Hauntings, Exorcisms and the Like

quote:

---

I might add, btw, concerning my post, that the more one assumes the responsibilities of Christianity, the more one can expect to get of it's blessings, such as protection from the supernatural evil, likely existing all around us to more of an extent than we realize.

---

That's funny, Buz.My life is pretty good. Great health, a job I love, a terrific husband, and I live in a great town.I ain't never seen or heard any demons.Seems to me that you, the devout fundie christian, has had more contact with demons than I have.

quote:

---

Gravity is gravity; it is there if you believe in it or not.

---

Ah, but the effects of gravity can be demonstrated to anyone regardless of belief.Can you demonstrate the effects of spirits to anyone regardless of belief?

quote:

---

I have experienced dreams that were simply the culmination of subconscious thoughts processing a day?s work and I have experienced dreams so demonic that I felt I was in a battle of life and death. I believe some dreams are circumstantial while others can carry deep spiritual roots.

---

How do you not know they are not all circumstantial?

quote:

---

The same book that taught you about the supernatural Holy Spirit is the book that teaches about the reality of supernatural demon posession, ghosts and spirits, is it not?

---

Buz, do you believe, as it was widely understood among Christians over the centuries, that mental illness is actually demonic posession?If so, then why do anti-psychotic drugs, which work by altering brain chemistry, seem to work?

quote:

---

If you have intelligent questions the feel free to ask.

---

I already asked one.I asked you if you could demonstrate the effects of spirit to someone regardless of belief, like someone could demonstrate the effects of gravity regardless of belief.

quote:

---

In my new age days I used to demonstrate the effects of spirit regardless of belief by altering energy in anyone I so chose. I could reverse the flow of energy within your body to feel cold / hot. I could almost knock you out with sheer energic power if I so chose. There are many out there that are presently like the way I was.

---

Wow, that's amazing.Who are these people? Why haven't I heard of any of them? Why hasn't science documented their amazing abilities?Can you do it now? You could win a million dollars from the Randi Foundation if you can demonstrate it under normal scientifically controlled conditions.

quote:

---

That proves energy but that does not prove spirit. Spirit can not be measured by science nor can it be proven to someone who can not see.

---

Oh, so you CAN'T demonstrate the effects of spirit regardless of belief.All of the people have to believe first before they will experience the effects.Well, then, that's not so impressive.

quote:

---

Any person can learn to see and understand the spirit however there is not a "dry display" that can be done to show a spirit. Spirits is not a simple duplicatable mass of energy, they are far more complicated than that.

---

OK, but if I have to be a believer in spirits before I see evidence of spirits, how do you know that people aren't just making things up in their own minds because they want to be part of something?

quote:

---

Talk to any Cranial Sacral Therapist studied in the Upleager method. Some practitioners are more "powerful" than others if you want to call it that.

---

Like who?Can you give me a few names?

quote:

---

In order for science to prove what is experienced, scientists must first be able to analyze the neurological synaptic and chemical transmissions at microscopic levels. They can not yet do this "live" while someone is doing energy work. So how can it then be proven to scientists? I don't know.

---

Well, no, that "micro" analysis isn't necessary at all. I was interested in a much more basic observation that anything at all was happening.For example, we would put someone like you in a room with someone else, but that subject would have no idea what your abilities are, and neither would the researcher recording the results.You try to make them feel hot, or cold, or whatever you say you can do without telling anyone what is "supposed" to be happening, and then the person you are supposed to be making the temperature change in would fill out a carefully worded questionaire afterwards.We might put some thermometers on their skin if that's what you say you can do.See, simple test under controlled conditions, which would be a good place to start to determine if greater investigation is warranted.Can you demonstrate that?

quote:

---

Science must catch up first. This might also be tested by microscopic changes in vascularity. Science can see veins but can not yet get into the capillary beds. They are too small to my understanding. At least not in a live person. Maybe nano technology may be able to do this in the coming years. However blood flow is secondary to the parasthetic sensations found in the nerve fibers.
As for documenting things, I have found in general if science can not measure an event it will not be documented cause in there eyes there is nothing proven. I hope when nanotechnology evolves this can finally be seen... Until then science can't measure properly unfortunately.

---

All of this above is jumping the gun. First we have to make sure you can really do what you said you can do, which is that you can make people feel hot or cold just by manipulating some "energy".

quote:

---

It has been documented in psy documents however most scientists think anything having to do with psy and paranormal are quacks.

---

When was it documented, and where? What were the experimental controls?

quote:

---

Yes about 10% what I used to do. I threw away that jersey a long time ago. But how can science prove what they can not measure?

---

Well, the effects you claim are quite measurable.Either you can make people hot or cold or you can't. That is easily measurable.

quote:

---

We are back to the atom and light microscope problem again. They would have to go off of what a "controlled body" says but then that will simply be shot down by people who want "proof". It is not my desire to prove anything anymore though. It does me no good. Science will prove it when it finally gets to it I am sure.

---

If you say there are real effects that are felt by people, even when those people have no idea what your abilities are and no idea of the effects they are supposed to be feeling, then that is measurable.Can you demonstrate that?Remember, you could win a million dollar prize if you can demonstrate it under the normal experimental control conditions I mentioned above. That amount of money would certainly do you or the charity of your choice a great deal of good, wouldn't it?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-29-2004 07:53 AM

quote:

---

There are hundreds of TT practitioners that are quacks, have no clue and experience few results. While others are like dynamite. The study groups should test those (or only those) that have experienced tangible results in the past. I do not know if they did.

---

Emily Rosa's JAMA article demonstrated that the TT practitioners she tested did either worse than or no better than chance in detecting if there was a human hand underneath theirs in a blind experiment.The results caused a lot of upset within the TT community, but do you know what they DIDN'T do?The results of Rosa's study DIDN'T prompt any of the TT practitioners or advocates to do follow up studies to determine if they were self-deluded or if their abilities were real.In fact, the TT folks have refused to participate in any real scientific investigations at all.I agree with you that the people who you say are "dynamite" should be tested.But they fear testing and refuse to participate.I wonder why?

quote:

---

If something works 95% of the time consistently when compared to all other alternatives then there must be some sort of scientific validation because those numbers can't be chance.

---

Yes, but how are the results recorded? Are the people who say they feel better after some treatment telling you what you want to hear to make you happy? Was there a placebo group? Were the positive results caused by something else, not the particular treatment? Was the placebo effect accounted for?I remember reading the newsletter the natural food co-op I am a member of publishes, and there was some advice in there to a headache sufferer from some "naturopath, Homeopathic" something or other practitioner.She advised the purchase of a bunch of herbs, roots, and special homeopathic remedies for these headaches. These substances were to be taken at particular times of the day at particular intervals. All rather intricate. After taking all of these things, the headache sufferer was supposed to lie down on a comfortable couch or bed in a dark room for 30-40 minutes.What regular headache isn't going to be made better by a half hour of relaxation in a dark room?

Well, I'm sorry, but it seems that you cannot come up with any documentation that a demonstration of your powers under real scientific controls has been done. Your own casual "tests" were likely rife with bias and sloppy control measures.If I am wrong, could you please explain the experimental protocol you used?You claim that there are lots and lots of people who can do what you used to do, yet there is not a single properly controlled study out there that even hints of anyone being able to do what you claim. Not a single New Ager has easily claimed the one million dollar Randi prize, making headlines across the globe and making scientific history.Isn't that even a little strange to you?Any your claims of being a multi-millionaire seem rather too convenient an answer as to why you don't want to subject yourself to a real experiment. I know it might be true, but I doubt it. Someone who has several businesses doesn't have time to hang out on an internet debate board, as a rule.Like I said, you could donate the million dollars to charity. Don't you know of a charity that could use a million dollars?I am afraid that I am going to have to consider your claims as probably a bunch of hooey and that you are probably self-deluded.Please don't take it personally. You have been completely cordial and very pleasant to talk to.I just think you're full of it. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-29-2004 08:41 PMThis message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-29-2004 08:45 PM

quote:

---

I know most strong new-agers stay away from the science world because all they seem to get from it is flack.

---

Well, that says a lot right there.If they could easily do what you are claiming...if there was any detectable positive evidence whatsoever, they should have nothing at all to fear from scientific investigation.I believe they fear rational scrutiny because:1) many of them know they are frauds and don't want to risk their lucrative careers.2) even the self-deluded ones won't risk failure in controlled tests because they want to continue feeling special and magical.

quote:

---

I had no desire to recruit test subjects in a formal manner and document with reams of scientific data because there was no need to do so.

---

No need?You didn't want to test yourself to see if what you were doing was real or if you were fooling yourself and others?You didn't want to revolutionize medicine?

quote:

---

Most scientists don't step foot in churches or mosks or whatever simply because 1) they think it is phoney (like new-agers believe science can't detect what is happening) 2) don't want their experience to be shaken to a movement of the spirit. If a "secular" scientist steps foot in a church he / she will automatically have a "closed heart" and not open to the possibilities because of their belief base.

---

But this isn't true, nor is it relevant.Many scientists believe in God, and there are many church- and mosque-and temple-going scientists around the world.Faith is "belief in things unseen".IOW, faith is something that you have regardless of evidence.The religious or spiritual "faith" of any given scientist is irrelevant to his scientific work, because science is a method of inquiry used to understand the natural world. It is not a "faith" or a "belief" like a belief in an "unseen" god or spirit.However, when we are talking about specific claims of "energy" manipulation that are supposed to be able to be detected, or "seen", we have left the arena of subjective faith and have entered emperical, testable nature.

quote:

---

There is a doctor named Patrick Quillin I believe that treats severe cases of cancer with healthy alternative medicine. His success rate is FAR higher than the other two accepted therapies however western medicine laughs at his results and discounts his findings.

---

Where can I view his published articles which carefully document his remarkable cure rate and the methodology he used? All I could find on him was a popular press book. He

quote:

---

I am just asking these questions arbitrarily. They are not my beliefs. But I can see how new agers hesitate to put themselves in a lab when their even non new age colleagues practicing normal medicine is laughed out of that world. I dont blame them for not stepping out.

---

Look, you are the one saying that you could literally knock people out with your power, and that there were others like you and that it was no big deal to easily do what you did.If anyone could really do that under normal experimental controls like the one I outlined, which you are claiming would be easy for many people to do, it would make headline news around the world.Science operates by demonstable effects. Evidence is everything in science. If you can produce detectable effects, scientists will believe you. In fact, just about any scientist would love to get their hands on a person who could really do what you say. It would make their career.

quote:

---

Do you need to test everything you now understand to be real in your life?

---

If I thought I could do something that defied all natural law, then yes, I would test it.

quote:

---

Maybe once the most basic of nutritional science is not longer viewed as quackery you may find other fringe therapies beginning to step up to the plate.

---

What are you talking about? The role of nutrition in health has been understood in general for hundreds of years. That's why sailors took citrus fruit with them on long voyages. That why we know the role of certain foods in preventing and promoting cancer and heart disease.

quote:

---

In general no one wants to be ridiculed by an old boys club. I know you guys will try to eat me alive for this post and quite frankly these are just my beliefs and findings about the science world.

---

You are right that science is a conservative endeavor. New ideas, especially ones which overturn dominant paradigms, are slow to be accepted. However, they are eventually always acceptes if the evidence shows that they must be.So, the question is, are the New Agers able to actually produce the effects under normal experimental controls.If they cannot, which is my strong suspicion, then they most likely are frauds or self-deluded. Kind of like the man who says he can turn himself invisible, but only when nobody is looking.

quote:

---

I knew if I was tested and proven the scientists that submit the results of the test will find some way to debunk the tests and maintain their belief state. It is what science is truly good at.

---

Now now, that sounds an awful lot like you are saying that all scientists are liars and that the entire scientific process is completely flawed.If that is so, then how have we been able to make the enormous progress in technology and knowledge that we currently enjoy?