---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote :
I'm not sure what you mean by the part highlighted in red below, but I believe the test subject did not "perform" in the presence of TM teachers; he was left in a room by himself hooked up to the EEG machine. In any case, he'd have had to "perform" (change his EEG, maybe other physiological parameters, I don't recall) according to the Amherst rounding schedule, and he presumably didn't know what that was, as I pointed out earlier. Oh, and the whole point was that he wasn't "in proximity to" the Amherst group. They were in Massachusetts; he was at MIU (that's 1,000 miles apart). Sheesh, But somebody would have done and you'd have to remove any influence. that was the whole point of the study, to see whether the effect carried over distance to someone who wasn't in the group. Obviously. He probably knew that the Amherst course was taking place around that time, but he may not have known that what he was being tested for had anything to do with the course. We'd have to see the actual study to know what the controls actually were. It still holds that knowing there's a course going on might affect his own performance, and consequently EEG's, if he picked up some sort of signal to subconsciously meditate deeper during the teaching process. You aren't anywhere near sceptical enough. And it's by no means the case that it's only the TMO "that believe this idea that all minds are connected as a unified field that also connects everything else." It's a fairly common belief among those who subscribe to the Perennial Philosophy and New Age types in general. Does anyone else claim to have evidence? And I think you've gone way beyond reasonable in the strictness of your controls. Ha! I see why it's important to have independent researchers. As to Randi, I'll stand by what I said about the strength of his bias; and I'll just add that his professional integrity is, er, not of the highest. He undoubtably thinks you're all mad but it's up to you to prove otherwise. He will organise an experiment and you have to agree that it's within your powers before he will go ahead with it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : Comments in this wishy-washy green that I've gone off already but can't be bothered to change... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote : FWIW, this was a long time ago; the Amherst course (the first World Peace Assembly) took place in 1979. For whatever reason, the TMO decided not to pursue this particular line of research. I don't know whether the study was ever published; do you, Salyavin? Do you remember where you read it? I can't find it in the lists of research papers. Maybe the title isn't sufficiently descriptive. I used to have the collected papers, I'm pretty sure it was in that. Don't recall if it got published. Would have to have been a journal desperate for filler IMO. Remember this was a WPA, so rounding would have been involved, and "general knowledge about programme times" might not have been adequate to clue the subject in (especially if he or she wasn't a Sidha--do you remember, Salyavin?). Also, just generally, sometimes explaining away a purported result involves positing circumstances and effects that are almost as unlikely--e.g., in this case, suggestion or subconsciously transmitted information being sufficient to allow the subject to significantly alter his or her EEG in specific ways at specific times. CAVEAT: I'm not claiming that the study showed anything startling, just critiquing Salyavin's critique. Sorry, but that's exactly the sort of thing that anyone trying to repeat the study would look for and subconscious cues are an obvious first step. Remember, the TMO is a closed group with a strong belief system that you only think your mind hasn't been steeped in. Suppose the subjectively stronger meditative state you report was trained into you by the way meditation is checked? You wouldn't know but you may perform in the same way when on a course or even just in the presence of a TM teacher because of expectations picked up at meetings. Self explanatory. The mind is a strange place, it may sound unlikely but group bonds and training are strong, the TMO has all the things cult watchers look for with it's secret language and rituals. You don't know what it's done to you. But a hardcore researcher will and will eliminate these potential causes with strict controls. Much stricter than they would even think necessary at MUM. Meditating deeper will affect the EEG and if it's caused by knowing that you are in the proximity of a group doing TM then it will show. If the researcher gives it away subconsciously somehow, then ditto. Remember it's only the TMO that believe this idea that all minds are connected as a unified field that also connects everything else. To add to the list of suspicions you would have to eliminate are all electromagnetic fields, pheromones, changes in breathing or auditory cues from researchers who do TM. Subconscious group conformity etc etc. There are probably many more. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and eliminating the apparently mundane is the first step. BTW, I wouldn't trust James Randi to make an honest, objective attempt to conduct any study involving TM. He's as biased as the TM researchers are, just in the opposite direction. Surely the study could be done with tighter controls, but Randi ain't the one to do it. Nonsense. Granted, there's plenty of whining about Randi's experiments being "set up to fail" but what everyone who misses the mark forgets to mention is that Randi sets the parameters of the experiment with the help of the person being tested, and they have to agree that the proposal is within their particular claimed powers before he begins.
