"Matter" is just an idea in consciousness.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this
1) What does "third-person" self-reference mean ? To me, this would be
equivalent to "third-person color red", which clearly is not the case for
red to be third-person, since red only exists in an ontological subjective
manner.
2) What "machine" ? What "self of the machine" ? "Machine" is just
Because Rover is just a bunch of atoms. Is nothing more than the sum of
atoms. But in the case of self-reference/emergence, each new level is more
than the sum of the previous levels.
I don't know how you can trick yourself so badly into believing that if you
put some rocks together, the
This clearly I must do. And I admit that at this point I am not able to do
that. But this doesn't mean that phenomenology is not a science in itself.
Actually, as I see it in the future, physics would be the one derived from
consciousness, not the other way around.
On Tuesday, 16 April 2019
There are no electrons and no neurons. "Electrons" and "neurons" are just
ideas in consciousness, are projections in the idea of "physical world" of
processes that happen in consciousness. And since in places where there is
consciousness, consciousness has certain effects, it is normal for
good starting place.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 18:43:20 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/16/2019 11:23 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>
> 1) Well... It might be a very specific arrangement of atoms, but they are
> still governed by Newton's Laws. Is not like if you p
The only downside being that... the robot does not exist. People are
tricking themselves too easily into personifying objects. There is no robot
there, there are just a bunch of atoms that bang into each others. You can
move those atoms around all day long as you want. You will not create
I'm not the only consciousness. There are other consciousnesses as well.
But that's all that exists: consciousnesses and their interactions.
Everything else are external appearances of the internal interactions that
take place between consciousnesses.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 18:47:06
But it has predictions. Is just that it depends what you understand by
"predictions" at this point. If you understand something like predicting
the masses of particles from physics, then it doesn't make such a
prediction. But neither does physics. But on the other hand, it makes
predictions
What does "self model" even mean ? Notice that any material attempt to
implement "self model" leads to infinite regress. Because let's say that a
machine has the parts A B C. To have a "self model" would mean to have
another part (A B C) which would contain the "self model". But this would
be
Before going deeper into analyzing your claims, I would like to know if
your concept of machine has free will. Because this is a very important
concept for consciousness. If you machine doesn't have free will, then you
are not talking about consciousness.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 19:08:40
1) Well... It might be a very specific arrangement of atoms, but they are
still governed by Newton's Laws. Is not like if you put them in certain
order magic happens and new things start to appear. It has no memory, no
purpose and no ability to act, since memory, purpose and ability to act are
1) Rover doesn't know anything, since knowing is a property of
consciousness. Rover doesn't have a model of the world, since having a
model of the world means being aware of a world, and awareness is a
property of consciousness. What does "Rover is represented by itself" even
mean ? I think
rily claims. They are quite trivial. And
they start from the trivial realization that the brain does not exist. The
"brain" is just an idea in consciousness.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 03:06:45 UTC+3, telmo wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, at 18:42, 'Cosmin Visan'
Wednesday, 17 April 2019 03:14:49 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/16/2019 12:43 PM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>
> There are no electrons and no neurons. "Electrons" and "neurons" are just
> ideas in consciousness, are projections in the idea
It's actually the other way around: biology is realized by certain
processes happening in consciousness. Biology is just an external
appearance of internal processes happening in consciousness.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 02:29:24 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
> What makes them "biological"? Do they
Also putting you some blind glasses will make your visual qualia go away.
This doesn't mean that the glasses are what generates qualia.
On Wednesday, 17 April 2019 06:13:21 UTC+3, Brent wrote:
>
>
> We know enough about matter that adding a little alcohol to your
> bloodstream or a small blow
Brain itself is a virtual construct generated by consciousness.
On Friday, 17 May 2019 02:17:15 UTC+3, smitra wrote:
>
>
> We don't live in the real world, rather in the virtual world generated
> by our brains.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
10:53:00 UTC+3, Bruce wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 5:45 PM 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
>> See Donald Hoffman research. Evolution filters out truth. We don't live
>> in a "physical" world. We
See Donald Hoffman research. Evolution filters out truth. We don't live in
a "physical" world. We live in an evolutionary world. The world of qualia
we see around us is an evolutionary world constructed by consciousness in
order to keep itself alive.
On Friday, 17 May 2019 04:00:03 UTC+3,
Telepathy is not information transmission. Telepathy is consciousnesses
unifications: 2 or more consciousnesses unify, they live a common
experience, and then they split back apart, all remembering the shared
experience.
Personal experiences are all there is, since consciousness is all there
Stating the obvious is not insulting. If a phenomenon is real and you say
is not, what else are you if not a irrational dogmatic believer in
materialism ?
On Friday, 17 May 2019 17:20:03 UTC+3, Terren Suydam wrote:
>
> If there isn't a word for this, there should be, to name the situation
>
"Matter" is an idea in consciousness.
On Thursday, 16 May 2019 13:25:55 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
> But I say the old guys - Thales, Democritus, Epicurus - had more of the
> right idea of *what matter is.*
>
> @philipthrift
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
t;
> Brent
>
> On 5/17/2019 8:30 AM, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List wrote:
>
> Stating the obvious is not insulting. If a phenomenon is real and you say
> is not, what else are you if not a irrational dogmatic believer in
> materialism ?
>
> On Friday
Landing on the Moon is anecdotal, since is only reported by 3 people.
Telepathies are reported by 7 billion people all the time, including me, so
they are not anecdotal. They are like breathing. Everybody breaths. And if
you say you never had telepathies, you lie.
On Friday, 17 May 2019
Are AI fanboys aware of the fact that consciousness is a unity ? For
example, hearing something and seeing something don't happen in 2
independent consciousnesses, but happen in only 1 consciousness. Also,
split brain patients show 2 different consciousness, for example one being
theist, the
Of course. Do you think that what they teach you at school is the truth ?
History is invented by the winners. History is just an anecdotal story.
On Saturday, 18 May 2019 00:22:28 UTC+3, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>
> On Friday, May 17, 2019 at 4:12:24 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote:
>>
>> Landing on
I'm not necessarily smarter as I am honest. When I look at the
phenomenology of consciousness and I see certain things, I cannot then lie
to myself that I haven't seen those things. If I had countless telepathies
and precognitions especially in relations to loved ones, I cannot then lie
that
Also, another question would be: What is your view on time ? Do
computations happen in time or does time emerges out of atemporal
computations ?
On Monday, 27 May 2019 13:02:24 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> Ask any question for more explanation,
>
>
--
You received this message because
I see that the majority way of thinking of people is the dismissive kind.
Tell them "there is telepathy" and they will say "no there isn't!". The
problem with this attitude is that it is end of story. How do this people
that dismiss everything expect progress to be made ? They say: "Let the
Atheism is only a belief. And an awful one. Elementary philosophy brings
strong arguments for the existence of God. My own view is that we are all
God that forgot about himself in order to actually experience life.
On Monday, 27 May 2019 21:40:48 UTC+3, Jason wrote:
>
>
> Then is atheism not a
After such a long post, you only showed that you failed to understand what
unification is. The details are precise in the sense that
sub-consciousnesses unified. Then, on top of that unification, different
new qualia have been emerged on the 2 different consciousnesses. The fact
that the final
When a phenomenon is real, you cannot falsify it. Is elementary logic. If I
see red, you cannot falsify me seeing red.
On Monday, 27 May 2019 00:05:16 UTC+3, howardmarks wrote:
>
> When one observes a real phenomenon, then one can create (again
> falsifiable) theories to explain the phenomenon.
Are you aware of Roger Penrose writings about non-computable phenomena ?
On Monday, 27 May 2019 13:02:24 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> computation
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
No. You don't understand how telepathy and consciousness generally works.
Consciousness works by unification: you are a consciousness that is made up
of made an infinite of smaller consciousnesses unified into 1. The fact
that you both hear and see is because you are a unification between a
I told you: The definition of a number is: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc. If you
start seeing number as being alive, then you have a problem.
On Thursday, 23 May 2019 19:39:42 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> Cosmin, ask question, it is simpler that way. You can read the papers also.
>
> Bruno
>
>
--
Do you understand what Bruno is talking ? Being frank with people is not
insulting. I'm sorry that you are indoctrinated to be politically correct,
smiling in front of people and talking bad about them from behind. Me, not
being indoctrinated, I tell people exactly what is to be told. So, I ask
You didn't answer the question (probably the politically correctness
indoctrination is keeping you from telling the truth): Did you understand
what Bruno is talking about ?
On Saturday, 25 May 2019 13:21:19 UTC+3, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
> Obviously, you can't. I'm sorry for you.
>
--
You
See ? Exactly what I was telling. You dismiss from the start something,
without giving the least amount of thought. Why do you live on this planet
if all that you know is to bring negativity ? Why don't you kill yourself ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
I see red. Please falsify this statement.
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 03:36:25 UTC+3, howardmarks wrote:
>
> Cosmin, it seems that you don't understand the very important concept of
> Karl Popper's falsifiability - a main basis used in reasoning and in the
> scientific method to determine whether a
I think I should let this guy know about my paper "The Emergent Structure
of Consciousness".
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
See ? You don't understand anything from what Bruno is saying. You only
spot the word "Turing", you also heard about the "Turing test", and you
shallowly concluded that that is what Bruno is talking about. No. He is
talking about all kinds of weird stuff, like numbers that are alive.
But of
that
everything is matter.
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 12:09:00 UTC+3, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
>
> Le mar. 28 mai 2019 à 08:48, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > a écrit :
>
>> See ? Exactly what I was telling. You dismiss from the start something
"Computer telepathy" is a meaningless phrase. Like saying that you have a
picture with water on your computer screen that will end your thirst.
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 11:24:18 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
> Beyond that, there is computer-assisted telepathy:
>
>
--
You received this message
What ? You didn't realize this yet ? See ? This is why theories are lacking
(for telepathy, and consciousness generally), because people simply fail to
see some elements of phenomenology. If people fail to see that
consciousness is unified, they will search explanations for telepathy in
terms
You just said in another post that mechanism = computationalism. Now you
say that mechanism = partially computationalism. Can you make up your mind ?
On Monday, 3 June 2019 10:35:27 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> If we assume mechanism, we assume to be at least Turing Universal, and the
>
How do you explain OBE and NDE ?
On Monday, 3 June 2019 14:38:33 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> I have defined mechanism by the idea that we can survive with a digital
> (universal) machine at the place of the brain
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Also, have a look at my paper "The Problem of the Self" and tell me how do
you solve those thought experiments.
https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan
On Monday, 3 June 2019 14:38:33 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> I have defined mechanism by the idea that we can survive with a digital
You didn't even read my paper, otherwise you would have seen that the paper
is about personal identity. And the connection with you theory in which
each one of us is a number is that the thought experiments suggest that we
are not 1 number, but that consciousnesses can unify and split and
But you just said in another post that you are familiar with Roger Penrose
writing about non-computational phenomena. How do you reconcile
non-computational phenomena with computationalism ?
On Friday, 31 May 2019 14:41:58 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> I have used the term
Why do you have the fetish with this word ? Why don't you find a word that
actually means what you want to say ?
On Friday, 31 May 2019 14:09:40 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> Mechanism
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
I asked for explanations, not for explanations away. So far you mentioned
1, though you claimed that there are many. 2 more please.
On Wednesday, 29 May 2019 13:49:39 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 28 May 2019, at 19:34, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@g
Why don't you have a Nobel prize if your theory is the best ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
How does a computer assist me in making a telepathy with an alien at the
other end of galaxy ?
Also, what does "dogmatic absolutism" mean ?
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 12:50:39 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
>
> It's computer-assisted telepathy.
>
> And you demonstrate the* 100% pure dogmatic
Just because useless close-minded people want to play the "I am
materialist, therefore I am smart" card, doesn't mean they are actually
smart. The opposite is actually true: "I am materialist, therefore I lack
intelligence".
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
https://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/dreamgates/2012/01/the-shadow-of-mark-twains-precognitive-dream.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
Self-reference is not what you think it is.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this
Or that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
How is he coherent with you if he is aware of non-computable phenomenon,
while you are oblivious ?
On Saturday, 1 June 2019 11:11:50 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 31 May 2019, at 14:13, 'Cosmin Visan' via Everything List <
> everyth...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>
Name 3 explanations.
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 13:52:27 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On the contrary, there are many explanations possibles,
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
Telepathy is facilitated by emotional contexts. You don't just prove it on
command.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
First of all, there is no brain and there no laws of physics. "Brain" is
just an idea in consciousness.
Second, you have 0 understanding of how life works. Probably because you
never actually lived life, you just stayed locked inside your house all the
time. Someone who does lives life knows
Where is the paper ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Of course is empty since it doesn't mean anything. As John Searle said it:
you can let a pen fall from a height and you can consider it to calculate x
= x0 + yt + gt^2/2. So is just words play, you can say about anything you
want that it "computes". Of course, besides consciousness.
On
Brain doesn't exist. "Brain" is just an idea in consciousness.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
The consciousness that we are familiar with always seems to be accompanied
by the quale of "brain". But notice here that dogs and monkeys and ants are
consciousnesses that don't feel themselves accompanied by the quale of
"brain". Only we seem to have discovered this. But exactly as they don't
How do you go in dreams from one place to another ? Simple: you just change
the qualia of space. Of course, probably the waking-state world indeed is a
world shared by other consciousnesses, so space motion might have another
explanation than in dreams.
--
You received this message because
Bruno, you clearly didn't read my paper "The Problem of the Self".
Otherwise you would have understood the following thought experiment: You
say YES DOCTOR! YES! YES! YES!, and the doctor starts to take your neurons
one at a time and replace them with transistors or whatever, but at the
same
Bruno, you have to understand that whatever theory you invent, if that
theory isn't in the end connected to qualia, then it's a meaningless
theory. If I say SKK, KKAK, SDASD, KASASDFDA, but I don't say in the end
"And that's what color red is.", then you are just mumbo-jumbo-ing.
--
You
Panpsychism is just the position adopted by those still afraid to leave
materialism behind and go to idealism.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
Of course, I also believe the same. But these crackpots here obsessively
ask for evidence, even though they totally ignore them, like in a mental
hospital. So I gave them those evidence that so dearly long to ignore them.
On Tuesday, 11 June 2019 00:50:48 UTC+3, Alan Grayson wrote:
>
> *I
You probably are mentally ill or something if even in the face of evidence
you continue to say ZERO. Go check a doctor.
On Monday, 10 June 2019 22:34:31 UTC+3, howardmarks wrote:
>
> NO exceptions, has ZERO hits
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Yeah, sure, ok.
On Tuesday, 11 June 2019 12:26:01 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
> Path Integral Monte Carlo.
>
> (In theory, that is.)
>
> @philipthrift
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
How do you emulate the collapse of the wave-function ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view
Next week I will be at The Science of Consciousness in Interlaken, where I
will present the ideas from my paper "The Self-Referential Aspect of
Consciousness": https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan
If anyone will be around too, I will enjoy debating issues about
consciousness.
Physical time does not exist. And this can be proven starting from the
experience of time in consciousness which is retentional, so unlike
anything that the "physical time" is supposed to be. For more details, have
a look at my paper "The Quale of Time":
Red is red.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht89rJUZUv4
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this
Working software developers don't do "computing". They just do get-set.
mail.getMessage(), mail.setMessage("Wow! Super-duper computing!");
On Thursday, 13 June 2019 15:44:22 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> Also,without computing, you would not been able to send your post on this
> list. You are
"Brain"/"Body" are just ideas in consciousness. The experience of "I" is
eternal and it is how self-reference feels itself.
On Thursday, 20 June 2019 00:29:43 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
>
> My brain/body (Me) has the *experience* I am. *That* *experience* occurs
> nowhere else.
>
--
You
"First person self-reference" is a pleonasm. Self-reference IS first
person. Anything else, "3rd person bla-bla", is just words-play.
On Tuesday, 18 June 2019 21:00:22 UTC+3, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> As I said already, you are right. What you describe is the “first person
> self-reference”.
>
But there are no legs in the first place. "Legs" are from the very start
just ideas in consciousness.
Also, self-reference doesn't "happen". Self-reference eternally is. All the
consciousness in the world are self-reference. Self-reference is no-thing
(in the sense that it is not a thing, it
These are interesting things that you say, and indeed I'm postponing for a
while the wearing of the colored glasses for a week, primarily because I
would look weird at work with colored glasses all the time. But sooner or
later I will do the experiment, because it is also my belief that the
Only because you don't remember, it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Is like
dreaming. Most of the time when we wake up we don't remember anything. But
if we are woken up during the night, we clearly remember dreaming. Also, a
guy once told me something very interesting. He said that when he had
"Machine" is just an idea in consciousness. Consciousness is the nature of
reality. You don't create it. It always is. Is like saying: "Machines will
one day be able to produce electrons, only if we write the proper algorithm
for electrons". lol
On Thursday, 20 June 2019 14:29:52 UTC+3,
You can clearly say that there are structures inside qualia, but the final
quale is always singular. The highest quale that you experience is the
present moment as such. And present moment as such, as a quale on its own,
doesn't have another quale to compare with. So it shouldn't be possible to
Self-reference not being a formal entity, it can maintain at its unformal
level propositions like "1=2". Therefore, it can look-back-at-itself in all
kinds of way without creating contradictions, so it is able to bring
multiple consciousnesses into existence, all consciousnesses having as
And when a telepathy happens, what happens is that self-reference
looks-back at 2 of its forms, and thus unite them into 1 form. If on the
left you have "I am" and on the right you have "I am "I am"",
self-reference will look at both at the same time and creates: I am ["I am"
& "I am "I am""].
Note that we know that telepathies are never 100% accurate. Some might
dream of eating food, some other might dream of drinking water. But there
was a telepathy, the telepathy of "ingesting something". This is because
self-reference being any of its "I am"s, it doesn't necessarily have to
What is a "proto"experience ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the
Time is a quale in consciousness.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on
Have a look at my paper "The Problem of the Self" for some of your wonders:
https://philpeople.org/profiles/cosmin-visan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
Right-click -> Copy image location, to see the full picture in a new tab.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
Fake news.
On Tuesday, 11 June 2019 20:34:15 UTC+3, howardmarks wrote:
>
> they couldn't get even one hit.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
Computing = empty concept.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web
I work as a software developer, if, then, get, set.
This is a game that I made in university just4fun:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt8LFl7t2oE
On Wednesday, 12 June 2019 00:34:00 UTC+3, Philip Thrift wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 4:18:15 PM UTC-5, Cosmin Visan wrote:
>>
>>
And also a song that I made, why not:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8_n-Ljl8MU
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
Fake news.
On Monday, 10 June 2019 11:46:47 UTC+3, howardmarks wrote:
>
> It seems like both you guys don't know much about the scientific method as
> applies to psi, especially if you can make statements like below. You have
> ignored maybe 250 years of studies by 100s of well-qualified
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2rOFo8X_rs
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this
You are always receiving proofs, but you always mindlessly reject them
because you are indoctrinated.
Bem did some experiments proving precognition. 90 other experiments
replicated those results. So where are those "ZERO people" that you talk
about ? Fake news much ?
1 - 100 of 368 matches
Mail list logo
