I hope someone in the group  was in the room with MMY when this
decision was made, and can describe what went down with this chart.
What I had heard  while at MIU, was that MMY asked for the most
coherent band of EEG data to be associated with flying in the exact
picture of EEG that is on that chart.  When they challenged him on it
because it could not be measured then and everybody would know it, he
just said "we know that is when maximum coherence occurs so just show
it".   Anyone want to confirm or deny who was actually in the room?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is David hiding the good research under a shell and we have to 
> > figure
> > > out which one it is under?  I know how that game works too well to
> > > play.  I am not talking about all the fantastic, super-scientific
> > > research that is not on the chart.  I am talking about the 
> deceptive
> > > chart and his admission that it is a fabrication at
> > > http://www.maharishi.org/sidhi/yogic_flying.html  That chart is
> > > logically, and by his own admission, impossible.
> > 
> > And Curtis *still* doesn't get that this is completely
> > irrelevant to anything of significance.
> > 
> > One more time: Nobody is going to be persuaded to take
> > the TM-Sidhis course because they believe, incorrectly,
> > that EEG coherence has been shown to continues during
> > hopping.
> > 
> > The only relevant question is whether the claimed EEG
> > coherence during flying-sutra practice at a point when
> > it *can* be measured is valid.
> I'm going to give the bitter-enders an out here, in the
> hope that it's not impossible to have a more rational
> discussion.  None of them has brought this point up,
> so I doubt this has ever occurred to them; it's a
> freebie:
> There's one respect in which the apparent suggestion
> that EEG coherence can be shown to continue during
> hopping--which everyone agrees isn't possible,
> including O-J--is relevant: If the researchers were
> willing to be misleading on this point, even though
> it's itself irrelevant, might they also have been
> willing to fudge the actual EEG data they *were* able
> to measure?
> OK, guys, don't say I never did anything for you.
> But boy, when your debating opponents have to hand
> you legitimate points so you have something
> reasonable to argue with, you aren't in such great
> shape.

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to