---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :

 No barn dances?
 

 I went to a local square dance in the community hall once. I have no idea why 
a few of my friends and I did that. It was back when I was attending MIU. All I 
remember is I laughed hysterically and had a great time promenading, 
allemanding left and do-si-doing my various plaid-bedecked FF farmer-type 
partners. It was a real hoot.
 

 


 From: feste37 <no_re...@yahoogroups.com>
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2015 6:22 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Peace on Earth?
 
 
   There were big hopes in the 1980s that Fairfield would grow as the 
meditating community grew, but it never really happened. Population has 
remained steady at just under 10,000. It's true you can run into the same 
people very frequently here, but some people like that -- it's part of feeling 
that you are in a community. Mind you, I am also struck by how you can go years 
and never once bump into some people you may know unless you actually make 
arrangements to meet. I'm also surprised at how many faces there are here that 
I do not recognize. 

If you walked an hour away from Fairfield you wouldn't get to anything 
interesting. The nearest city worth visiting is Iowa City, one hour's drive 
north. It is a university town (big public university) so has 
entertainment/culture/restaurants/shopping. I spend quite a lot of time there. 

You have to remember that Iowa is a rural state with a population of only about 
2.3 million, I think, and you could easily fit the whole of England into it, 
more than once, as far as area is concerned. I have lived here a long time and 
have got used to it. Indeed, it has its own kind of beauty. Often, you can be 
driving on the highway and there is no one else around. It's as if the road has 
been made just for you. There is a pleasure in that. 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :

 I have never before seen the claim that the ME will not work in a community of 
under 10,000. 
 

 I imagine it's one of those things that got invented on the spot to explain 
why things don't work. See also, too much stress in collective consciousness 
etc. Bit embarrassing for them that it's been made public.
 

 That's actually pretty odd, since Fairfield itself numbers only about 9,500 
people, which would mean that the ME has zero effect here, but is able, so to 
speak, to jump over Fairfield and affect other places in Iowa. That's one 
weird-acting ME!  
 

 Is FF really that small? You must know everyone in town! Must be a friendly 
place too, unless you're sick of the sight of each other and spend all day 
hiding. My friends who have lived there say it's weird being so far from other 
towns compared to the UK where you can't walk for an hour without passing 
through several villages.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :

 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote :

 Reading through that all I'm down fine enough with the rebuttals further 
below. Sorry Sal you're so disgruntled with your experience.
 

  Best Regards from Fairfield, Iowa   

 

 Thanks, I always enjoy best regards as opposed to the abuse I often get from 
our fellow forum members but what puzzles me is what experience it is that you 
are sympathising with me for?
 

 If it's my experience in meditation then there's no need because I get the 
same wild, breaking-on-through trips that everyone else does. There wouldn't be 
much point doing it otherwise. I expect it's the fact I'm not totally "on 
message" about the Marshy Effect as you are, but as I try to point out in my 
post there isn't any reason to be enthusiastic about it at all so I don;t feel 
the need to help them with their advertorial. I'd hope at least that came 
across.
 

 What did you think of the Deux ex Machina I highlighted? Ever come across such 
a pathetic excuse for why independent research didn't replicate the results of 
the claim? "Sorry you couldn't achieve social harmony in your test of our 
technology, even though we told you what to do we must have omitted to mention 
the one illogical thing that makes your experiment pointless" And it makes no 
sense that the ME should only work on
 big groups does it?
 

 This is what I mean by scientific filters, or controls as they are also 
called. I did start writing an extra paragraph there but abandoned it as it 
would have made the post too long and I thought I'd covered the main points. 
Those being is that science is about gathering data to support a hypothesis and 
that process has to be carried out in a particular way, and it has to be 
consistent. Apart from the fact a lot of the complainants accusations make a 
mockery of the usual standards by which social monitoring is carried out - a 
fact not convincingly explained by OJ - means it's a lot less likely that their 
conclusions can be supported.
 

 Most science is actually done in someone's head long before it gets near a 
lab, whether that lab is a particle accelerator a test tube or a war zone, 
there's a set of questions you have to ask yourself to make sure that you 
aren't fooling yourself. These questions will vary according to what you are 
proposing but basically follow a similar path. Is there a signal to be heard or 
is it random noise? Am I sure the data doesn't have a simpler explanation or 
one that someone hasn't already covered? Is there any data present that 
contradicts my hypothesis? Is it possible for people to replicate? Is my idea 
the best - simplest - way of explaining any data gathered? Am I just kidding 
myself?
 

 You get the general idea. I have many interests that the mainstream passes 
over like evidence of bicameralism in early human self-representation, it would 
be easy just to look for data that confirms that and ignore the rest but what 
would be the point? I'd be the only one I'm fooling so I keep my eyes open for 
contradictory information.
 

 When I read Marshy Effect research it makes me wonder whether the scientists 
involved are asking themselves similar control questions before they even start 
because if they have to invent Deux ex Machina as howlingly embarrassing and 
illogical as the one they passed on to the poor guy who had actually gone out 
of his way to try and replicate their claims, then they aren't doing science 
properly at all. (Please note there was no attempt to explain this in OJ's 
rebuttal) 
 

 You may say that it's a small point but it's pivotal to the way they do 
things. The goalposts constantly shift and failures - the yagya programme for 
instance - are ignored. You probably think I'm just getting at you lot for no 
reason but I'm not, I'm trying to show that science is a process trying to work 
out what is from what isn't and I rather suspect that people round here cheer 
it on when it supports what they want to believe and dismiss it as irrelevant, 
when it doesn't. 
 

 But it gladdens my heart that everyone nowadays sees it as the standard they 
have to reach for intellectual acceptance, every New Age hopeful has to get a 
"quantum" in there somewhere. Trouble is you have to accept the conclusions 
when they don't support your ideas and move on to something else but there's so 
much money in keeping people believing in the dream that the TMO can't afford 
to do any serious research into the ME or yagya's because they probably know by 
now that it isn't working. 
 

 But why would intelligent and well decorated scientists not apply any of the 
usual rigour to their work? It's that there are stronger forces at work in 
people than merely needing to check theories, especially to people who have 
been involved in strong cults. Larry Domash raised the point with Marshy that 
we shouldn't talk about the unified field as we don't know anything about it 
yet - this was before the SU5 experiments that debunked it - and Marshy 
apparently banged the table and shouted "We are the masters in this field!".
 

 So that's my explanation for the blinkered and poor quality research, you are 
either on the bus or you are off it. Domash and the others decided to stay on 
the bus and were henceforth duty-bound to believe and actively campaign for 
Marshy's teachings. They have blinded themselves to the possibility they are 
wrong because they believe utterly in Marshy's worldview of consciousness as 
some sort of field that can spread peace. That's how they can fail to ask 
themselves difficult questions and invent dubious excuses to fellow researchers 
trying to check their results. 
 

 Funny how ironically that mirrors the English enlightenment with Isaac Newton 
and how the development of the modern scientific method broke free of religious 
interference by setting up the principles of free inquiry without anyone with a 
beard or funny hat telling what to think before you've even looked. They made 
dramatic gains in knowledge the minute they got away from revealed wisdom 
whereas the TMO scientists remain in their own ever decreasing circles trying 
to justify it!
 

 But thanks for reading anyway Buck, even if I haven't reached you yet ;-) But 
I reiterate, it's not about my experience, it's about explaining experience.
 

 

 

 











 


 












Reply via email to