for more info:
remote viewing - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Peter, posted 04-09-2003 8:55 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Peter, posted 04-22-2003 5:30 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 34 of 41 (37073)
04-15-2003 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Jesuslover153
04-10-2003 3:06 PM


That's more evidence that doctors are not scientists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Jesuslover153, posted 04-10-2003 3:06 PM Jesuslover153 has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 35 of 41 (37074)
04-15-2003 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by crashfrog
04-10-2003 6:12 PM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
quote:
I understand there's a phenomenon called the "Ganzfeld"(sp?) effect where people experiencing sensory deprevation have greater-than-chance success at "recieving" pictures and messages mentally from senders in the next room who concentrate really hard.
There are lots of problems with the Ganzfield experiments:
ganzfeld - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
quote:
Of course it smacks of pseudoscience so it's hard to attract funding.
It's not pseudoscience, exactly. It's more like sloppy science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by crashfrog, posted 04-10-2003 6:12 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 36 of 41 (37528)
04-22-2003 5:30 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by nator
04-15-2003 8:58 AM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
The 'reflected back part' was a reference to your
immediate 'It's not real' response. You say things
like 'How do you know?' which is equally well directed
back to you as a question of whether or not you know otherwise.
Yes I know about cold-reading, and have observed it first hand.
I have also seen self-proclaimed mediums drawing complete
blanks from audience members, and then found non-targetted
audience members who admit afterward that the refernces
seemed familiar to them. (Coincidence maybe, who knows?)
Since there is little well performed research in the area,
all I am saying is that we cannot have sufficient information
at present to make the determination.
Just because we are taught that something is (or isn't) the
case, doesn't mean it is ... does it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by nator, posted 04-15-2003 8:58 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Quetzal, posted 04-22-2003 6:34 AM Peter has replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 37 of 41 (37531)
04-22-2003 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Peter
04-22-2003 5:30 AM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
Peter,
Although I agree that "absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence", on the other hand it provides no support for the claim, either. Anecdotal evidence or testimony - as you well know from your posts on this board on creationist nonsense, for instance - is insufficient in and of itself to validate a claim. Especially a claim about capabilities and energies for which there is no other empirical support, and which tend to disappear under controlled conditions, or apparently even in the presence of skeptics like stage magicians.
Reading your exchange with Schraf, I don't think she's dogmatically asserting that the capabilities DON'T exist. After all, as Shakespeare put it, "there are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamed of in your philosophy". She IS, however, stating that the evidence thus far provides no support for the claim of their existence. It isn't up to the skeptic to disprove a claim such as remote viewing. It's up to the advocates to provide unambiguous, replicable evidence of its existence.
Otherwise, it's just a belief...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Peter, posted 04-22-2003 5:30 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Peter, posted 04-22-2003 7:20 AM Quetzal has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 38 of 41 (37533)
04-22-2003 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Quetzal
04-22-2003 6:34 AM


Re: Psychics, Dreams
My line was just that we cannot know at present,
and I often get a little carried away when I see
statements that appear to be closed on any subject.
Re-reading schraf's posts I think I tend to agree that
she is simply stating that at present there is no
formal evidence to suggest that such powers exist.
Which is OK by me

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Quetzal, posted 04-22-2003 6:34 AM Quetzal has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 39 of 41 (38421)
04-30-2003 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by nator
03-22-2003 9:23 AM


Just out of curiosity, what are the standard control
conditions used to test psychics?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 03-22-2003 9:23 AM nator has not replied

  
techristian
Member (Idle past 4102 days)
Posts: 60
Joined: 04-03-2002


Message 40 of 41 (158694)
11-12-2004 11:11 AM


COLD READING
Mr. Pamboli
It sparks my curiosity, sure enough, but doesn't strike me as spiritual.
How's the music, btw? Still going strong?
Yes I'm about to release a new CD OUT OF THIS WORLD
OK I posted a new title here about Cold Reading because a few people mentioned it.
I want to know how good YOU ALL are at cold reading. I'm not talking about a PSYCHIC experience here, (or you may think that I am) When you meet someone new , does something in their face trigger a repulsive, positive or neutral response? Why. After you get to know them better was your first instinct correct?
As I get older, I find that I get better at this but I still get surprises sometimes.
Are we reading the AURA?, the EYES?, FACE or the gestures?
If the administrator wants to start a new topic on this, I hope that I can find it !
Dan

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 41 of 41 (158749)
11-12-2004 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jesuslover153
03-24-2003 2:41 PM


have you read witgenstein? you should. on certainty is entirely about that statement you just made.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jesuslover153, posted 03-24-2003 2:41 PM Jesuslover153 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024