Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
R C Macaulay wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. Particularly one who can materialize gold coins, eh? Howdy Vorts, 'Bout now the boys at the Dime Box are scratching their heads in wonder how this thread morphed in eastern mysticism. I thought wez discussing how the bartender could somehow slide a mug of beer down the bar at just the right time... but .. I can understand that people might not understand the understanding with the patrons. Read The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. Particularly one who can materialize gold coins, eh? Howdy Vorts, 'Bout now the boys at the Dime Box are scratching their heads in wonder how this thread morphed in eastern mysticism. I thought wez discussing how the bartender could somehow slide a mug of beer down the bar at just the right time... but .. I can understand that people might not understand the understanding with the patrons. Richard
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Let me answer your question, Richard. The issue was how does a person evaluate reality. Of course, different kinds of or different levels of reality exist. Therefore, different methods are required. Science uses objective evaluation of observation in the material world. The question was raised about thought transfer as an example of a phenomenon that appears to be outside of the material world. The resulting discussion involved how this phenomenon is investigated and how would it behave if real? I provided another example of this type of reality in the person of Sai Baba. No mysticism is involved. My point is that examples exist of phenomenon beyond our understanding of the material world that can be tested and verified. Faith and religion are not involved. Of course, these examples impact on religion, but they do not require a religious belief. The examples have the same reality we attribute to any chemical or physical reaction, except they have no physical explanation. How does an open minded person deal with such a situation? Dismissing the phenomena as mysticism is a cop-out. Ed R C Macaulay wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. Particularly one who can materialize gold coins, eh? Howdy Vorts, 'Bout now the boys at the Dime Box are scratching their heads in wonder how this thread morphed in eastern mysticism. I thought wez discussing how the bartender could somehow slide a mug of beer down the bar at just the right time... but .. I can understand that people might not understand the understanding with the patrons. Richard
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Howdy Ed, A very quality analysis of the direction taken in the thread. I always understood Sai Baba to be a mystic but I can agree a mystic may not be considered a mystic as long as his heart is pure and the gold is 24 karat.. Ole Balaam had this problem too, but God helped him out a little by having his donkey make a jackass outa him. Balaam was from an ole line of soothsayers,cardsharps, con men, magicians, seers, socalled prophets and general all around handy people to have around when you had the money and needed a favor. A The two magicians in Pharoah's court were kinfolks of Balaam that lost a perfectly good snake during a magic trick they played on Moses.. but ain't nobuddy perfect. I always gave PT Barnum credit for having a sense of humor and he pulled a few rabbits outa his hat for fun and profit. Ed Storms wrote. Let me answer your question, Richard. The issue was how does a person evaluate reality. Of course, different kinds of or different levels of reality exist. Therefore, different methods are required. Science uses objective evaluation of observation in the material world. The question was raised about thought transfer as an example of a phenomenon that appears to be outside of the material world. The resulting discussion involved how this phenomenon is investigated and how would it behave if real? I provided another example of this type of reality in the person of Sai Baba. No mysticism is involved. My point is that examples exist of phenomenon beyond our understanding of the material world that can be tested and verified. Faith and religion are not involved. Of course, these examples impact on religion, but they do not require a religious belief. The examples have the same reality we attribute to any chemical or physical reaction, except they have no physical explanation. How does an open minded person deal with such a situation? Dismissing the phenomena as mysticism is a cop-out.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, Yes - I know something of Sai Baba, the latest in a lineage of Sai Babas. I also know a disciple who spent 25 years at his ashrama. But Sai Baba is also part of the dream... Which dream is that? Or do you mean that we can only dream that the message will come true? I'm not fixated on Richard Rose, nor anyone for that matter; been there, done all that. This thread runs a long way... May I suggest that you read just the first chapter of After the Absolute by Dave Gold. Ordinariness has its attractiveness... You can read the chapter (in fact the entire book) on-line. Thanks, I ordered the book. Ed P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 9:23:11 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Thanks for pointing this out, Philip. I have not read of Richard Rose, but I know of many other people who have acquired extraordinary insight. In addition, some people have also been able to master some of the abilities Sai Baba exhibits. As with all things, these talents occur throughout the population to varying degree. However, only Sai Baba has these abilities in complete form and totally at his control. Besides, he is using the abilities to focus attention on a message worth hearing. This is not always the case. Sai Baba says that additional men having the same abilities are alive now in various countries and presently at different ages who will carry the message into the future. Keep your eyes open. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, I wonder if you've ever heard of a man they called the Backwoods Buddha... Look him up on the 'Net if you're interested... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:30:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Sai Baba is presently helping remake India by supporting schools he founded that teach his philosophy along with modern technology. As he says, a person can not remake the world without first remaking his own country. Obviously, the spirit world believe this is easier to do in India than elsewhere. I agree. The spirit world attempted to do this in the middle East 2000 years ago, but now look at the mess. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? A person only knows what they seek to learn. The information about Sai Baba is easily available, but not in the American press. But then, what's new about tat? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? One man, no matter how talented, can not do it alone. His role is to teach other people how to solve the problems. After all, it was mankind who created the problems in the first place. We need to learn how to stop doing this. Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? His message will eventually start another religion, as have the messages of the other messengers. However, this takes time. Gradually, this religion will be corrupted, as has happened every time repair was attempted, and the process will be repeated. Gradually, mankind will learn to avoid religion, as some of us have already mastered. So, what is he doing with his powers, aside from healing a relative handful of individuals? (In a world of 7 billion, hands-on healing of individuals can never reach more than a relative handful, of course. Another bit of perspective: Bill Gates, with his charitable work which includes large scale vaccination
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Hi Ed, Glad to hear you got the book. I enjoyed it immensely. Difficult to explain what I meant by the dream, especially in an email forum of any sort. It may become a little clearer once you read what Rose had to say. Philip. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, June 6, 2008 1:30:40 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, Yes - I know something of Sai Baba, the latest in a lineage of Sai Babas. I also know a disciple who spent 25 years at his ashrama. But Sai Baba is also part of the dream... Which dream is that? Or do you mean that we can only dream that the message will come true? I'm not fixated on Richard Rose, nor anyone for that matter; been there, done all that. This thread runs a long way... May I suggest that you read just the first chapter of After the Absolute by Dave Gold. Ordinariness has its attractiveness... You can read the chapter (in fact the entire book) on-line. Thanks, I ordered the book. Ed P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 9:23:11 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Thanks for pointing this out, Philip. I have not read of Richard Rose, but I know of many other people who have acquired extraordinary insight. In addition, some people have also been able to master some of the abilities Sai Baba exhibits. As with all things, these talents occur throughout the population to varying degree. However, only Sai Baba has these abilities in complete form and totally at his control. Besides, he is using the abilities to focus attention on a message worth hearing. This is not always the case. Sai Baba says that additional men having the same abilities are alive now in various countries and presently at different ages who will carry the message into the future. Keep your eyes open. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, I wonder if you've ever heard of a man they called the Backwoods Buddha... Look him up on the 'Net if you're interested... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:30:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Sai Baba is presently helping remake India by supporting schools he founded that teach his philosophy along with modern technology. As he says, a person can not remake the world without first remaking his own country. Obviously, the spirit world believe this is easier to do in India than elsewhere. I agree. The spirit world attempted to do this in the middle East 2000 years ago, but now look at the mess. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? A person only knows what they seek to learn. The information about Sai Baba is easily available, but not in the American press. But then, what's new about tat? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? One man, no matter how talented, can not do it alone. His role is to teach other people how to solve the problems. After all, it was mankind who created the problems in the first place. We need to learn how to stop doing this. Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? His message will eventually start another religion, as have the messages of the other messengers. However, this takes time. Gradually, this religion will be corrupted
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Edmund Storms wrote: . Regardless of the difficulty in accepting the claims and observations, when thousands of people keep experiencing the same reproducible events, something real must be happening. I don't want this to be a discussion of Sai Baba. Nevertheless, his existence raises some important questions about how we evaluate reality. Since we are discussing reality and how to separate the real from the imagined, we must evaluate such phenomenon by Sai Baba is an interesting person. I met a man who was healed by him. Worn out knees are difficult to fix, and expensive to replace. Materializing gold is quite a trick too. It would be interesting to do an analysis of that ash that he materalizes. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
thomas malloy wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: . Regardless of the difficulty in accepting the claims and observations, when thousands of people keep experiencing the same reproducible events, something real must be happening. I don't want this to be a discussion of Sai Baba. Nevertheless, his existence raises some important questions about how we evaluate reality. Since we are discussing reality and how to separate the real from the imagined, we must evaluate such phenomenon by Sai Baba is an interesting person. I met a man who was healed by him. Worn out knees are difficult to fix, and expensive to replace. Materializing gold is quite a trick too. It would be interesting to do an analysis of that ash that he materalizes. Indeed, I suggest he is more than interesting, Thomas. Every once in awhile a person comes along who has such unusual abilities that the whole fabric of conventional reality is brought into question. This, I believe, is what Sai Baba has done. He makes claims about how the spirit reality works and does things that are impossible without his claims being true. In fact, he readily admits, this is exactly what his tricks are intended to do. In his case, what appears to be magic actually occurs, as many people have clearly seen. Consequently, his existence is unique and needs to be examined beyond the claims and logic of religion. As he says, he is the messenger who comes from the spirit world about every 2000 years to clean up the mess mankind has made of the last message. This is a claim worth exploring without imposing any religious connotations. As for the ash and objects he materializes, these have been examined closely by scientists in India, as you might expect. Also, you can forget the arguments advanced by the usual skeptics because his abilities have been examined very closely in India by experts and thousands of people on many occasions. Apparently, the objects he materializes are normal and seem to have been transported from where they are made by the usual methods into his hand where they become visible. Of course, the process violates our ideas of space and time. The ash is a water soluble organic material similar to solid honey that is observed to form about a centimeter below his outstretched palm in quantities that are observed on occasion to reach many hundreds of pounds. It is also been observed that the material forms spontaneously in the homes of certain people in India. Of course, all of this has to be accepted from the testimony of people who have witnessed the events, of which there are many thousand in India. And of course, some of the events will be exaggerated. This does not change the fact that such a person with very unusual abilities exists at the present time. At last count, I found at least 150 books about him available on www.amazon.com. Ed --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. By your account there are at least 150 books that have been written on Baba. And yet Baba remains primarily an unknown individual, particularly within our objectively oriented western culture. It would seem that collectively speaking we have made a tact pact to ignore the significance of what Sai teaches us, perhaps because the majority of us would for the moment prefer to remain transfixed within the manufactured belief that reality manipulates us rather than the other way around. If history is any indication it would not surprise me if the accounts of Sai Baba will be more widely known and better respected by the inhabitants of this planet a thousand years from now. Sooner or later, all children must grow up, some kicking and screaming the whole way. Thanks for all the Ashes, Baba. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? So, what is he doing with his powers, aside from healing a relative handful of individuals? (In a world of 7 billion, hands-on healing of individuals can never reach more than a relative handful, of course. Another bit of perspective: Bill Gates, with his charitable work which includes large scale vaccination programs, has surely already reached more people and prevented more disease than any single hands-on healer could cure in a lifetime. Yet Gates is no miracle worker; surely someone who can bend reality to his will should be able to do better than Gates.) Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. And it could be done subtly, as well; all the world over there are stock markets which shower riches on those with true prescience (or good judgment), and the phenomenon of getting rich playing the market is common enough that it would not raise cries of Demon! if someone with true second sight were to use it that way. By your account there are at least 150 books that have been written on Baba. And yet Baba remains primarily an unknown individual, particularly within our objectively oriented western culture. It would seem that collectively speaking we have made a tact pact to ignore the significance of what Sai teaches us, perhaps because the majority of us would for the moment prefer to remain transfixed within the manufactured belief that reality manipulates us rather than the other way around. If history is any indication it would not surprise me if the accounts of Sai Baba will be more widely known and better respected by the inhabitants of this planet a thousand years from now. Sooner or later, all children must grow up, some kicking and screaming the whole way. Thanks for all the Ashes, Baba. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Hi Stephen, I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? No apologies are necessary. ;-) IMO: I suspect the phrase fix up the mess is being taken out of context. Please consider the following as metaphor. Consider the possibility that a wise parent learned long ago not to fix the problems his children create. He advises, he suggests, he encourages. But he doesn't fix our problems - just for us. What would we learn if a parent constantly fixed the problems we created ourselves? It's a perfect recipe for keeping us at the level of ignorant foolish children for all of eternity. Ironically, it would seem that some of us would actually prefer to remain as innocent ignorant children! (The fall from grace fable.) But alas, sooner or later we'd just create the same mess again, and again, then we would be right back to where we started, pissed of at our current concept of a Deity for not bailing us out. Well... screw you, G_d! You, must not exist Your comments strike me personally as if it shares a tiny element of this frustration. In fact your comments almost strike me as being pissed of at this Baba guy for not doing more to help us out. After all, if Baba really is as powerful as some suspect he is why isn't he DOING something fixing things up for us! FWIW: I often hear a similar argument originating from many atheists, some who almost strike me personally as if they are unconsciously pissed off at this G_d concept, because how could a G_d allow so many unspeakable horrors to run rampant across our planet. Therefore, almost in retaliation, many become outraged at the perceived injustice of it all and subsequently conclude there must be no G_d, cuz a real G_d (if one actually existed, sitting in his rocking chair with his hearing aid turned off) would have prevented the messes we find ourselves mired in. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? I repeat what I said previously: It would seem that collectively speaking we have made a tact pact to ignore the significance of what Sai teaches us, perhaps because the majority of us would for the moment prefer to remain transfixed within the manufactured belief that reality manipulates us rather than the other way around. The master shows his disciples the trick of manifesting ash seemingly out of thin air. Afterwards, he gazes at his astonished students, and then asks, OK, YOUR TURN. What do YOU want to manifest? Just my two cents Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
alternatively... God created us to fix his mistakes. [Sometimeschildren do end up fixing their parents mistakes] ;-) Harry - Original Message - From: OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, June 5, 2008 5:18 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Hi Stephen,I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to "fix up the mess" in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? No apologies are necessary. ;-) IMO: I suspect the phrase "fix up the mess" is being taken out of context. Please consider the following as metaphor. Consider the possibility that a wise parent learned long ago not to fix the problems his children create. He advises, he suggests, he encourages. But he doesn't fix our problems - just for us. What would we learn if a parent constantly fixed the problems we created ourselves? It's a perfect recipe for keeping us at the level of ignorant foolish children for all of eternity. Ironically, it would seem that some of us would actually prefer to remain as innocent ignorant childr! en! (The
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Ed, I wonder if you've ever heard of a man they called the Backwoods Buddha... Look him up on the 'Net if you're interested... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:30:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Sai Baba is presently helping remake India by supporting schools he founded that teach his philosophy along with modern technology. As he says, a person can not remake the world without first remaking his own country. Obviously, the spirit world believe this is easier to do in India than elsewhere. I agree. The spirit world attempted to do this in the middle East 2000 years ago, but now look at the mess. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? A person only knows what they seek to learn. The information about Sai Baba is easily available, but not in the American press. But then, what's new about tat? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? One man, no matter how talented, can not do it alone. His role is to teach other people how to solve the problems. After all, it was mankind who created the problems in the first place. We need to learn how to stop doing this. Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? His message will eventually start another religion, as have the messages of the other messengers. However, this takes time. Gradually, this religion will be corrupted, as has happened every time repair was attempted, and the process will be repeated. Gradually, mankind will learn to avoid religion, as some of us have already mastered. So, what is he doing with his powers, aside from healing a relative handful of individuals? (In a world of 7 billion, hands-on healing of individuals can never reach more than a relative handful, of course. Another bit of perspective: Bill Gates, with his charitable work which includes large scale vaccination programs, has surely already reached more people and prevented more disease than any single hands-on healer could cure in a lifetime. Yet Gates is no miracle worker; surely someone who can bend reality to his will should be able to do better than Gates.) The individual is not as important as the whole of mankind. Mankind can only advance as fast as a certain level of understanding develops. This is a gradual process. Meanwhile individuals come and go, with each adding, or sometimes subtracting from this understanding. Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. And it could be done subtly, as well; all the world over there are stock markets which shower riches on those with true prescience (or good judgment), and the phenomenon of getting rich playing the market is common enough that it would not raise cries of Demon! if someone with true second sight were to use it that way. You are thinking too small. If this talent were used, it would destabilize the markets and cause all kinds of unwanted attention. Sai Baba gets his money from gifts, which is easier do do than playing the markets. Ed By your account there are at least 150 books that have been written on Baba. And yet Baba remains primarily an unknown individual, particularly within our objectively oriented western culture. It would seem that collectively speaking we have made a tact pact to ignore the significance of what Sai teaches us, perhaps because the majority of us would for the moment prefer to remain transfixed within the manufactured belief that reality
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Harry sez: alternatively... God created us to fix his mistakes. [Sometimes children do end up fixing their parents mistakes] ;-) Harry LOL! Metaphorically speaking: Even G_d is surprised at what is occasionally manifested. Whoa! You did what Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Thanks for pointing this out, Philip. I have not read of Richard Rose, but I know of many other people who have acquired extraordinary insight. In addition, some people have also been able to master some of the abilities Sai Baba exhibits. As with all things, these talents occur throughout the population to varying degree. However, only Sai Baba has these abilities in complete form and totally at his control. Besides, he is using the abilities to focus attention on a message worth hearing. This is not always the case. Sai Baba says that additional men having the same abilities are alive now in various countries and presently at different ages who will carry the message into the future. Keep your eyes open. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, I wonder if you've ever heard of a man they called the Backwoods Buddha... Look him up on the 'Net if you're interested... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:30:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Sai Baba is presently helping remake India by supporting schools he founded that teach his philosophy along with modern technology. As he says, a person can not remake the world without first remaking his own country. Obviously, the spirit world believe this is easier to do in India than elsewhere. I agree. The spirit world attempted to do this in the middle East 2000 years ago, but now look at the mess. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? A person only knows what they seek to learn. The information about Sai Baba is easily available, but not in the American press. But then, what's new about tat? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? One man, no matter how talented, can not do it alone. His role is to teach other people how to solve the problems. After all, it was mankind who created the problems in the first place. We need to learn how to stop doing this. Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? His message will eventually start another religion, as have the messages of the other messengers. However, this takes time. Gradually, this religion will be corrupted, as has happened every time repair was attempted, and the process will be repeated. Gradually, mankind will learn to avoid religion, as some of us have already mastered. So, what is he doing with his powers, aside from healing a relative handful of individuals? (In a world of 7 billion, hands-on healing of individuals can never reach more than a relative handful, of course. Another bit of perspective: Bill Gates, with his charitable work which includes large scale vaccination programs, has surely already reached more people and prevented more disease than any single hands-on healer could cure in a lifetime. Yet Gates is no miracle worker; surely someone who can bend reality to his will should be able to do better than Gates.) The individual is not as important as the whole of mankind. Mankind can only advance as fast as a certain level of understanding develops. This is a gradual process. Meanwhile individuals come and go, with each adding, or sometimes subtracting from this understanding. Money could not be a problem for a miracle worker, of course -- it takes only the slightest ability to affect the laws of chance, or the teeniest ability to predict the future, to allow one to amass as much wealth as you could possibly need. And it could be done subtly, as well; all the world over there are stock markets which shower riches on those with true prescience (or good judgment), and the phenomenon of getting rich playing the market is common enough that it would
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Ed, Yes - I know something of Sai Baba, the latest in a lineage of Sai Babas. I also know a disciple who spent 25 years at his ashrama. But Sai Baba is also part of the dream... I'm not fixated on Richard Rose, nor anyone for that matter; been there, done all that. This thread runs a long way... May I suggest that you read just the first chapter of After the Absolute by Dave Gold. Ordinariness has its attractiveness... You can read the chapter (in fact the entire book) on-line. P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 9:23:11 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Thanks for pointing this out, Philip. I have not read of Richard Rose, but I know of many other people who have acquired extraordinary insight. In addition, some people have also been able to master some of the abilities Sai Baba exhibits. As with all things, these talents occur throughout the population to varying degree. However, only Sai Baba has these abilities in complete form and totally at his control. Besides, he is using the abilities to focus attention on a message worth hearing. This is not always the case. Sai Baba says that additional men having the same abilities are alive now in various countries and presently at different ages who will carry the message into the future. Keep your eyes open. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Ed, I wonder if you've ever heard of a man they called the Backwoods Buddha... Look him up on the 'Net if you're interested... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:30:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: Thanks for bringing Sai Baba back to my attention, Ed. How foolish of me to have temporarily forgotten him. Isn't it interesting that someone with his unique perception on reality, combined with his ability to manipulate reality (seemingly the fundamental laws of physics) as Sai does remains, for the most part, an undiscovered resource of the potentiality of humanity. I'm sorry, but I have to ask this... If he can work miracles, and if he's here to fix up the mess in any way shape or form, what's he actually doing to fix things up? Sai Baba is presently helping remake India by supporting schools he founded that teach his philosophy along with modern technology. As he says, a person can not remake the world without first remaking his own country. Obviously, the spirit world believe this is easier to do in India than elsewhere. I agree. The spirit world attempted to do this in the middle East 2000 years ago, but now look at the mess. Turn it around: Sai Baba is a miracle worker and yet his impact has apparently been so slight that people outside of India are nearly unaware of him. Why is that? A person only knows what they seek to learn. The information about Sai Baba is easily available, but not in the American press. But then, what's new about tat? The world abounds with problems which cry out for the touch of a miracle worker, from lack of clean water for humans to lack of usable habitat for polar bears. Surely someone gifted with physical powers which allow him to manipulate reality at a fundamental level should be doing more with this capability than just using it as a sort of publicity stunt to get folks to come and listen to his sermons? One man, no matter how talented, can not do it alone. His role is to teach other people how to solve the problems. After all, it was mankind who created the problems in the first place. We need to learn how to stop doing this. Philosophers ultimately wield great influence over events, it is true. But whatever power sent Sai Baba here must have intended him to be more than a philosopher, else why grant him such astonishing *physical* abilities? His message will eventually start another religion, as have the messages of the other messengers. However, this takes time. Gradually, this religion will be corrupted, as has happened every time repair was attempted, and the process will be repeated. Gradually, mankind will learn to avoid religion, as some of us have already mastered. So, what is he doing with his powers, aside from healing a relative handful of individuals? (In a world of 7 billion, hands-on healing of individuals can never reach more than a relative handful, of course. Another bit of perspective: Bill Gates, with his charitable work which includes large scale vaccination programs, has surely already reached more people and prevented more disease than any single hands-on healer could cure in a lifetime. Yet Gates is no miracle worker; surely someone who can bend reality to his will should be able to do better than Gates.) The individual
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Howdy Ed, This thread is becoming most interesting because it deals with a voyage toward a science of ideas where, once embarked upon that sea, there can be no return. Our decision then becomes that of selecting the posture one takes in the boat, As the human species of flesh on an earth, populated by animals, we alone, do not practice survival of the fittest. Jones touched on this subject some time back with his comment on maji. On occasion, in history, a single brilliant mind may rise every couple hundred years. One of my grandchildren is in private school for gifted children. These children have every resource available for their education and they demonstrate certain intellectual heights that cannot be otherwise explained except to describe them as gifted. The school has yet to reveal a maji after 60 years and some 100 grads per year. The school has children from across the earth. There are perhaps a half dozen schools like this in the USA. The represent a form of intellectual survival of the fittest. There are examples of this practice in history.. Alexandria, Byzantine, Seville, Florence, etc. There are also schools on earth for the black arts. The US government is now budgeting a fortune toward these black arts schools. Richard Ed Storms wrote, Of course, these ideas are not accepted because the process is not very reproducible and has no theory to explain it. (Does this sound familiar?) In addition, as Steven pointed out, a person with this ability might want to hid this fact.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Edmund Storms wrote: To get back to science, a lot of scientific study has been done to reveal the existence of this ability. The results of this work, at least to me, show that thought transfer is real. But like all such claims, this belief is rejected by conventional science. My question is, what would it take to change this attitude? Or is this possibility too scary for it to be accepted regardless of the evidence or logic? What it would take, for me at least, is an experiment which can't be shown to be flawed, and which can be reproduced by other labs. I'm not aware of such. Are you aware of such, and can you provide a reference? I was very interested in this at one point, but as I seem to recall Rhine's research, which was the big one for a long time, came to a dead end and was dropped. My general impression is that his earlier results, which looked great, were flawed, possibly by data selection (dropping the bad runs out of the dataset) but it's been a long time and I'm hazy on the details now; his later results, which were not apparently flawed, saw the results recede to about the level of chance. I recall some results showing either precognition or telekinesis using a quantum random number generator, not at Rhine's lab, which looked very promising but again I recall it came to naught and I'm no longer sure why; that, too, was a long time ago. There have been others, of course, many others, but I'm not aware that anyone managed to produce solid results which were above reproach and which could be reproduced. Reproducibility has plagued the field, that's for sure, as have charlatans, who make this area into a mine field. Geller is the most obvious example, but as far as I know all the individuals who've turned up showing exceptional ESP talent can be shown with reasonable confidence to be fakes. This is not to say the researchers at ESP labs are intentionally faking anything -- but unlike the field of LENR, where the beaker of electrolyte just sits there innocently, the subjects they're studying don't just sit there and a lot of them aren't innocent. Makes it tough to sort the wheat from the chaff. Randi has had a field day debunking stuff in this area, and unlike his efforts at debunking hard science experiments where he flounders around like a pig on roller skates and relies heavily on proof by assertion, this sort of thing actually *does* lie within his area of expertise. Mentalist acts are stock and trade of magic shows and the techniques used by magicians can be used to very good effect to produce apparently positive results in ESP experiments.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Edmund Storms wrote: Interesting logic, Stephen. Let's explore another possibility. Suppose thought transfer is common in animals that do not have a complex language. One might use schooling fish as an example or perhaps a flock of birds. While other explanations can be suggested for the observed behavior, thought transfer provides a very consistent explanation. In addition, this ability would have great survival value. It's also interesting to note that this avoids the problems I pointed out with involuntary mind reading. Thought transference of this sort would presumably require the cooperation of the *sender*, and hence would not automatically lead to an arms race, or to the evolution of brainwave jamming. I find the arguments I put forth reasonably convincing as regards pull transfers, and the possibility that you'll someday meet someone who can read your mind and tell what you've got in your hand during a poker game. But those arguments don't bear at all on sender-initiated push transfers.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
R C Macaulay wrote: Howdy Ed, This thread is becoming most interesting because it deals with a voyage toward a science of ideas where, once embarked upon that sea, there can be no return. Our decision then becomes that of selecting the posture one takes in the boat, I agree partially Richard, this is one of our decisions that needs to be made. We also need to decide where the boat is heading and what we do when we get there. As the human species of flesh on an earth, populated by animals, we alone, do not practice survival of the fittest. Since when? No species PRACTICES survival of the fittest. Instead this is imposed on them. We are now being selected based on a different criteria than was imposed in the past. Of course, the criteria depends on which country and where in that country a person happens to live. Jones touched on this subject some time back with his comment on maji. On occasion, in history, a single brilliant mind may rise every couple hundred years. I suggest part of this brilliance is the ability to learn from thought transfer. One of my grandchildren is in private school for gifted children. These children have every resource available for their education and they demonstrate certain intellectual heights that cannot be otherwise explained except to describe them as gifted. The school has yet to reveal a maji after 60 years and some 100 grads per year. The school has children from across the earth. While these gifted kids are being taught conventional knowledge, they have to learn the skill of mind reading on their own, which is not easy and is usually discouraged. I suggest that without this skill, a person will only be gifted and never a maji. I suggest you study the life and teachings of Sai Baba (check Amazon.com) to see this process in operation. There are perhaps a half dozen schools like this in the USA. The represent a form of intellectual survival of the fittest. There are examples of this practice in history.. Alexandria, Byzantine, Seville, Florence, etc. There are also schools on earth for the black arts. The US government is now budgeting a fortune toward these black arts schools. What skills do the black arts schools teach? I presume we are not talking about Harry Potter. Regards, Ed Richard Ed Storms wrote, Of course, these ideas are not accepted because the process is not very reproducible and has no theory to explain it. (Does this sound familiar?) In addition, as Steven pointed out, a person with this ability might want to hid this fact.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Wow! There's been a LOT said on this subject. Jones! What a Chicken Heart monster you unleashed on New York City! ;-) Let me add yet a few more pennies to the on-going fertile discussion of alleged mind-transference - is it real or is it Memorex. First, two personal experiences: (Experience ONE) Back in the early 90s I was driving down University Avenue in Madison one day after work when suddenly I had strong sudden impulsive urge to veer to the right and head over to my parent's house. (They conveniently lived within a mile of my own home.) I really had to struggle with this sudden impulse because I was sure I had other things I rather be doing right at that moment and I wondered if I was simply wasting my time with an unplanned visit right before dinner time. But veer right I did. When I entered the front door I discovered that my mother had just fallen down the basement stairs and had broken her right tibia. She was delirious. She had probably suffered a concussion as well. (Experience TWO) back in the 80s I was (once again) driving in my car thinking of nothing in particular when I suddenly began envisioning hot gaseous clouds of deadly radiation. I saw images of bright white steamy clouds of hot radioactive steam and/or smoke - and death. I hated those visions. I wondered why my imagination had suddenly become so morbidly transfixed on a horrible scenario that spelled death. Making things worse for me the imagery felt so personal. Why the hell would I want to personally imagine such destruction. I also wondered if I personally was going to experience some kind of a nuclear attack, probably from the Russians. (They were still a secretive country - USSR, under Gorbachev's rule.) After several visions I finally said enough! of this morbidity made an effort to purge them out of my mind. As far as I was concerned they were useless morbid imaginations. Nothing good would come from them. And I also didn't want to believe in the possibility that I was about to be nuked. Best to remain blissfully ignorant! Several days later the world learned about Chernobyl disaster. Both of my personal experiences are obviously anecdotal in nature. But just try convincing me that both were nothing more than personal random experiences that just happened to coincide with external incidents. * * * * * Ok, and now, to put myself on the line so-to-speak, I shall relay one more final personal experience from approximately three to six months ago. Actually, this experience has yet to be played out, IMO. The experience was actually quite simple in nature. Nothing really all that profound, mind you, but at least it was more pleasantly experienced. It was a sudden and unexpected felt conviction - an emotionally felt state-of-mind that suddenly and inexplicitly swept over me. It was a sudden conviction that a new promising alternative energy invention and/or technology would soon make its debut. (Of course, soon is a relative term as we vorts have learned the hard way!) Having had these kinds of mundane-like convictions in the past I've learned to interpret them as random hits. (I certainly wouldn't bet on them!) I ended up interpreting the experience as follows: I think it's possible my sensory feelers might have picked up on some individual's emotionally felt conviction, some individual and/or group that has been working within a controversial branch of the AE field for quite some time. I also got the impression that it came from an individual few of us Vorts have actually heard of, but I could be wrong. Perhaps I had randomly picked up on the emotions coming from an enthusiastic engineer who had just completed a successful hydrino generating test from the BLP's labs. Who knows!!! I speculate that what I picked up on was a random hit of the individual's emotionally felt conviction that he/she had had completed a special test, a test that had at least convinced themselves UTTERLY at that moment in time that they were on the right path, that they believed beyond a shadow of doubt that they had discovered a way (a path way) of generating a clean and abundant source of energy. But then, perhaps what they experienced was just that: An enthusiastic belief that they were on the right path. Perhaps after they stop celebrating their success and they take a closer look at the data, they may eventually discover that the findings may not be as impressive as originally perceived. Or perhaps the actual engineering involved that would allow their dream to manifest is not so forgiving. I just don't know. FWIW: I actually briefly talked about this personal impression within Vortex several months ago, so those who are curious you can probably find my ramblings in the archives. I believe Terry Blanton contributed a brief reply. As for me I'm just not motivated enough to dig through the archives to find out what it was that I actually said. Just lazy, I guess. Will it come to pass. Beats me. To be honest a skeptic would say my
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Thanks -- that's a very nifty pair of anecdotes. As one of our favorite demons once said, The plural of anecdote is data (from the collected aphorisms of Bob Park). They have a big advantage over the theophanies which are commonly experienced (and which are one of the primary engines which keep religious belief going from one generation to the next, IMHO): They both had direct connections to external events, which makes them more than just symptoms of a purely internal funky state of mind. As to the third one -- well, as you said, we'll just have to wait and see. OrionWorks wrote: Wow! There's been a LOT said on this subject. Jones! What a Chicken Heart monster you unleashed on New York City! ;-) Let me add yet a few more pennies to the on-going fertile discussion of alleged mind-transference - is it real or is it Memorex. First, two personal experiences: (Experience ONE) Back in the early 90s I was driving down University Avenue in Madison one day after work when suddenly I had strong sudden impulsive urge to veer to the right and head over to my parent's house. (They conveniently lived within a mile of my own home.) I really had to struggle with this sudden impulse because I was sure I had other things I rather be doing right at that moment and I wondered if I was simply wasting my time with an unplanned visit right before dinner time. But veer right I did. When I entered the front door I discovered that my mother had just fallen down the basement stairs and had broken her right tibia. She was delirious. She had probably suffered a concussion as well. (Experience TWO) back in the 80s I was (once again) driving in my car thinking of nothing in particular when I suddenly began envisioning hot gaseous clouds of deadly radiation. I saw images of bright white steamy clouds of hot radioactive steam and/or smoke - and death. I hated those visions. I wondered why my imagination had suddenly become so morbidly transfixed on a horrible scenario that spelled death. Making things worse for me the imagery felt so personal. Why the hell would I want to personally imagine such destruction. I also wondered if I personally was going to experience some kind of a nuclear attack, probably from the Russians. (They were still a secretive country - USSR, under Gorbachev's rule.) After several visions I finally said enough! of this morbidity made an effort to purge them out of my mind. As far as I was concerned they were useless morbid imaginations. Nothing good would come from them. And I also didn't want to believe in the possibility that I was about to be nuked. Best to remain blissfully ignorant! Several days later the world learned about Chernobyl disaster. Both of my personal experiences are obviously anecdotal in nature. But just try convincing me that both were nothing more than personal random experiences that just happened to coincide with external incidents. * * * * * Ok, and now, to put myself on the line so-to-speak, I shall relay one more final personal experience from approximately three to six months ago. Actually, this experience has yet to be played out, IMO. The experience was actually quite simple in nature. Nothing really all that profound, mind you, but at least it was more pleasantly experienced. It was a sudden and unexpected felt conviction - an emotionally felt state-of-mind that suddenly and inexplicitly swept over me. It was a sudden conviction that a new promising alternative energy invention and/or technology would soon make its debut. (Of course, soon is a relative term as we vorts have learned the hard way!) Having had these kinds of mundane-like convictions in the past I've learned to interpret them as random hits. (I certainly wouldn't bet on them!) I ended up interpreting the experience as follows: I think it's possible my sensory feelers might have picked up on some individual's emotionally felt conviction, some individual and/or group that has been working within a controversial branch of the AE field for quite some time. I also got the impression that it came from an individual few of us Vorts have actually heard of, but I could be wrong. Perhaps I had randomly picked up on the emotions coming from an enthusiastic engineer who had just completed a successful hydrino generating test from the BLP's labs. Who knows!!! I speculate that what I picked up on was a random hit of the individual's emotionally felt conviction that he/she had had completed a special test, a test that had at least convinced themselves UTTERLY at that moment in time that they were on the right path, that they believed beyond a shadow of doubt that they had discovered a way (a path way) of generating a clean and abundant source of energy. But then, perhaps what they experienced was just that: An enthusiastic belief that they were on the right path. Perhaps after they stop celebrating their success and they take a closer look at the data, they may eventually discover that the findings may not
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
--- Edmund Storms wrote: study the life and teachings of Sai Baba These details do not do justice to the man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirdi_Sai_Baba_movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirdi_Sai_Baba A lazy-boy-lab experiment for the spiritually inclined, or even the spiritually declined, might be of interest ... ...direct from the Church of the Presumptuous Assumption. ... that is, if you should want to take a flyer on push/pull meme transference at the most visceral level, darshan, then this particular meme is fairly well-developed and active - without priestly or guru assistance ... and being more geographically and culturally removed, may be more surprising... Procedure- you must sit still for twenty minutes without nodding off and in a quiet focused meditation. You do not need to know anything about the subject or teacher - just begin the experience with a mantra like sai-baba, and concentrate on deep breathing. Precautionary warning to xenophobes: A single meditation experience, informal and unstructured, but focused on such memes can result in unintended guru-less shaktipat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaktipat Sai baba shared Martin Luthur's 'priesthood of believers' ideal in a different cultural context (which ironically is most often completely ignored by modern Baptists - who typically adore and cling to their Pastors). Anecdotally, the phenomenon seems to occur in a few per hundred individuals, almost at random... so scientifically - it could be called insignificant. The advantage of cross-cultural meditation is that in many cases you may try to consciously avoid a positive reaction, out of fear, but cannot ... worth noting: if you consider yourself to be born again you probably already understand what shaktipat is about, under a different guise. ... a rose by any other name... Signed, Pastor Rod Flash Church of the Presumptuous Assumption.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:46 AM, OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW: I actually briefly talked about this personal impression within Vortex several months ago, so those who are curious you can probably find my ramblings in the archives. I believe Terry Blanton contributed a brief reply. As for me I'm just not motivated enough to dig through the archives to find out what it was that I actually said. Just lazy, I guess. As I have been evoked: I first realized I could experience the emotion of others while experimenting with a combination of organic mescaline and Canadian codeine. Interesting combination, that. I think that the reptilian brain is better at ESP than the higher levels. And like Penrose, et al, I do not believe this is an electromagnetic effect. It is, IMO, qubit related -- a quantum effect. One must be careful to recognize an induced emotion from an internal one. It's not always easy. We are all capable of this transcendental empathy. Terry
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
This reminds me of Cleve Baxter his polygraph machine that he wired up to plants, cell cultures etc. found remote reactions to human thoughts deeds. In one experiment he would grow a culture form an person and have that person go miles away poke himself with a pin he would get a reaction on the polygraph wired to the cell culture. Really bizarre. It has been a long time since his work was described in The Secret Life of Plants I don't know if his ideas of a primary perception were ever researched further. I found his results intriguing but never followed up on it. Ron --On Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM -0400 Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: To get back to science, a lot of scientific study has been done to reveal the existence of this ability. The results of this work, at least to me, show that thought transfer is real. But like all such claims, this belief is rejected by conventional science. My question is, what would it take to change this attitude? Or is this possibility too scary for it to be accepted regardless of the evidence or logic? What it would take, for me at least, is an experiment which can't be shown to be flawed, and which can be reproduced by other labs. I'm not aware of such. Are you aware of such, and can you provide a reference? I was very interested in this at one point, but as I seem to recall Rhine's research, which was the big one for a long time, came to a dead end and was dropped. My general impression is that his earlier results, which looked great, were flawed, possibly by data selection (dropping the bad runs out of the dataset) but it's been a long time and I'm hazy on the details now; his later results, which were not apparently flawed, saw the results recede to about the level of chance. I recall some results showing either precognition or telekinesis using a quantum random number generator, not at Rhine's lab, which looked very promising but again I recall it came to naught and I'm no longer sure why; that, too, was a long time ago. There have been others, of course, many others, but I'm not aware that anyone managed to produce solid results which were above reproach and which could be reproduced. Reproducibility has plagued the field, that's for sure, as have charlatans, who make this area into a mine field. Geller is the most obvious example, but as far as I know all the individuals who've turned up showing exceptional ESP talent can be shown with reasonable confidence to be fakes. This is not to say the researchers at ESP labs are intentionally faking anything -- but unlike the field of LENR, where the beaker of electrolyte just sits there innocently, the subjects they're studying don't just sit there and a lot of them aren't innocent. Makes it tough to sort the wheat from the chaff. Randi has had a field day debunking stuff in this area, and unlike his efforts at debunking hard science experiments where he flounders around like a pig on roller skates and relies heavily on proof by assertion, this sort of thing actually *does* lie within his area of expertise. Mentalist acts are stock and trade of magic shows and the techniques used by magicians can be used to very good effect to produce apparently positive results in ESP experiments.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Terry sez (most eloquently): FWIW: I actually briefly talked about this personal impression within Vortex several months ago, so those who are curious you can probably find my ramblings in the archives. I believe Terry Blanton contributed a brief reply. As for me I'm just not motivated enough to dig through the archives to find out what it was that I actually said. Just lazy, I guess. As I have been evoked: I first realized I could experience the emotion of others while experimenting with a combination of organic mescaline and Canadian codeine. Interesting combination, that. I think that the reptilian brain is better at ESP than the higher levels. Heh! I hadn't thought of the reptilian connection! Makes sense to me! Probably explains all those UFOs we have been seeing as well. Where do they come from? I bet they come from a line of pre-historic intelligent dinosaurs that became sufficiently advanced technologically that they left our planet hundreds of millions of years ago, before the great comet struck. Oh, shoot! Star Trek, Voyager already thought up that premise. It was a good story. What I like about that episode what how more advanced technologically speaking the reptilian ships were from ours. The dinos were insulted to think that we humans were possibly their descendants. It was so insulting they told Janeway and her scale-less simian crew to please leave now and don't come back! And like Penrose, et al, I do not believe this is an electromagnetic effect. It is, IMO, qubit related -- a quantum effect. One must be careful to recognize an induced emotion from an internal one. It's not always easy. We are all capable of this transcendental empathy. Terry Let me add yet another wrinkle: Because most of us rational scientist-types are trained to think in objective technical cause-and-effect terms we often try to model the ESP effect using externalized models. We conceive of a physical transfer mechanism (EM or whatever) of thought energy as being transmitted from one being to another. IMO, this may be an erroneous perception possibly based on the illusion that we tend to believe that we are separate self-conscious individual creatures. Based my own rather mundane meditations combined with readings from various learned scholars I must confess that I've come to appreciate more and more the notion that the I of me really doesn't exist, and never did. CONSCIOUSNESS or AWARENESS exists and always has. It's the only thing that is real as far as I can tell. However, most of us tend to overlook our awareness of AWARENESS (sorry for the redundancy) and instead identify with the external I that AWARENESS perceives, what we call by various names. However, the I of me, which in my case is known as Steven Vincent Johnson with all of it's excessive baggage of thoughts, memories, and emotions, are but a convenient growing collection, a dynamic package that AWARENESS has chosen to fiddle with for AWARENESS'S enjoyment, just to see what will happen next. The key point being: We are all AWARENESS. If one is willing to entertain the notion that who WE really are is really nothing more than AWARENESS, then one begins to comprehend the possibility that there really are no boundaries and/or implied distances between various externally perceived identities - other than the constructs the various externally perceived identities have erected in order to continue to experience the intensity of believing we are separate individual creatures that have been randomly cast out into a scary universe to fend for ourselves. Separateness, Aloneness, such perceptions are experienced intensely! Once AWARENESS acquires the skill of manifesting the illusion of separateness, AWARENESS is in no hurry to tear down the boundaries. But of course, those boundaries occasionally fray a tad at the seams. This occasionally results in a few items slopping over into other portions of AWARENESS's other dynamic packages. But, ahem! Just ignore them if you please, and step back into the illusion. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Jones, Ed, and Richard ponder one of the Big Mysteries pertaining to our Existence: ... Specifically from Jones: Is it possible to stimulate actual scientific advancement through mere intent? Can we even rid ourself from oil addiction this way? ... or is the time horizon too extended for that? ... But - going beyond this one example, are we nevertheless on the cusp of something big (in alternative energy) from another niche (or several of them)? ... due to overwhelming desire, or are we on the cusp of yet another round of disappointment? This brings to mind the many debates concerning Morphogenetic Fields: See: http://www.co-intelligence.org/P-morphogeneticfields.html http://www.mgtaylor.com/delphi/sheldrake.html ...as speculated by Rupert Sheldrake. Ok, some Off-the-wall-thoughts of my own on this speculative matter: There's a popular NewAge saying which proclaims that we create our own reality. I suspect most who ponder the ramifications of the NA phrase take the meaning metaphorically, perhaps in the same vein as reading certain passages from the bible, particularly Genesis. Others are beginning to ponder the ramifications of wondering if there might actually be more to this NA meaning. Back in the 1970s, the pre-NewAge author, Jane Roberts, was one of the first to explore the ramifications in a series of alleged channeled writings - the Seth Material comes to mind. NewAge mumbo-jumbo set aside, I suspect aspects of these ramifications have been explored in certain SF novels. And if not, they damn well should be. FWIW, I'm particularly suspicious of the notion that we, as a species, have not yet matured to the point that we can consciously accept the notion that we might be responsible for creating our own reality. I suspect it would terrify most of us to consider how responsible we are in the manifestation of our surroundings, particularly the cause and effects we experience and blunder through. At our current stage of development we have collectively conspired to create a series of marvelous tools to help us cope with the gravity of the situation, such as Statistics. With Statistics we can divorce ourselves from our creations, allowing ourselves to step out of our creations and observe more objectively how the manifestations we create behave. Acquiring tools like Statistics is not a bad thing! Baby steps. But sooner or later we must grow up, some no doubt kicking and screaming the whole way. No! I wanna keep believing in the Great Punkin! And now, I return the TV back to the viewer. Roll the Outer Limits Credits. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
OrionWorks wrote: There's a popular NewAge saying which proclaims that we create our own reality. I suspect most who ponder the ramifications of the NA phrase take the meaning metaphorically, perhaps in the same vein as reading certain passages from the bible, particularly Genesis. Others are beginning to ponder the ramifications of wondering if there might actually be more to this NA meaning. Back in the 1970s, the pre-NewAge author, Jane Roberts, was one of the first to explore the ramifications in a series of alleged channeled writings - the Seth Material comes to mind. NewAge mumbo-jumbo set aside, I suspect aspects of these ramifications have been explored in certain SF novels. Waldo and Magic, Inc, both by Heinlein are probably the best known. If you've ever heard someone refer to a remote manipulator as a waldo then you've heard of the first of these. The Childe cycle of Gordon Dickson explored a chunk of the idea in Necromancer but Dickson dropped it later on in the series (it makes for a rather hard to manage world). The Practice Effect explores a cute variation on it; can't recall the author. Many, many other books have touched on the notion that belief can make it so. It's an easy proof that in an infinite universe there's a world where magic works. Sadly, it's an equally easy proof that you could never find such a world even if you had interstellar teleportation so you could visit lots and lots of star systems in hardly any time.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
--- Ed, I am not suggesting that intent is ever necessary or required for scientific advancement. After all, we can point to many anecdotes in the history of science where a great advance was either random or accidental. In fact seeming randomness serves to disguise the proportion of cases where intent is useful. Instead, the point is that intent can *on occasion* expedite, or significantly step-up the rate of progress, over what is expected; and furthermore that the occasion itself can be manipulated in a positive way by group *non-physical* input (as well as by real information from the larger group). This has nothing to do with general understanding or interest, any more than a safe can be opened using only intention without the key. That, my friend, is a very fitting example and perfect metaphor for exactly what I am talking about. ... which metaphor does indeed highlight very well the thin-line of applicability to situations where intent can not only expedite but go beyond ... and where intent can materialize in several surprising ways: including looking at a problem outside the box, and having finely honed sensory ability to practice what you preach and reach beyond normal limitations ... Bottom line: you do not always need the key: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004434096_apwasafecracked1stldwritethru.html Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
From Stephen Lawrence ... The Practice Effect explores a cute variation on it; can't recall the author. David Brin is the author. (His series of novels on the Uplifting of species are particularly noteworthy.) In that universe which Brin created the more you worked ON a particular thing (or object) the better the thing got in its purpose. For example, rich people hired others to wear their favorite clothing. The more a particular piece of clothing was worn, the better looking and fitting the clothing became. I believe people in the novel were fond of saying Good Practicing when they bid farewell. If only in our universe! ;-) It's an easy proof that in an infinite universe there's a world where magic works. Sadly, it's an equally easy proof that you could never find such a world even if you had interstellar teleportation so you could visit lots and lots of star systems in hardly any time. That might change after we develop DA's Improbability Drive! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Here on this island, there is this wonderful black box... R. -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 7:28 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention snip It's an easy proof that in an infinite universe there's a world where magic works. Sadly, it's an equally easy proof that you could never find such a world even if you had interstellar teleportation so you could visit lots and lots of star systems in hardly any time.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
At the risk of replowing the same field, of course intention and belief play a role at some level. For example, people can never win at the slots unless they have sufficient belief to actually put the coin into the machine and push the button. If the expected belief is not fulfilled, the conclusion is that the belief was not strong enough. If you win, the belief was clearly justified. Educated people now know that the belief, in this case, had no effect except to start the process. While this is a trivial example, the same process occurs in all actions, frequently where the relationship between belief and outcome is not so clear. Superstition relies on this ambiguity while science attempts to show the underlying process. Unfortunately, many people are not educated enough to understand what is already known and enough true ignorance remains to give support to the belief in magic. To make matters even more confusing, while science attempts to sort out the actions in the material world, I believe the spiritual world can always throw in a joker to confuse the issue. This is how religion gets its power. In addition, must people feel inadequate in their ability to control reality using their knowledge. Instead a strong belief, which everyone has without effort, or faith in a God, which requires no knowledge, are used as a substitute for skill. It is sometimes difficult when exploring this subject to separate the true reality from the substitution, especially when the true reality is scary and the substitution is entertaining and loving. Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: There's a popular NewAge saying which proclaims that we create our own reality. I suspect most who ponder the ramifications of the NA phrase take the meaning metaphorically, perhaps in the same vein as reading certain passages from the bible, particularly Genesis. Others are beginning to ponder the ramifications of wondering if there might actually be more to this NA meaning. Back in the 1970s, the pre-NewAge author, Jane Roberts, was one of the first to explore the ramifications in a series of alleged channeled writings - the Seth Material comes to mind. NewAge mumbo-jumbo set aside, I suspect aspects of these ramifications have been explored in certain SF novels. Waldo and Magic, Inc, both by Heinlein are probably the best known. If you've ever heard someone refer to a remote manipulator as a waldo then you've heard of the first of these. The Childe cycle of Gordon Dickson explored a chunk of the idea in Necromancer but Dickson dropped it later on in the series (it makes for a rather hard to manage world). The Practice Effect explores a cute variation on it; can't recall the author. Many, many other books have touched on the notion that belief can make it so. It's an easy proof that in an infinite universe there's a world where magic works. Sadly, it's an equally easy proof that you could never find such a world even if you had interstellar teleportation so you could visit lots and lots of star systems in hardly any time.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
FWIW - and to rescue the subject of intent from the more obscure realms of SciFi and try to shine some light onto its deeper hidden meaning, consider the film noir: Dark City ... ...which Roger Ebert calls one of the greatest films of all time. He even taught a University film school class on this single film (choosing it as the focus over such classics as Metropolis, 2001, Blade Runner and Matrix). Trouble is- it is almost unknown, and even dedicated film buffs missed it, or were unimpressed ... until they get the key. I didn't understand this film either until the second or third time, and wouldn't have given it another viewing without having heard of Ebert's respect for it and his film class. Very few film critics understood the deep layered metaphor of the strangers... Not even sure Roger gives it the emphasis it deserves. Anyway- to cut to the chase, the strangers who seem so ominous at first are not aliens, demons or confused angles -- but they are hidden controllers in one sense: an intent to change things for the better, even if things do not always work out that way. The strangers can be either good and evil, and just as in the Matrix, we (as Neo) are never sure that understanding our true nature was a pleasant call. Perhaps the more we can hide our true nature, the better - oops, shoulda taken the other pill ;-) The strangers are us. All of us, or more specifically they are our true identity and spiritual essence, which is not always good, and like them, we rebuild our world every day- or at midnight as the case may be. The world does not literally stop and get rebuilt, as in the film but that is the beauty of literary license. Even if you hated it the first time - watch it again knowing the key, and try to imagine the grain of truth which does operate in our real world, for better or for worse... or at least in the world which we think is our real one. i.e. do NOT get off on the 13th floor. Did I mention, the strangers are us? Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Howdy Ed, By asking for a return to science, this theme, begun by Jones is beginning to reach a level of scientific inquiry, fitting of Vorts. Solomon expressed his opinion that time and chance happens to us all. This profound wisdom does not escape Jones in his musings. There can be an entire trioloxy of writings on one simple observation .. say for example..the story of David and Goliath in 1 Sam:17... if one can get past the religious aspect of the account, the story becomes an interesting exercize in mental gymnastics. Most of the elements of which novels are composed are contained in this seeming fairy tale of a boy slaying a fearsome giant. Here, out of the annals of history, is captured an essence of what dreams are made of. Remarkably, within the story, the method and resultant is revealed, offered to the world for use, provided one searches. Richard Ed Storms wrote... Educated people now know that the belief, in this case, had no effect except to start the process. While this is a trivial example, the same process occurs in all actions, frequently where the relationship between belief and outcome is not so clear. Superstition relies on this ambiguity while science attempts to show the underlying process. Unfortunately, many people are not educated enough to understand what is already known and enough true ignorance remains to give support to the belief in magic. To make matters even more confusing, while science attempts to sort out the actions in the material world, I believe the spiritual world can always throw in a joker to confuse the issue. This is how religion gets its power. In addition, must people feel inadequate in their ability to control reality using their knowledge. Instead a strong belief, which everyone has without effort, or faith in a God, which requires no knowledge, are used as a substitute for skill. It is sometimes difficult when exploring this subject to separate the true reality from the substitution, especially when the true reality is scary and the substitution is entertaining and loving.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Jones, Ed and Richard continue to transfuse stimulating thoughts into this delightful subject called MAYA - sometimes interpreted as reality. It comes as a nice tangential distraction from recent BLP speculation. Oh, what a relief it is! I'd like to contribute additional fertilizer to a thought vector recently express by Ed. At the risk of replowing the same field, of course intention and belief play a role at some level. For example, people can never win at the slots unless they have sufficient belief to actually put the coin into the machine and push the button. If the expected belief is not fulfilled, the conclusion is that the belief was not strong enough. If you win, the belief was clearly justified. Educated people now know that the belief, in this case, had no effect except to start the process. IMO, there's a subtle point often missed in regards to this conjecture where one perceives a flaw in believing in the intensity of believing or wishing for a specific outcome to manifest. It's not that it's a sign of ignorance that a person believes they didn't believe hard enough and/or sincerely enough that they didn't get their cheese. Consider the possibility that it's how we designed the rules of etiquette. Consider the ramifications that creation is a group effort. When we all agreed to enter the SandBox I think it became pretty clear to most that in order to make our time in the SandBox interesting and educational nobody is going to want to play with anyone who suddenly decides that whenever they plunk a quarter in the slot machine they instantly become jackpot winners - every damned single time. Where's the sport in that? Hey! You Out of the sandbox! Perhaps that's why we created Statistics. In any case, how's that for a rationalization! ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
You raise an interesting point, Richard, by this example. People need encourage to believe they can do things that need to be done but are threatening or hard. Stories like David and Goliath, whether it is true or not, provide this encouragement. Missing, of course are the stories of the more common occasions when the giant is challenged and the David gets creamed. Once again, we need to separate out the real reality from the one being generated for another purpose. For example, the reality in the Bible has been modified to promote Christianity just as the reality in the Koran is designed to promote Islam. Both attempt to describe the spiritual world, but with different results. How should a person discover the true reality? Science, at least, has a few tools that can be used. Unfortunately, religion does not provide such tools nor does the idea of magic. Ed R C Macaulay wrote: Howdy Ed, By asking for a return to science, this theme, begun by Jones is beginning to reach a level of scientific inquiry, fitting of Vorts. Solomon expressed his opinion that time and chance happens to us all. This profound wisdom does not escape Jones in his musings. There can be an entire trioloxy of writings on one simple observation .. say for example..the story of David and Goliath in 1 Sam:17... if one can get past the religious aspect of the account, the story becomes an interesting exercize in mental gymnastics. Most of the elements of which novels are composed are contained in this seeming fairy tale of a boy slaying a fearsome giant. Here, out of the annals of history, is captured an essence of what dreams are made of. Remarkably, within the story, the method and resultant is revealed, offered to the world for use, provided one searches. Richard Ed Storms wrote... Educated people now know that the belief, in this case, had no effect except to start the process. While this is a trivial example, the same process occurs in all actions, frequently where the relationship between belief and outcome is not so clear. Superstition relies on this ambiguity while science attempts to show the underlying process. Unfortunately, many people are not educated enough to understand what is already known and enough true ignorance remains to give support to the belief in magic. To make matters even more confusing, while science attempts to sort out the actions in the material world, I believe the spiritual world can always throw in a joker to confuse the issue. This is how religion gets its power. In addition, must people feel inadequate in their ability to control reality using their knowledge. Instead a strong belief, which everyone has without effort, or faith in a God, which requires no knowledge, are used as a substitute for skill. It is sometimes difficult when exploring this subject to separate the true reality from the substitution, especially when the true reality is scary and the substitution is entertaining and loving.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
You are right, Steven, if belief were only required, the reality we find ourselves in would not work and it would not survive long enough for us to debate the issue. I suppose we could conclude that the Darwin process has eliminated this possibility. If this is true, then this process would have a low-level recessive characteristic, having been weeded out of the general population. Of course, there is another possibility that can be confused with getting something when you want it bad enough. Suppose, certain people are able to obtain information by mental telepathy. This ability would give them an advantage in getting their way that could be confused with belief being the cause. This, at least, is an effect that science can explore, as has been done on many occasions with supporting results. Ed OrionWorks wrote: Jones, Ed and Richard continue to transfuse stimulating thoughts into this delightful subject called MAYA - sometimes interpreted as reality. It comes as a nice tangential distraction from recent BLP speculation. Oh, what a relief it is! I'd like to contribute additional fertilizer to a thought vector recently express by Ed. At the risk of replowing the same field, of course intention and belief play a role at some level. For example, people can never win at the slots unless they have sufficient belief to actually put the coin into the machine and push the button. If the expected belief is not fulfilled, the conclusion is that the belief was not strong enough. If you win, the belief was clearly justified. Educated people now know that the belief, in this case, had no effect except to start the process. IMO, there's a subtle point often missed in regards to this conjecture where one perceives a flaw in believing in the intensity of believing or wishing for a specific outcome to manifest. It's not that it's a sign of ignorance that a person believes they didn't believe hard enough and/or sincerely enough that they didn't get their cheese. Consider the possibility that it's how we designed the rules of etiquette. Consider the ramifications that creation is a group effort. When we all agreed to enter the SandBox I think it became pretty clear to most that in order to make our time in the SandBox interesting and educational nobody is going to want to play with anyone who suddenly decides that whenever they plunk a quarter in the slot machine they instantly become jackpot winners - every damned single time. Where's the sport in that? Hey! You Out of the sandbox! Perhaps that's why we created Statistics. In any case, how's that for a rationalization! ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Howdy Ed, Is is possible to engage in a discussion of ideas without veering off into religion? Yes! perhaps, among Vorts which make for such an interesting group. Religions have perplexed me because I cannot understand why so many reasonably educated people cannot get past religion and establish a personal faith based belief system. Mention of the brief account of the story of David and Goliaththe account is overflowing with the basics of how to view, how to plan and how to execute a simple life strategy. Facing the giants!. In the mind, where all battles are ultimately won or lost. Does one individual's mind victory impinge on the overall direction of society ? Yes! To those that believe... it's true !, To those that don't .. it's not ! Richard Ed Storms wrote, Science, at least, has a few tools that can be used. Unfortunately, religion does not provide such tools nor does the idea of magic.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Hi Richard, I used religion as an example of my point because you used a metaphor based on religion in your example. I agree with you, the organized religions are nothing but power structures that are used to control behavior, which is needed of course. However, they offer very little insight into the workings of the spirit world. A personal belief system is best, but what should it be based on? Where should a person start? Most people in this society start with Christianity. The debate I would encourage is to understand reality, which includes both the material and spiritual realities. The question is how should this research be undertaken. Science has developed tools to explore the material world. How can these be applied to exploring the spiritual world? Ed R C Macaulay wrote: Howdy Ed, Is is possible to engage in a discussion of ideas without veering off into religion? Yes! perhaps, among Vorts which make for such an interesting group. Religions have perplexed me because I cannot understand why so many reasonably educated people cannot get past religion and establish a personal faith based belief system. Mention of the brief account of the story of David and Goliaththe account is overflowing with the basics of how to view, how to plan and how to execute a simple life strategy. Facing the giants!. In the mind, where all battles are ultimately won or lost. Does one individual's mind victory impinge on the overall direction of society ? Yes! To those that believe... it's true !, To those that don't .. it's not ! Richard Ed Storms wrote, Science, at least, has a few tools that can be used. Unfortunately, religion does not provide such tools nor does the idea of magic.
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
From Edmund Storms: Of course, there is another possibility that can be confused with getting something when you want it bad enough. Suppose, certain people are able to obtain information by mental telepathy. This ability would give them an advantage in getting their way that could be confused with belief being the cause. This, at least, is an effect that science can explore, as has been done on many occasions with supporting results. Ed Evolution is fraught species that cheat. Learning how to get away with it is all that is required. Perhaps that's why we don't hear much about them. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
OrionWorks wrote: From Edmund Storms: Of course, there is another possibility that can be confused with getting something when you want it bad enough. Suppose, certain people are able to obtain information by mental telepathy. This ability would give them an advantage in getting their way that could be confused with belief being the cause. This, at least, is an effect that science can explore, as has been done on many occasions with supporting results. Ed Evolution is fraught species that cheat. Learning how to get away with it is all that is required. Perhaps that's why we don't hear much about them. That's right. Never show more intelligence than the average and never admit to having special talents. This approach will even get you elected president. Continue to act stupid and you can get the country to do anything you want. Or am I just being cynical? Regards, ed Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Edmund Storms wrote: You are right, Steven, if belief were only required, the reality we find ourselves in would not work and it would not survive long enough for us to debate the issue. I suppose we could conclude that the Darwin process has eliminated this possibility. If this is true, then this process would have a low-level recessive characteristic, having been weeded out of the general population. Of course, there is another possibility that can be confused with getting something when you want it bad enough. Suppose, certain people are able to obtain information by mental telepathy. This ability would give them an advantage in getting their way that could be confused with belief being the cause. This, at least, is an effect that science can explore, as has been done on many occasions with supporting results. Let's consider telepathy a little more closely. I think we can actually conclude something about the possibility, or at least the likelihood, of mind-reading simply by an exercise in logic, with a small handful of reasonable assumptions used to guide the argument. Point zero -- a baseline assumption: Mind reading involves information transfer and that transfer must have a mechanism. For the time being, let's assume there's a physical mechanism and proceed from there. With that said, we should recognize that there are *two* kinds of mind-reading: Cooperative -- where the subject /wishes/ to have their thoughts read -- and non-cooperative -- where the subject does not want to have their thoughts read, and may not even know it happened. The first kind -- cooperative -- happens all the time, and it's so commonplace that we don't even think about it. The information transfer takes place via waves in a compressive medium. We call such a transfer talking. The second kind is the more interesting kind. Is there a possible physical mechanism? -- Of course! Brains are more or less electrical in nature, and EMF is a fine way to transfer information. Let's follow this a little farther. Is it conceivable that one could decode the EMF radiated by a brain to distill out the thoughts in that brain? A priori one would have to say yes -- there's nothing obvious which would forbid it. I can think of two examples off hand which support this: a) Sharks can read the life signs of other creatures by their EMF emissions. This is not exactly mind reading but it's a first cousin. b) The CIA was very concerned about printer cable emissions (in the distant past) because it was apparently pretty easy to pick them up remotely and figure out exactly what was being printed just from the leakage. Printers are not exactly brains but none the less this seems like a fine Proof of Concept to me. But now let's take this farther. First, let's think about brain structure. The brain is a parallel computing engine, with many electrical impulses happening at the same time. Decoding the output of this thing would not be simple. This will have implications, as we will see. Next, let's assume that at some point in the past someone was born with the ability to read minds. I would expect this to require a rather fancy *PHYSICAL* bit of brain hardware -- you need to be able to receive the signals and demodulate them somehow. No matter how much post-processing you can do, if you can't grab the signals to start with you are stuck at square 1. Hardware is something you don't get by learning, you get it by growing it ... and from that comes my assumption that this person was /born/ with the /innate/ ability to read minds. This leads us *at once* to two additional conclusions -- but first we need an additional assumption, which is obvious if you think about it: -- Mind reading would be an incredibly valuable ability!! Note that current theory says politics -- the constant effort to outguess other humans and figure out what they're planning in order to outwit them -- provided the unrelenting selection pressure which led to the runaway evolution of the incredibly over-developed human brain. I mention this because it's obvious once it's pointed out, and it also sets off in high relief just how valuable the ability to read minds would be. In terms of outguessing your evolutionary opponents it would surely be worth more than an extra 50 IQ points. So what can we conclude from that? We are considering an *innate* ability which provides an enormous advantage. Conclusion: In very short order the genes for that ability will spread through the population. In short, if *anyone* can read minds, then *everyone* should be able to do it ... unless the ability only entered the gene pool very, very recently. Because, if it entered the gene pool in the prehistoric past, those who had the ability would have parented more offspring and yada yada you all know the drill. Anyhow the point of this is that the fact that *I* cannot read minds leads me to
Re: [Vo]:The Science of Intention
Interesting logic, Stephen. Let's explore another possibility. Suppose thought transfer is common in animals that do not have a complex language. One might use schooling fish as an example or perhaps a flock of birds. While other explanations can be suggested for the observed behavior, thought transfer provides a very consistent explanation. In addition, this ability would have great survival value. Suppose mankind, as we evolved, also had this ability, thus accounting for our success before language evolved. Now, suppose that language, because it is so much more efficient in providing the necessary communication, replaced thought transfer. As a result thought transfer became a recessive ability. Even though this idea has been suggested and explored before by other people, I think it needs to be given more attention. Like musical ability or other talents that are randomly distributed in the population, most individuals would have no awareness of such a talent, yet they could see that some people seemed to know what to do before the need became obvious. For example, some people seemed to win all the time at cards or know when their loved ones were in trouble, etc. The fact that any single individual did not have these abilities would mean nothing, any more than a person's inability to play a musical instrument very well means than no one can do this. Indeed, some people have suggested ways to amplify this ability. Of course, these ideas are not accepted because the process is not very reproducible and has no theory to explain it. (Does this sound familiar?) In addition, as Steven pointed out, a person with this ability might want to hid this fact. To get back to science, a lot of scientific study has been done to reveal the existence of this ability. The results of this work, at least to me, show that thought transfer is real. But like all such claims, this belief is rejected by conventional science. My question is, what would it take to change this attitude? Or is this possibility too scary for it to be accepted regardless of the evidence or logic? Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: You are right, Steven, if belief were only required, the reality we find ourselves in would not work and it would not survive long enough for us to debate the issue. I suppose we could conclude that the Darwin process has eliminated this possibility. If this is true, then this process would have a low-level recessive characteristic, having been weeded out of the general population. Of course, there is another possibility that can be confused with getting something when you want it bad enough. Suppose, certain people are able to obtain information by mental telepathy. This ability would give them an advantage in getting their way that could be confused with belief being the cause. This, at least, is an effect that science can explore, as has been done on many occasions with supporting results. Let's consider telepathy a little more closely. I think we can actually conclude something about the possibility, or at least the likelihood, of mind-reading simply by an exercise in logic, with a small handful of reasonable assumptions used to guide the argument. Point zero -- a baseline assumption: Mind reading involves information transfer and that transfer must have a mechanism. For the time being, let's assume there's a physical mechanism and proceed from there. With that said, we should recognize that there are *two* kinds of mind-reading: Cooperative -- where the subject /wishes/ to have their thoughts read -- and non-cooperative -- where the subject does not want to have their thoughts read, and may not even know it happened. The first kind -- cooperative -- happens all the time, and it's so commonplace that we don't even think about it. The information transfer takes place via waves in a compressive medium. We call such a transfer talking. The second kind is the more interesting kind. Is there a possible physical mechanism? -- Of course! Brains are more or less electrical in nature, and EMF is a fine way to transfer information. Let's follow this a little farther. Is it conceivable that one could decode the EMF radiated by a brain to distill out the thoughts in that brain? A priori one would have to say yes -- there's nothing obvious which would forbid it. I can think of two examples off hand which support this: a) Sharks can read the life signs of other creatures by their EMF emissions. This is not exactly mind reading but it's a first cousin. b) The CIA was very concerned about printer cable emissions (in the distant past) because it was apparently pretty easy to pick them up remotely and figure out exactly what was being printed just from the leakage. Printers are not exactly brains but none the less this seems like a fine Proof of Concept to me. But now let's take this farther. First, let's think about
