 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Warsie
OG Balla Representin' Da Souf Sydeeee of Chi-City
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
Age: 19
Posts: 2460
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
|
 Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| psych wrote: | google 'DNA biological internet fosar bludorf'
im going to bed  |
found! first result!
http://www.illuminati-news.com/2007/0914.html
_________________
I am a Star Wars Fan, Warsie here.
[url=http://911truth.org/]9/11 TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE![/url] [url=http://nyccan.org/]CHANCE FOR A INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION CLICK[/url]
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Felinity
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow! ha! I love this thread! I always had a fascination for Parapsychology and all of this stuff
Tekra, Thank you for your insight on my musings as to what's going on. I will definitely do more reading on this! I really appreciate your thoughts and would like to keep up with all the latest developments in this field. I'm going to re-read what you wrote and reflect on it more.
Also, I tried to get this link, but it didn't work: "An assessment of the evidence for psychic functioning" at anson dot ucdavis dot edu slash ~utts maybe they're off line? I tried it without ~utts, but no luck either..
Other posts here have given me more food for thought as well.
Warsie, thanks for that really interesting link above also
Just the other day, I was looking at my cat and noticing that he washes himself methodically using the side of his paw in just such a way to go over his ears and head area in precisely the same manner that I have seen EVERY cat do... I wondered, is this "instinct" knowledge that is learned from one generation to the next and somehow passed down genetically? OR with the monkey-theory.. it might be that this "knowledge" is transferred in quite a different way!?!
As well as many other examples of "instinctive" knowledge? Fascinating stuff!
Last edited by Felinity on Sun May 11, 2008 10:18 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Warsie
OG Balla Representin' Da Souf Sydeeee of Chi-City
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
Age: 19
Posts: 2460
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Felinity wrote: | | Inventor, wow! Do you have any links for that? |
I remember something basing people based on how early they do something or adapt an idea, from the early visionaries to most people, to the last people to those who never do the new thing.
_________________
I am a Star Wars Fan, Warsie here.
[url=http://911truth.org/]9/11 TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE![/url] [url=http://nyccan.org/]CHANCE FOR A INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION CLICK[/url]
|
|
| Back to top |
|
ouinon
chemical reaction
Joined: Jul 11, 2007
Posts: 5349
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| anbuend wrote: | | bias in picking out which events have major importance and which don't...events seem very much centered on what makes American news and what doesn't...no explanation for when "spikes" occur when "important" events are not considered to be going on... no explanation for when "spikes" fail to occur when "important" events are going on...Confirmation bias and clustering illusion, anyone?? |
Thank you for the links and cold shower of reason.
Ref: "important events", and no/fewer/smaller spikes; reminds me of how often acccording to the news there is no war going on anywhere, no famine, and no human rights scandals.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Felinity
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anbuend, That's why I was hoping to see the data... I was concerned about that possibility.. It's like after they know the world events, then they could try and look for coincidental mathematical changes... Similar to people who try and decode the Bible, assigning alot of mathematical codes to it.. to explain things that have already happened... or Nostradamas' prophecies where they base them on things that have already happened to explain them..
Do we know one way or another? I'd like to see these "spikes" and what they are supposed to coincide with .. and how prevalent the spikes actually are too... I guess I have to read that link more..
Tekra, I never was able to access the other ".edu" link.. maybe that site is down? |
|
| Back to top |
|
BrutalRhubarb
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Nov 01, 2007
Posts: 191
Location: Obio oidO
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Could this possibly mean that I could expand my own awareness by eating brains?
Seriously, though, brains are relatively inanimate, compared to consciousness, so maybe the secret lies within the neural network. Some brains would be more powerful. Those are the ones to eat.
But seriously, I'm just way too giddy to be posting here, right now. Besides, we all know that according to the grand old theory of relativity, consciousness must be connected to everything, in whatever trivial or marvelous ways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Tekra
Emu Egg
Joined: Mar 22, 2008
Posts: 6
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Felinity
> Also, I tried to get this link, but it didn't work: "An assessment of the evidence for
> psychic functioning" at anson dot ucdavis dot edu slash ~utts maybe they're off
> line? I tried it without ~utts, but no luck either..
anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/
This does work - try again? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Tekra
Emu Egg
Joined: Mar 22, 2008
Posts: 6
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's worth reading at least the first few chapters of Sheldrake's "A new Science of Life". There are apparently a whole range of phenomena that demonstrate what I've named a "Critical Density Principle". For example, rats running a new maze take much longer to solve it than different rats in other labs during subsequents tests, suggesting a "remote learning" capability. We only have to look at the "computer literacy" of the younger generations versus the older folk to see similar evidence in humans. Even at the chemical level, the first crystallization of a new substance can take considerably longer than subsequent events. These are the sorts of phenomena that led Sheldrake to propose his Theory of Formative Causation.
My own experience is that most people don't WANT to accept new possibilities, and will find any and every "reason" why they can't exist. On the other hand, Radin warns of the ease with which we can deceive ourselves in this sort of work. Older traditions teach that the mind is both an organ of creation and an organ of perception - thus is it easy to create a mental image, become attached to it, and insist on its validity because it "looks so right".
Einstein said, "It is the theory that decides what we can observe. I believe that there is now so much evidence pointing to the probability of phenomena beyond the physical that we need to open our minds to it in order not to shut it out. Further more, the final consensus of the 2005 Solvay Conference - the peak worldwide convention of physicists - was that "We don't know what we are talking about. We have no idea what our theories mean." Dialectical materialism was formally adopted by physicists at the 1927 Solvay Conference, so we've effectively come full circle.
If you're interested, I can outline a new approach to electromagnetic theory that is quite in accord with existing theory, but extends it in such a way as to demonstrate new possibilities in atomic structure. I'm not the only one to suggest this, but I do have a couple of new angles. These ideas arose as a consequence of my interest in the psychophysical interface (PPI) - if consciousness does interact with matter, it must do so across a boundary or "interface" of some sort. Once this has been identified and its properties understood, we have the possibility of "opening a window" directly into the realm of subjective phenomena, a breakthrough I've long been waiting for, and one that would allow rapid progress thereafter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sand
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 16, 2007
Posts: 6131
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| How do you decide what is a change in human consciousness? Do they first find some sort of cluster in the random numbers and then look for the human consciousness change for a relationship? Sounds like baloney to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
