# Sleep and Dreams > Beyond Dreaming >  >  PSI abilities, ARE THEY REAL!?!

## DopeyGuy

Are psi abilities real or not? I mean, how come many people in this forum claim they have those "powers", but they do not prove it, and if they do have those powers, how come scientists are not putting them into their labs and start doing some testings? If psi abilities are real, i don't need any videos that show they are real because those videos can be edited. 
Oh yeah, if these things are real, how come they are in websites, but not the news channel on tv?

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by DopeyGuy_
> *Are psi abilities real or not? I mean, how come many people in this forum claim they have those \"powers\", but they do not prove it, and if they do have those powers, how come scientists are not putting them into their labs and start doing some testings? If psi abilities are real, i don't need any videos that show they are real because those videos can be edited. *
> Oh yeah, if these things are real, how come they are in websites, but not the news channel on tv?*



There is a huge documented history of Saints in all of the World's Higher Religions.  The Catholics have had perhaps a dozen Christ-like Saints, the Jews had Elijah, the Hindus have had ... I don't want to say a dozen because I hope that the Catholics would have a supremousy there... but.    The Buddhists have even had a few.  The Sufis, who claim to be Muslim but actually trace back to Zoroastrianism, the First Higher Religion, have also had a great number of Saints.  Oh, and by the Way, the Sufis had also mastered Dreaming more than any other group I've ever studied.  many of their Libraries have gone to rot, but I hear there are still square miles of ancient texts that are only awaiting some funding so that people can be trained up in Ancient Persian Script in order to translate them over. 

but there have been few great saints lately.  The last Big Saint was Padre Pio who died in 1968.    In india today there is one Pralad Jani who was studied at the Sterling Hospital there -- he was blessed by a particular Goddess some 60 years ago -- he was worried that he would starve to death if he committed himself to her total devotion and She told him not to worry -- he has not eaten or drank anything since.  The Hospital observed him long enough to affirm the probability of his Story.   He makes an odd picture.  Apparently in order to worship his Goddess, he took to dressing just like Her, in a Red Sari, which must have been cute some 60 years ago, but now he is an Old Man walking about in a bright red dress.  But, for all I know, he is the last living Miracle Worker now on earth.

My angels came and told me the World was undergoing a spiritual drought.  They weren't kidding.   But I was shown a great body of water -- a huge lake -- to the south and the east.  Spiritual Powers will be rekindled when the Peoples of the World find that Lake of Spiritual Waters.

----------


## Matchbook

Pralad Jani's abilities must not have been totally confirmed.  If they had been, I don't see how the whole scientific community wouldn't be buzzing over this, and the news tossing stories left and right about it.  There's never been any verified proof of anyone having "supernatural" abilities.. so this would be huge.  Sure you can talk about documented history, but so is the Bible, and not everyone believes in that.  To physically witness something is different.

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by Matchbook_
> *Pralad Jani's abilities must not have been totally confirmed.  If they had been, I don't see how the whole scientific community wouldn't be buzzing over this, and the news tossing stories left and right about it.  There's never been any verified proof of anyone having \"supernatural\" abilities.. so this would be huge.  Sure you can talk about documented history, but so is the Bible, and not everyone believes in that.  To physically witness something is different.*



The problem with Science is its unspoken Orthodoxy.  The Scientists at the Sterling Hospital thought they had an airtight Protocol for their study.  But when they submitted their Results for Peer Review, the very Results they submitted were enough for the rest of the Scientific Community to distance themselves immediately.  The thought was, since it is clearly impossible, the Findings MUST HAVE BEEN flawed.

But the Doctor in charge of the Study would not say so.  

You see, Scientists for the most part are dedicated Atheists.  Many are Masons, or those who want to be made head of their own departments someday are Masons, and so it is absolutely forbidden NOT to be an Atheist.  To support Religion in anyway would be against their Secret Oaths.  But how would some Scientist in India know about all this Western Politics?  

I argued for more than a year on Atheist Websites.  they think of themselves as Scientifically minded, but it is clear that they suppose they already have it all figured out.  They already know what is impossible, and Miracles are impossible.  Psychic Phenomena is impossible.   Even dreams are just random firings of neural whatevers.  They don't explain MEANING because, since MEANING is not quantifiable, they simply left that out of their equations.

but here, take a look at a few Web Searches:

http://www.soulcounseling.com/nov2003.html

----------


## DopeyGuy

uhh...please, i just want an easy answer...

----------


## nesgirl119

Yes & No.....
I do believe in LDing, playing Telephone, Guess Wizards, DSing, & S**-*****, but I am still a bit skeptical on the others....
Maybe the reason they haven't been proven is b/c Michelle & I are mean to Scientists who try to experiment on us  ::wink::

----------


## Placebo

> Leo

I agree about the attitude of scientists. It seems that it would be near impossible to convince the scientific community of certain paranormal abilities   ::?:  

Of course, their perspective is that the more improbable it is (determined from their opinion of the world), the more criticism should be thrown at it.





> _Originally posted by DopeyGuy_
> *uhh...please, i just want an easy answer...*



ROFL   ::lol::

----------


## Peregrinus

> _Originally posted by Leo Volont_
> *You see, Scientists for the most part are dedicated Atheists.  Many are Masons, or those who want to be made head of their own departments someday are Masons, and so it is absolutely forbidden NOT to be an Atheist.  To support Religion in anyway would be against their Secret Oaths.*



Oh damn, you figured us out!   It's true -- all scientists are atheists.  In fact, even to be admitted into the science departments of  most universities, you have to undergo a super secret initiation ritual in which you swear to the Void that you will do your utmost to destroy religion and spirituality using any and all methods at your disposal.  I even had to write my oath in the Bat Cave with the blood of a kitten I'd slaughtered, but then again, that's probably just because it was a highly selective program.  Can't just go letting anyone in, you know?  Only the really dedicated ones are admitted into the Order of the Set of Null.    ::roll:: 

To be serious, there are certain prejudices in the sciences against new ideas which go completely against the status quo, but that is to be found in every discipline.  Accepted and established ideas which have been successfully utilized for generations die hard.  For example, Einstein went to his grave believing that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics was incorrect.  Science is a practice of human beings, and as such, suffers from the same flaws inherent in any human pursuit.  However, the methods of science were developed in order to minimize the effects of those human flaws on scientific research, and for the past 400 years these methods have helped advance our knowledge of the physical world in ways unprecedented in history.  To dismiss science as a way of knowing because of some superstitious conspiracy theory is absurd.

----------


## Kaniaz

Leo, you may have the "sidestep the point" award. I'm so proud of you. As for that whole "scientists not listening" thing, true enough. But you don't find many groundbreaking advances in history simply being met immediately with "Okay, it goes against everything we know so far - but we'll believe that!". (Or even "we'll listen to that thing that kind of defies all those laws of psyhics we've spent years and years upon for the man in the street to say otherwise").

----------


## Placebo

> _Originally posted by Kaniaz_
> *But you don't find many groundbreaking advances in history simply being met immediately with \"Okay, it goes against everything we know so far - but we'll believe that!\". (Or even \"we'll listen to that thing that kind of defies all those laws of psyhics we've spent years and years upon for the man in the street to say otherwise\").*



Of course not, I'd be happy with 'Wow, this seems to go against everything we believe, let's tell the scientific community what we found and investigate this example before jumping to an early conclusion.'

As opposed to:

'It makes no sense, so someone is pulling a fast one on us. Tell them to go away'

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by Placebo_
> *> Leo
> 
> I agree about the attitude of scientists. It seems that it would be near impossible to convince the scientific community of certain paranormal abilities   
> 
> Of course, their perspective is that the more improbable it is (determined from their opinion of the world), the more criticism should be thrown at it.
> 
> 
> ROFL *



It's not Criticism that we are worried about.  It is the outright rejection of any Submission they are AFRAID to even evaluation.  You see, they are all terrified to be put on the spot.  Orthodoxy is such that any Scientist's career can be ruined by doing one of three things -- supporting Extraterrestrial Space Travel, supporting a miracle or an apparition, or supporting the promotion of a Non-Mason over a Mason.

----------


## Placebo

Yep, that's very true. A scientist has to think very carefully before announcing a finding in an area such as paranormal abilities. His career very often is ruined.

It's quite sad really..

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by Placebo_
> *Yep, that's very true. A scientist has to think very carefully before announcing a finding in an area such as paranormal abilities. His career very often is ruined.
> 
> It's quite sad really..*



Are there a couple of parallel Posts?  This is odd.  Where are we?

Anyway....

....But it was Okay for those pricks to construct Nuclear Weapons, and then hand them to Politicians who would have no compunction but to destroy the World with them.  God!  After the Revolution takes care of the Lawyers, we will have to start on the Scientists...

----------


## Placebo

> _Originally posted by Leo Volont_
> *Are there a couple of parallel Posts?  This is odd.  Where are we?*



Yep, there's another similar thread going on at http://www.dreamviews.com/forum/viewtopic....=16809&start=45
You're in there too  :smiley: 





> ....But it was Okay for those pricks to construct Nuclear Weapons, and then hand them to Politicians who would have no compunction but to destroy the World with them.  God!  After the Revolution takes care of the Lawyers, we will have to start on the Scientists...[/b]



Well, if you're referring to eg. Einstein, as I understand it he was simply naive. And not necessarily a prick.

----------


## Kaniaz

> Einstein, as I understand it he was simply naive[/b]



It's about this point I go run off the nearest cliff, which is a major inconvience to me because the nearest cliff is about 20 miles away.

----------


## Placebo

> _Originally posted by Kaniaz_
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				Einstein, as I understand it he was simply naive
> 			
> ...



Are you going to explain why or just tease us ?  ::D:

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by Placebo_
> *
> Well, if you're referring to eg. Einstein, as I understand it he was simply naive. And not necessarily a prick.*



"Naive", that is the euphemism for 'stupid'.  Even if the 'Wrong' side had won that war, affairs would have found a new normalization after no more than 150 years, but more probably things would have been little different than before in about 50.  Yet the scientific community went headlong to invent a Globe Destroying Weapon.  Not just Einstein, but hundreds of physicists (almost half of the American GNP went to pay for 'secret weapon's development' during the War years).  And the most obvious thing about it was that no Politician could ever have imagined the possibility of a Nuclear Weapon.   All the Scientists had to do was keep their mouths shut.

Why is it that only Doctors must swear to "First, do no harm"?

----------


## Kaniaz

> _Originally posted by Placebo_
> *
> Are you going to explain why or just tease us ?*



Sure! (Einstein wasn't stupid).

----------


## Placebo

ROFL, okay, by 'naive' I meant that he honestly believed that his discoveries would not fuel the idea of such a horrible weapon in the minds of the 'powers that be'
Of course, I'm not saying Einstein was stupid at all.

Nevertheless, you're referring the scientific community as a whole, and the other scientists who had a hand in the actual creation of the weapons (I don't believe Einstein did?)
I can't argue that scientists thought about the humanity of the issue ... they could possibly have avoided the situation

[EDIT]
Realistically speaking though, scientists are human, and as such there would always have been someone who would built the unthinkable

----------


## Leo Volont

> _Originally posted by Placebo_
> *I can't argue that scientists thought about the humanity of the issue ... they could possibly have avoided the situation
> 
> *



Priests insist upon confidentiality.  Lawyers insist upon confidentiality.  doctors insist upon doing no harm.  Journalists insist upon protecting their sources.  So Scientists appear to be the Only Profession that PROFESSES TO HAVE NO MORAL CONSTRAINTS.

----------


## Kaniaz

You know, he probably did think that at some point. But what can you really do? It would be either drop an entire field of scientific discovery at the hint of something sinister on the horizon, or keep going and expect the "powers that be" to do their job properly. (ie: Not detonate whatever might happen).

 :tongue2:  I don't think any scientist would be stupid for inventing something that could blow up the world. They're just putting the tools there that some other guy would only go and invent someplace else - that's just inevitable. If no scientist we know, then some guy in a remote place in china. Arguably it's probably better that every side knew what exists, because then you can get MAD ("Mututally Assured Destruction"), which means that no side is going to launch the weapon, because the other has it too, and all it would result in was death on either side. If only, say, China had the weapon, then they could blow up anything they liked at their luxury. Not a good situation.

The person who really is stupid, (in my opinon) would be the one who detonated it.

----------


## Placebo

I seem to have sidetracked this thread - perhaps we should start another thread about whether scientists should have a moral code or oath?

----------


## Kaniaz

It sounds like a good idea for me. Not that i'm any good at debating things, anyway.

----------


## Placebo

Here we go Should scientists take an oath?

Now, where was the discussion about psi though? *scratches head*

[EDIT]
I think we more or less ended up here, before the discussion of scientists' morals:





> _Originally posted by Placebo+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Placebo)</div>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				Yep, that's very true. A scientist has to think very carefully before announcing a finding in an area such as paranormal abilities. His career very often is ruined.
> 
> It's quite sad really.. [/b]
> ...

----------


## Placebo

> ...But it was Okay for those pricks to construct Nuclear Weapons..[/b]



Sure, nobody said scientists were little angels. The problem really is that discoveries like paranormal abilities won't happen if scientists are too scared to post findings on it  :tongue2:

----------


## Xyn

> So you assume that because "psi-powers" exist therefore the paranormal must as well. That's one mighty big leap to make, with literally no evidence to back it up. It seems that you're saying because one branch of new-age thinking exists they all must.



Are you blind?  Do you not see reality?  Do you close yourself from the real world?  I've seen a UFO myself.  ALso, I saw my friend lift a pen cap under a cup, so I know Psi's exist.  

BUT OMG!!!! THERES NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF!>? OMGZ!!!!!!!!!!!! 

How can a scientist prove it without looking like a food?

----------


## Kromoh

Maybe you are seeing non-existant things you know

----------


## Pez_Soluble

> I'm not talking about the career drudges. 
> 
> I'm talking about the Fountainheads -- the Idiot Savants.  Not the worker bees.  If it had been up to the worker bees, believe me, we never would have had The Bomb.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

----------


## Goldney

> Are you blind?  Do you not see reality?



Of course I do, however we have very two very different perspectives on what reality is.





> Do you close yourself from the real world?



Do you create your own little world? 





> I've seen a UFO myself.



You saw what you _thought_ was a UFO. Think about this logically. We have found one, just, one planet that may (and it's a big may) support life. It took us millenia to find this one planet. I don't know for sure, but I'm betting it is a _huge_ distance from earth. 

But I digress, suppose we wanted to travel to Andromeda (the nearest galaxy of any considerable size to our own). It is 200 MILLION light years away. (1 light year= 9,500,000,000,000 kilometres) As well as this, it is physically impossible to build a spaceship that can go as fast as the speed of light. It literally cannot be done, this is because as you increase velocity your mass increases as well. When you reach the speed of light your mass is infinite; therefore slowing you down. How can light go so fast? Because it has no mass to begin with. Furthermore as species go we're pretty darn intelligent and if we can't do it, pretty much no-one can.

So it could NOT have been a UFO you saw





> ALso, I saw my friend lift a pen cap under a cup, so I know Psi's exist.



Easily faked. Make very small hole in bottom of glass, put thread through, tie one end to the pen and the other to your finger. Kapow, floating pen lid.

I came up with that in 2 seconds. Your friend could easily have done better





> BUT OMG!!!! THERES NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF!>? OMGZ!!!!!!!!!!!!



No there is scientific proof you are just ignoring it. Don't treat science as the enemy, if your psionics were real then they would _easily_ have been proven so by science.





> How can a scientist prove it without looking like a fool?



If a scientist could prove it, incontrovertably, he would almost definitely win the Nobel Prize. I'm sure many, many scientists have tried... and failed.

----------


## thegnome54

> You saw what you _thought_ was a UFO. Think about this logically. We have found one, just, one planet that may (and it's a big may) support life. It took us millenia to find this one planet. I don't know for sure, but I'm betting it is a _huge_ distance from earth.



No, he undoubtedly saw a UFO.  Remember, if you see a new species of butterfly it's a UFO.  UFOs are not necessarily alien spaceships, or even extraterrestrial objects - they're just Unidentified Flying Objects, which, unless you can classify every airplane you've ever seen, I'm sure you've encountered many times in your life.

----------


## vee

I guess I believe in some PSI.  Edgar Casey maybe.  Never saw a flying saucer.  That's a bit over my head.

----------


## Xyn

> No, he undoubtedly saw a UFO.  Remember, if you see a new species of butterfly it's a UFO.  UFOs are not necessarily alien spaceships, or even extraterrestrial objects - they're just Unidentified Flying Objects, which, unless you can classify every airplane you've ever seen, I'm sure you've encountered many times in your life.



Ok well, it wasn't a butterfly.  It was an actuall Flying Object with different colored lights.  It was actually big too.  To be honest, I seriously hope it was a Lucid Dream err somthing, but I was young at the time where I couldnt Comphrehend what was exactly happening or what it was.  So I doubt my mind would come up with that.  What makes it more believable was we were listening to  a song and I tell you, I will never forget that song for the rest of my life.  It reminds me of that day everytime I hear it.

To be honest, I believe what I saw.  I know many others I know expierenced something like this (Including my teacher).  So well, im not here to convince you cause I THINK the evidence is in the world to support this.  (Unlike Psi Abilitys ECT).


Also, now, I don't believe in Psi abilitys.  I think its a figment of imagination.  So any belief I had prior to this post, desipated.

----------


## Goldney

> No, he undoubtedly saw a UFO. Remember, if you see a new species of butterfly it's a UFO. UFOs are not necessarily alien spaceships, or even extraterrestrial objects - they're just Unidentified Flying Objects, which, unless you can classify every airplane you've ever seen, I'm sure you've encountered many times in your life.



Don't be a pedant.





> Also, now, I don't believe in Psi abilitys.  I think its a figment of imagination.  So any belief I had prior to this post, desipated.



That makes me very happy. Thank you.

----------


## thegnome54

> Don't be a pedant.



My point was, he never claimed it was an alien spaceship - he just said that he saw some pretty lights in the sky.  You seemed to be saying that he must have imagined them, but it's more likely that they were just an airplane that he didn't recognize.

----------


## Xyn

No it wasn't an airplane.  It was a hovering round object(I think).  It was so long ago and I was so young to really remember.  Then, my parents were yelling,"What Is that!!!".  Back and fourth.

I mean, you don't have to believe me.  If I was reading this I wouldn't believe it either.  The only ones that probably will are the ones who know they exist.

----------


## thegnome54

> If I was reading this I wouldn't believe it either.  The only ones that probably will are the ones who know they exist.



Know what exist?  Hovering round objects?  Like hot air balloons, weather balloons, blimps, ball lightning, saint elmo's fire, stealth bombers, helicopters, high-flying birds, and god knows what other military vehicles they're testing?

Probably.

----------


## Soul_Sleeper

Personaly I don't think PSI powers (remote viewing, telekinesis, pyrokenesis, mind control,) exist.

Just my opinion. 

Please, dont' be a flamer.

That is all.

----------


## The Cusp

From Monty Pythons's Meaning of Life.

[_Large corporate boardroom filled with suited executives_]  
*Exec #1*: Item six on the agenda: "The Meaning of Life" Now uh, Harry, you've had some thoughts on this.  

*Exec #2*: Yeah, I've had a team working on this over the past few weeks, and what we've come up with can be reduced to two fundamental concepts. One: People aren't wearing enough hats. Two: Matter is energy. In the universe there are many energy fields which we cannot normally perceive. Some energies have a spiritual source which act upon a person's soul. However, this "soul" does not exist ab initio as orthodox Christianity teaches; it has to be brought into existence by a process of guided self-observation. However, this is rarely achieved owing to man's unique ability to be distracted from spiritual matters by everyday trivia. 

*Exec #3*: What was that about hats again?  
*Exec #2*: Oh, Uh... people aren't wearing enough.  
*Exec #1*: Is this true?  
*Exec #4*: Certainly. Hat sales have increased but not pari passu, as our research...  
*Exec #3*: [_Interrupting_] "Not wearing enough"? enough for what purpose?  
*Exec #5*: Can I just ask, with reference to your second point, when you say souls don't develop because people become distracted...  
[_looking out window_]  
*Exec #5*: Has anyone noticed that building there before?

----------


## Xyn

> Know what exist?  Hovering round objects?  Like hot air balloons, weather balloons, blimps, ball lightning, saint elmo's fire, stealth bombers, helicopters, high-flying birds, and god knows what other military vehicles they're testing?
> 
> Probably.



I was thinking maby it had something to do with the military...

But wow, 3+ of my family members claimed they saw UFO's.  I thought most of you would have at LEAST 1 family member that had.  That, or you guys don't get out much xD  ::D:   Lol just kidding.  

But seriously thegnome, i didn't say you had to believe me.  Leave me alone.


But seriously think about it.  They just discovered a planet that is like earth not too long ago.  I mean, don't you think that there could very easily be life out there somewhere?  I mean, the universe is huge.

----------


## the real pieman

> I was thinking maby it had something to do with the military...
> 
> But wow, 3+ of my family members claimed they saw UFO's. I thought most of you would have at LEAST 1 family member that had. That, or you guys don't get out much xD  Lol just kidding. 
> 
> But seriously thegnome, i didn't say you had to believe me. Leave me alone.
> 
> 
> But seriously think about it. They just discovered a planet that is like earth not too long ago. I mean, don't you think that there could very easily be life out there somewhere? I mean, the universe is huge.



personally i have no doubt at all that there are other planets out there with life on.....i mean just think about it....billions of solar systems and we're the only ones which have life...

but i do doubt that they visit us, even if they knew we existed and they managed to observe us through telescopes then why visit us briefly and not show themselves to us....

and dont tell me because the government has 'waged war' on them because  if the government had then that would be even more reason to show themselves....basically if they wanted to learn about the people of earth then why not show themselves and study with us....then we can both learn from each other....if they are smart enough to master space travel then they should be smart enough to know this....

----------


## Bonsay

About UFOs. The question isn't if they exist, they sure do as many, including me, have seen. The question is what are they. UFO doesn't mean Alien spaceship, it means Unknown flying object.

----------


## The Cusp

I'm going to see if I can harness my psi abilities and put them to the test today.  I have free tickets to the Super Ex and I'm going down to play some *Crown and Anchor*.

You know, where they have symbols on the wheel you bet on which one comes up.  I've always been lucky at that game.   I prefer roulette, but the stakes are too high.   I play the outside.

Some exercise and meditation before I leave, and I should be rich in no time!

Wish me luck!

----------


## The Cusp

Ok, I walked away with 46 dollars more than I started with.  Not too shabby!

----------


## thegnome54

> But seriously thegnome, i didn't say you had to believe me.  Leave me alone.
> 
> 
> But seriously think about it.  They just discovered a planet that is like earth not too long ago.  I mean, don't you think that there could very easily be life out there somewhere?  I mean, the universe is huge.



I didn't say you had to listen to me, either.  Say what you want, I'll say what I want about what you want to say  :tongue2: 

Of course it's possible.  It's just much more likely that it's something terrestrial.  Seriously, think about it.  If there was a species who went to all the effort of finding another planet with life on it, why wouldn't they actually contact us, instead of flying about in the upper atmosphere all the time?  Worse, if all of these sightings are genuine, then they've been popping in and out of our atmosphere for a span of over thirty years.  What are they doing?  Where do they go when they're not frolicking about up there?

It makes very little sense, and I suspect the whole thing was born of the human desire to have company on this little rock of ours.

----------


## BohmaN

> About UFOs. The question isn't if they exist, they sure do as many, including me, have seen. The question is what are they. UFO doesn't mean Alien spaceship, it means Unknown flying object.



Yes that's strange. I do believe they are aliens, but I'm not sure. My mum has seen a UFO too and she has told me about it and I believe her. Another question: if there are aliens in those things, what do they want?

----------


## Goldney

Okay, let's change the wording UFO, to alien spaceship. It's causing some confusion. From now on, alien spaceship mmkay?

Also, read my previous post. It is physically impossible for aliens to visit Earth. A complete load of shit. It CAN'T be done.

1. No planets near enough that could support life (I'm talking in our solar system close. That's how close we'd need to be to have aliens visit.
2. Physically impossible to travel faster than light. Einstein discovered this. E=MC^2 I think it is.
3. Teleporting doesn't exist.

The odds are that the "spaceship" you saw was some kind of military aircraft etc.

----------


## thegnome54

> Okay, let's change the wording UFO, to alien spaceship. It's causing some confusion. From now on, alien spaceship mmkay?
> 
> Also, read my previous post. It is physically impossible for aliens to visit Earth. A complete load of shit. It CAN'T be done.
> 
> 1. No planets near enough that could support life (I'm talking in our solar system close. That's how close we'd need to be to have aliens visit.
> 2. Physically impossible to travel faster than light. Einstein discovered this. E=MC^2 I think it is.
> 3. Teleporting doesn't exist.
> 
> The odds are that the "spaceship" you saw was some kind of military aircraft etc.



1) We cannot be sure that there is no life on planets - hell, we're not even sure whether or not there is life on Mars yet.

2) Maybe they found a way to travel really close to the speed of light, and have been traveling for generations.

3) ...And?

We can't really say for sure whether or not alien ships have visited Earth, although we might be able to explain single occurrences at a time.

----------


## Bonsay

> 2. Physically impossible to travel faster than light. Einstein discovered this. E=MC^2 I think it is.



Well there is that theoretical traveling faster than light. The Warp thing. It's about bending space time, so instead flying there yourself, you just stretch the fabric of space on which you are stationed. So theoretically it is possible. Although I'm not saying I saw aliens, or that I "believe" that they are visiting Earth. Quite improbable in my opinion. I saw an orb flying and splitting in four little thingies.

----------


## The Cusp

> 1. No planets near enough that could support life (I'm talking in our solar system close. That's how close we'd need to be to have aliens visit.
> 2. Physically impossible to travel faster than light. Einstein discovered this. E=MC^2 I think it is.
> 3. Teleporting doesn't exist.



What about wormholes?

Or maybe they came from another dimension?

----------


## Goldney

> 2) Maybe they found a way to travel really close to the speed of light, and have been traveling for generations.



A good response, however, we aren't just talking 100 years. The distances are _huge_. It would take 200 million years just to travel to the nearest galaxy other than our own if we went at the speed of light. However, we do know that time slows down for those in a space craft going at incredibly fast speeds. Maybe the slowing of time would counteract the distance... Possible but highly improbable. There are things so far away that the light from them hasn't even reached us yet. The Earth is 6 billion years old by the way. A distance of more than 6 billion light years. Just to put all this in perspective it takes about 1.3 seconds for light to go to the moon from Earth.





> What about wormholes?
> 
> Or maybe they came from another dimension?



What about wormholes? Tell me how they might work instead of just saying, "What about wormholes?" As far as I know, no spaceship can travel through a wormhole as it'll get destroyed. Again, how will they cross this over from this other dimension? We're not even sure they exist! It sounds like you've been watching too much sci-fi and mistaken it for facts.

Use some common sense people. I'm not denying that aliens exist. In fact I fervently believe that they DO exist. Though us being visited by them. Not going to happen. As far as we know aliens could just be like earth without any intelligent beings. It could just be populated with creatures of equal intelligence to cows.

----------


## BohmaN

Goldney, correction, earth is about 12.7 billion years old. At least that's what my physicist teacher told me today. It's quite unlikely as you say that the aliens would have traveled normally through space. I think (if the UFOs are controlled by aliens) that the aliens have another way of travelling. I'm inclined to think they've found a way to teleport themselves. You can never know how far they have come with their technology.

What if they aren't aliens, then what are they?  :tongue2:

----------


## Goldney

Well then you're physics teacher is wrong. That or you confused the age of Earth with the age of the Universe.





> The generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1&#37. This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.



I must admit I was wrong also, however less so.

Teleportation _is_ possible. However, it has only been done with atoms. An alien spaceship is far too complicated to be teleported.

Any number of things have been mistaken for alien spaceships.

quote taken from http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

----------


## Bonsay

Here are some possible or possibly possible ways of travel for "aliens" or us.
NASA - Warp Drive, When?

----------


## Goldney

Not really, all that site said was, "We can't space-travel just yet, and it's not due to technology, it's due to our understanding of physics."

Basically, they don't know either. They're clutching at straws. Also that site's from the US government. It's going to be _full_ of propaganda.

----------


## Bonsay

I thought you'd be interested in faster then light travel.

----------


## phoenelai

One thing that is spooky is those air traffic controller tapes when they encounter wierd shit up there. It's defintely unknown what they are seeing up there spaceship or not. Even if its earth anomolies how wierd would that be to see while flying aircraft. The history channel shows some good pilot encounters with the unexplained. Really wierd.

Werd!

----------


## Goldney

> I thought you'd be interested in faster then light travel.



Haven't you been reading my posts about how impossible it is?

Yes, I'd listen if it came from an independant, non-biased source and actually had answers. However, that site, as I've said before, doesn't actually know how to travel faster than light.





> Objectively, the desired breakthroughs might turn out to be impossible, but progress is not made by conceding defeat.



I dislike that statement greatly. 

Yes, it _may_ and probably _will_ turn out to be impossible but at least we're trying.

Not when it's costing taxpayers money, for us to discover something we already knew and have known for decades.

----------


## jefe

I just want to clear things up about sub-speed-of-light space travel.  It is definitely possible for an alien spaceship to reach earth within the lifetime of the little green passengers.  The reason for this is the phenomenon of time dilation that goldney mentioned.  From our perspective, the passengers on a spaceship traveling close to the speed of light experience time much slower than we do.  For example, 700 light years could be traveled in only a year if the speed was .999999 times the speed of light.  If you're wondering why the space explorers don't perceive that the laws of physics have been broken, it's because of length contraction.  They perceive that they didn't really travel 700 light years.

I said that this is possible, which it is, but it isn't easy.  The energy required to reach such speeds is absurd.  Not to mention the fact that under a reasonable acceleration, say, 1g, it would take about a year to get going that fast (and another year to slow down).  I guess taking 3 years to go 700 light years isn't such a bad deal.  Well, except for the fact that anyone who isn't with you on the trip would be dead by the time you returned.  That sucks.

Using wormholes would definitely be a much better method, but as someone mentioned, creating one large enough and stable enough would be quite the challenge, and that is if it is even possible.

Having said this, keep in mind that the universe is 13.7 billion years old.  An alien race could be millions or billions of years beyond us technologically.  That is, if they managed to not blow themselves up first.

----------


## ♥Mark

> Having said this, keep in mind that the universe is 13.7 billion years old.  An alien race could be millions or billions of years beyond us technologically.  That is, if they managed to not blow themselves up first.



Don't forget they'd have to develop the technology before their respective star systems died.

----------


## jefe

That is true, but considering the lifetime of a star similar to our sun is about 10 billion years, I expect that they'd have plenty of time.

----------


## BohmaN

Nice input there jefe, definately blew goldneys arguments away.

----------


## Bonsay

> Haven't you been reading my posts about how impossible it is?



What exactly makes you believe that it's so impossible?

----------


## Goldney

> Nice input there jefe, definately blew goldneys arguments away.



Actually I have mentioned that in one of my previous posts about how the people in the space ship would experience time dilation (didn't know the name) but I wasn't sure as to how this would affect their journey.





> It would take 200 million years just to travel to the nearest galaxy other than our own if we went at the speed of light. However, we do know that time slows down for those in a space craft going at incredibly fast speeds. Maybe the slowing of time would counteract the distance...



Also, if anything jefe's post _confirms_ my argument as jefe was saying that the amount of energy required to reach that speed is huge and therefore hard to obtain, therefore comfirming the difficulty in interstellar travel.

-----




> What exactly makes you believe that it's so impossible?



I have explained that several times in my posts, using several different points. How about you go read them and discover FOR YOURSELF what makes me believe it. In fact you quoted me telling someone else to do pretty much that.

----------


## SKA

This topic goes to show how little we all know of reality, yet still how much we assume must be the explanation. Sometimes we see things and we just CAN'T explain them. Some mysteries of life are being thoroughly explored, practiced and manifested by shamanic tribal cultures around the world so I do see some cohenrence and links between my personal mystical experiences and theirs.

However UFOs can be secret militairy aircrafts. They could be natural optical phenomena we don't understand (yet). They could be aliens that came here in a way we couldn't even BEGIn comprehending because to think we are so smart as a species would be arrogant and ignorant; what have we to compair ourselves with. The thing is: We just don't know.

It's just stupid to make assumptions like" It just can't be, stop wishfull thinking" or " It was an ali&#235;n spaceship I tell you!. I'm sure." when you have absolutely no way to rationally explain what you've just experienced. It is just as stupid to say "There's an afterlife, I'm sure of it" as it is to say "There's no afterlife, you supersticious fool". Both "Skeptics" and "Spiritualists" are guilty of this unwillingness to consider wether they might not per say be all that right about what they believe.
And this unwillingness-mentality is what leads to fruitless discussions; not only in this topic.

----------


## BohmaN

Great point there SKA, and sorry I didn't read your posts carefully enough, goldney.

And for our little discussion about how old the Universe is goldney, I decided to find out for good. The Universe is 13.7 billion years old.

Since we have only been on Earth for about 50 000 years and developed our technology, it would be pretty arrogant not being open to the possibilities that the aliens (if there are any) could be a billion years ahead of us...

I like to think about that the universe

----------


## Bonsay

> I have explained that several times in my posts, using several different points. How about you go read them and discover FOR YOURSELF what makes me believe it. In fact you quoted me telling someone else to do pretty much that.



Actually I quoted your response to my suprised response to your response which had nothing to do with the current issue of "space travell" and more with propaganda, which I didn't really understand. What kind of propaganda? Jupiter supports USA kind?

They had some interesting ideas linked to current theories and scientific knowledge. Obviously you don't want to hear anything about travelling faster then light. The only answer to why I got from you is "because E=mc^2".

----------


## Goldney

> Since we have only been on Earth for about 50 000 years and developed our technology, it would be pretty arrogant not being open to the possibilities that the aliens (if there are any) could be a billion years ahead of us...



I'm completely open to that possibility. However, advanced life takes a _long_ time to evolve, mammals have been on the earth for 50, 000, 000 years and it's only in the last few thousand years that man kind has made any real technological advances. As well as this, if there was an advanced society of aliens in space, visiting Earth; wouldn't they make contact? It doesn't even have to be "close" eg. landing on earth. They could send out a message comprised of electromagnetic waves from beyond our solar system. There are satellites designed to listen out for this.





> Actually I quoted your response to my suprised response to your response which had nothing to do with the current issue of "space travell" and more with propaganda, which I didn't really understand. What kind of propaganda? Jupiter supports USA kind?



First of all, what? I can't understand that. Could you word it better please?





> They had some interesting ideas linked to current theories and scientific knowledge. Obviously you don't want to hear anything about travelling faster then light. The only answer to why I got from you is "because E=mc^2".




I'll edit this post with an explanation of E=MC^2 tomorrow. Just too tired at the moment.

----------


## jefe

> Also, if anything jefe's post _confirms_ my argument as jefe was saying that the amount of energy required to reach that speed is huge and therefore hard to obtain, therefore comfirming the difficulty in interstellar travel.



Out of curiosity I calculated just how much energy it would take.  For a spaceship the mass of our space shuttle to make the journey I described above, the energy used is 100 million times the amount consumed by the U.S. in a year.  Damn!





> if there was an advanced society of aliens in space, visiting Earth; wouldn't they make contact?



This is a puzzling question.  You would think that if they bothered making the journey, they would want to contact us.  However, I think we all agree that any civilization capable of visiting us is way beyond us, both technologically and in terms of wisdom.  Perhaps they foresee how dramatic and possibly devastating it could be for them to contact us.

----------


## ♥Mark

> That is true, but considering the lifetime of a star similar to our sun is about 10 billion years, I expect that they'd have plenty of time.



Is it? 

That's entirely dependent on how long it takes life to develop in the first place. It's not going to happen right at the beginning of the star's life, which will be much before the planet is habitable. Then the planet itself must develop. Once life finally does start, it must evolve for a few billion years, if the rate is anywhere similar to Earth's, before it even figures out that it even exists. Then factor in the time it could take to develop the technology. If their civilization is even kind of close to ours, then they'll certainly be concerned more with... Earthly matters? By which I mean matters on their respective planet. Then consider that they might also nuke their civilization off the face of their planet, or at least nuke their civilization back a few hundred years, causing them to spend their resources on rebuilding their planet. Also factor that inter-star system space travel development may not be their primary focus, or necessarily something they are even interested in. And let's not forget natural extinctions. Their planet may not have been so lucky as to have a giant, asteroid absorbing shield named Jupiter like we do.

----------


## Bonsay

> First of all, what? I can't understand that. Could you word it better please?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll edit this post with an explanation of E=MC^2 tomorrow. Just too tired at the moment.



That messed up sentence was the answer to your "In fact you quoted me telling someone else to do pretty much that." response. 

E=Mc... doesn't say you can't reach the destination before the light does, if we look at a "race" example. All I was saying is that theoretically there is nothing stopping you from beating something which travels with the unbeatable speed of light. I think I didn't say faster than light speed, but travel.

----------


## Goldney

> All I was saying is that theoretically there is nothing stopping you from beating something which travels with the unbeatable speed of light. I think I didn't say faster than light speed, but travel.



If you're referring to the wormhole theory where two points in space are joined by a shortcut (the wormhole) and the spacecraft simply travels along it.



This is still only a theory and to do so it requires colossal amounts of energy. It requires you to bend the universe quite literally in half and then create a tunnel through which you can _safely_ traverse. Imagine the energy required to do that; bending the universe in half.

----------


## Bonsay

I never said that aliens are using them. I just felt like questioning you  :tongue2:  . There is also the warp drive.

----------


## Goldney

What's the warp drive?

----------


## thegnome54

> What's the warp drive?



Something from B-grade sci-fi  :tongue2: 

About the wormhole idea, it wouldn't necessarily take so much energy.  I understand that black holes actually bend space-time, so all you would need would be massive amounts of... mass.  The question is where to put them, which depends on the four-dimensional shape of the universe, assuming that there actually is a fourth dimension.

It's all very theoretical, so as far as I'm concerned, most anything is possible in these areas.

----------


## jefe

In response to Mark, I totally agree that there are many factors that limit how soon intelligent life can evolve, and that there are many possibilities for setbacks.  However, I still think it is reasonable that intelligent life could have developed elsewhere in the universe long before us.  Think of how much time this planet was dominated by the dinosaurs (160 million years).  If mammals had become dominant sooner, the evolution of humans could have occurred much sooner than it did.





> About the wormhole idea, it wouldn't necessarily take so much energy. I understand that black holes actually bend space-time, so all you would need would be massive amounts of... mass. The question is where to put them, which depends on the four-dimensional shape of the universe, assuming that there actually is a fourth dimension.



It is true that black holes bend spacetime, as does any other form of mass or energy.  This is the way that Einstein's general relativity accounts for gravity.  But just because spacetime is curved doesn't necessarily mean that distant regions of spacetime have been connected via a wormhole.  And the fourth dimension is merely how time is incorporated.

I'm not trying to say that a traversable wormhole is impossible.  It's just that we haven't found any evidence for a naturally occurring one, and as goldney pointed out, creating one would be extremely difficult.

----------


## Bonsay

> What's the warp drive?



Again it is a theoretical way of travel. Basically you use quantum vacuum to attract two points of time-space fabric. Instead of traveling you just stay put and move space, again not limited by speed of light. I don't expect aliens using it either.

----------


## Chaos Theory

I remember watching something on the Discovery Channel about Remote Viewing and Telepathy and about half  the people were able to Remote view. 
As for ET's, Every star is a Galaxy, correct? How is it NOT possible that there might be another Planet just like Earth?

----------


## Bonsay

> As for ET's, Every star is a Galaxy, correct? How is it NOT possible that there might be another Planet just like Earth?



Most, probably even all of us here believe that there is life out there. Just not out "here".  ::roll::

----------


## thegnome54

> *thirdly: "Whether you believe that you can do something, or believe that you cannot. You are always right." - Henry Ford.
> 
> but understand, you dont need any information. Willpower is enough alone.
> Concentration, relaxation, and commitment/determination.



That approach only applies to dissolving mental blockages - yes, the brain can affect the brain.  If you think lowly of yourself, an attitude change can easily improve your life.  However, there is no reason to believe that willpower or determination will noticeably affect the physical world outside of the human body any more than laziness or apathy.  That is wishful thinking.

----------


## Goldney

> As for ET's, Every star is a Galaxy, correct? How is it NOT possible that there might be another Planet just like Earth?



Every star is a galaxy? No that could never happen. In size of things it goes-

Universe-> Galaxies-> Stars-> Planets-> etcetera

But if you are saying that every star has a _solar system_ then I believe most but not all do.

We are not debating whether planets like Earth exist as that is a near mathematical certainty due to the size of the Universe, however we _are_ debating whether life-forms on said planets have visited Earth and possible (and highly hypothetical) means in which they could/have visited us.

Basically we're now talking about faster-than-light travel, although a better name would be faster-than-electromagnetic-waves travel as light belongs to the electromgnetic spectrum which all (from radio waves to gamma rays) travel at the same speed.

----------


## Chaos Theory

> Every star is a galaxy? No that could never happen. In size of things it goes-
> 
> Universe-> Galaxies-> Stars-> Planets-> etcetera
> 
> But if you are saying that every star has a _solar system_ then I believe most but not all do.
> 
> We are not debating whether planets like Earth exist as that is a near mathematical certainty due to the size of the Universe, however we _are_ debating whether life-forms on said planets have visited Earth and possible (and highly hypothetical) means in which they could/have visited us.
> 
> Basically we're now talking about faster-than-light travel, although a better name would be faster-than-electromagnetic-waves travel as light belongs to the electromgnetic spectrum which all (from radio waves to gamma rays) travel at the same speed.



Your right, sorry. Lol. I meant Solar System. Haha. 
I already know. As for ET"s visiting Earth, I absolutely have no idea. Some people I know say that it's all the Military covering it up. I remember once one of my Parents told me that a UFO had hovered over Redondo ( Spelling? ) For at least half an hour and people were calling into the Radio saying " There's a UFO! "

----------


## Rainman

> However, there is no reason to believe that willpower or determination will noticeably affect the physical world outside of the human body any more than laziness or apathy. That is wishful thinking.



thegnome54 I would not quite say that. To the contrary, science itself tells us that there is every reason to believe that willpower can affect the physical world outside of the human body. Allow me to explain before the attacks, please. Thoughts and expectations can certainly affect the physical world around you. Since you're a science guy, it's been proven many times, and it's pretty old news. Ever heard of that series of experiments done with living organisms? Two sets of identical organisms were placed into different rooms. The only difference in the rooms were that one had angry people who were full of hate or were arguing with their spouse, etc. They would scream, and yell and say terrible things. We'll call that room A. In the other room, there were people to the complete opposite. People who were content and happy with their lives, and said positive things constantly. Newlyweds, hippies, etc.  :wink2:  We'll call that room B. 

The organisms in room A after a certain period of time (i can't remember how long)were dying, rotting, shrivelled, brown (the one with water crystals) was distorted and small. Whereas the organisms in room B were healthy, in good order, beautiful, full grown, the water crystals done were clear and large and sparkly. Coincidence? Perhaps. Unless this experiment was done hundreds of times with different variables and the same results were reached and overwhelming majority of the time.

Watch a movie called "the secret". There's a book also, but the movie goes more in-depth if you ask me. The concept is that your thoughts have an effect on reality. And they do. If you were in a bad neighborhood, and you felt an overwhelming sense of fear, even if you didn't show it, and even if you're a big dude, people would likely fuck with you or try to do something to you. To the contrary, if you were confident, unafraid, and knew you could kick everyone's ass, no one would mess with you, even if you were a little dude. No one would know why they react to you the way they do, they just do it.

And it's because people can pick up on your emotions. It gives off a vibe. If you give off a vibe that says "if you talk to me I will rip your face off" people won't talk to you. Even if you look normal, look content, etc., people will be less likely to talk to you than if you put off a vibe that says "i love everyone and I want to meet new friends and party". Even if you looked reserved, people would be more likely to talk to you even if you're a complete stranger. 

And those are just examples with humans. Those are more common sense ideas than the ideas that are in "The Secret", but they are all true, and they are all proved within the movie/book. I'd take a look at it, it's pretty interesting.

----------


## thegnome54

> thegnome54 I would not quite say that. To the contrary, science itself tells us that there is every reason to believe that willpower can affect the physical world outside of the human body. Allow me to explain before the attacks, please. Thoughts and expectations can certainly affect the physical world around you. Since you're a science guy, it's been proven many times, and it's pretty old news. Ever heard of that series of experiments done with living organisms? Two sets of identical organisms were placed into different rooms. The only difference in the rooms were that one had angry people who were full of hate or were arguing with their spouse, etc. They would scream, and yell and say terrible things. We'll call that room A. In the other room, there were people to the complete opposite. People who were content and happy with their lives, and said positive things constantly. Newlyweds, hippies, etc.  We'll call that room B. 
> 
> The organisms in room A after a certain period of time (i can't remember how long)were dying, rotting, shrivelled, brown (the one with water crystals) was distorted and small. Whereas the organisms in room B were healthy, in good order, beautiful, full grown, the water crystals done were clear and large and sparkly. Coincidence? Perhaps. Unless this experiment was done hundreds of times with different variables and the same results were reached and overwhelming majority of the time.
> 
> Watch a movie called "the secret". There's a book also, but the movie goes more in-depth if you ask me. The concept is that your thoughts have an effect on reality. And they do. If you were in a bad neighborhood, and you felt an overwhelming sense of fear, even if you didn't show it, and even if you're a big dude, people would likely fuck with you or try to do something to you. To the contrary, if you were confident, unafraid, and knew you could kick everyone's ass, no one would mess with you, even if you were a little dude. No one would know why they react to you the way they do, they just do it.
> 
> And it's because people can pick up on your emotions. It gives off a vibe. If you give off a vibe that says "if you talk to me I will rip your face off" people won't talk to you. Even if you look normal, look content, etc., people will be less likely to talk to you than if you put off a vibe that says "i love everyone and I want to meet new friends and party". Even if you looked reserved, people would be more likely to talk to you even if you're a complete stranger. 
> 
> And those are just examples with humans. Those are more common sense ideas than the ideas that are in "The Secret", but they are all true, and they are all proved within the movie/book. I'd take a look at it, it's pretty interesting.



First of all, what is a water crystal?  Do you mean ice?  I fail to see the connection between a 'large and clear' ice particle and happiness, unless you're relying purely on the human idea of beauty and purity, which has nothing to do with the objective structure of ice.  

Yes, people can pick up your emotions.  That's common sense.  Your thoughts are not affecting them, they are affecting your body, which is betraying your thoughts to the watchful eyes of those around you.  Were you walking through the city in an opaque box which rolled around you, concealing you from view, your thoughts would MIRACULOUSLY cease to affect those around you.

I think I have heard of that movie, and they make a completely ridiculous assumption - that human thoughts and wishes will manifest themselves physically, JUST from the act of thinking.

Now obviously, if you concentrate on a wish, you will be more likely to work at achieving the goal, and maybe your demeanor in everyday life will help you along.  Fine.  But to say that if you sit in bed all day and wish to win the lottery, then you will, is ridiculous, because you STILL HAVE TO BUY A TICKET.

People can indeed pick up on your emotions.  Inanimate objects cannot.  If you don't believe me, go outside and throw a brick up in the air about ten feet above your head.  As it's falling towards your skull, WISH as hard as you can that it won't kill you.  I'm sure the results will be interesting.

*edit* by the way, the REAL secret is to make a movie about new-age nonsensically simple ways to be successful in life and make millions of dollars off of the dreams of gullible plebeians.  Then, at least _your_ pockets will be lined, and your dreams fulfilled.

----------


## Rainman

> People can indeed pick up on your emotions. Inanimate objects cannot. If you don't believe me, go outside and throw a brick up in the air about ten feet above your head. As it's falling towards your skull, WISH as hard as you can that it won't kill you. I'm sure the results will be interesting.







> I think I have heard of that movie, and they make a completely ridiculous assumption - that human thoughts and wishes will manifest themselves physically, JUST from the act of thinking.



You clearly have no idea what it's actually about. The movie makes no such assumption whatsoever. Watch it and see for yourself, before you make assumptions on what it's about. I don't know who told you it was about wishing things would happen and they happen. It actually says the contrary. It is about taking action, and being positive about what you want, and you will always get it, even if it seems like something that cannot be done. Within reasonability of course. It has worked for millions of people, including myself.





> First of all, what is a water crystal? Do you mean ice? I fail to see the connection between a 'large and clear' ice particle and happiness, unless you're relying purely on the human idea of beauty and purity, which has nothing to do with the objective structure of ice.



The experiment was done with several different organisms and plants and it was done hundreds of times with the same results. Even you cannot denounce that, although I am certain that you will find a way to try, as it is a skeptic's nature.  :wink2:   There were controls done as well. Every combination was done and recorded. If you don't believe me, watch "what the bleep do we know?". I believe that is the movie that covers a portion of those experiments, or re-does them. 

On a side note, I appreciate your civility in debates. I've always been grateful for people who prove their point respectfully, especially since there are so few members like that on DV.

----------


## thegnome54

> It actually says the contrary. It is about taking action, and being positive about what you want, and you will always get it, even if it seems like something that cannot be done.



A bit of a paltry secret, no?  I think you're the one misunderstanding the movie's premise.  I really think that the movie is implying that your wishes and your determination will affect things which are not sentient beings, resulting in the fulfillment of said wishes.






> The experiment was done with several different organisms and plants and it was done hundreds of times with the same results. Even you cannot denounce that, although I am certain that you will find a way to try, as it is a skeptic's nature.   There were controls done as well. Every combination was done and recorded. If you don't believe me, watch "what the bleep do we know?". I believe that is the movie that covers a portion of those experiments, or re-does them.



I'm sorry, but I still don't know what a water crystal is.

Also, I'm not denouncing the results, I'm denouncing the interpretation.  As I believe that the human mind is entirely physical, this could be interpreted in a number of different ways.  First of all, if the plants are locked in this room, perhaps angry people generate more body heat and moisture, which is bad for the plants.  Second of all, humans have a (presumably) vestigial vomeronasal organ which appears to be built to detect pheromones.  I am aware that research in this area is limited and of questionable merit, but it is very possible that angry human beings release certain chemicals which happy ones do not.  Maybe plants are simply sensitive to high levels of noise, and this disrupts some physiological process inside of them.  It is also possible that the angry people generate more air currents, or any number of easy-to-overlook little factors could be coming into play.

The only way that I would really trust such an experiment would be if the physical human being was somehow isolated from the plant.  For example, if the plants were placed in sound-proof area, thermally and atmospherically separate from the humans, and then the test was conducted.  It seems like there will always be trouble with isolating the physical effects of human emotions on plants from the alleged 'mental' effects on the plants.

----------


## Rainman

> A bit of a paltry secret, no? I think you're the one misunderstanding the movie's premise. I really think that the movie is implying that your wishes and your determination will affect things which are not sentient beings, resulting in the fulfillment of said wishes.



You really think...but I really know, cause I've seen it and you haven't, period.  :wink2:  I am not misunderstanding the movie's premise. Watch it, trust me, you'll see. It's a decent combination of both, but they repeatedly and strongly emphasize that it's not about wishing, it's about action, and for things that are out of reach, positivity will aid you the rest of the way.





> I'm sorry, but I still don't know what a water crystal is.



 Neither do I. :p that's just what I remember hearing. Irrelevant, however, because as I said, the experiment was done with plants, and small organisms as well.





> I'm denouncing the interpretation. As I believe that the human mind is entirely physical, this could be interpreted in a number of different ways. First of all, if the plants are locked in this room, perhaps angry people generate more body heat and moisture, which is bad for the plants. Second of all, humans have a (presumably) vestigial vomeronasal organ which appears to be built to detect pheromones.



Hmm. Checkmate. You got me there, mate, there's not much I can say to counter that. It is quite likely that you're correct, now that I'm thinking about it. Heh. You might one day convert me to skepticism  :wink2: 





> The only way that I would really trust such an experiment would be if the physical human being was somehow isolated from the plant. For example, if the plants were placed in sound-proof area, thermally and atmospherically separate from the humans, and then the test was conducted. It seems like there will always be trouble with isolating the physical effects of human emotions on plants from the alleged 'mental' effects on the plants.



No, the theory implies that the human would have to be near the plant. But also, not all of the people were speaking. They brought depression patients in, etc. They weren't yelling or screaming AT the plant, many times, the people were not within 10 feet of it. However, I still think your point holds validity because of pheromone release. Pheromones are something I don't know much about other than the fact that non-human organisms and animals can pick up on them much more strongly than we can. That would certainly be an interesting variable to test out.

----------


## Jeff777

Alas, noone has bothered to answer DopeyGuy's question.

----------


## Xyn

> thegnome54 I would not quite say that. To the contrary, science itself tells us that there is every reason to believe that willpower can affect the physical world outside of the human body. Allow me to explain before the attacks, please. Thoughts and expectations can certainly affect the physical world around you. Since you're a science guy, it's been proven many times, and it's pretty old news. Ever heard of that series of experiments done with living organisms? Two sets of identical organisms were placed into different rooms. The only difference in the rooms were that one had angry people who were full of hate or were arguing with their spouse, etc. They would scream, and yell and say terrible things. We'll call that room A. In the other room, there were people to the complete opposite. People who were content and happy with their lives, and said positive things constantly. Newlyweds, hippies, etc.  We'll call that room B. 
> 
> The organisms in room A after a certain period of time (i can't remember how long)were dying, rotting, shrivelled, brown (the one with water crystals) was distorted and small. Whereas the organisms in room B were healthy, in good order, beautiful, full grown, the water crystals done were clear and large and sparkly. Coincidence? Perhaps. Unless this experiment was done hundreds of times with different variables and the same results were reached and overwhelming majority of the time.
> 
> Watch a movie called "the secret". There's a book also, but the movie goes more in-depth if you ask me. The concept is that your thoughts have an effect on reality. And they do. If you were in a bad neighborhood, and you felt an overwhelming sense of fear, even if you didn't show it, and even if you're a big dude, people would likely fuck with you or try to do something to you. To the contrary, if you were confident, unafraid, and knew you could kick everyone's ass, no one would mess with you, even if you were a little dude. No one would know why they react to you the way they do, they just do it.
> 
> And it's because people can pick up on your emotions. It gives off a vibe. If you give off a vibe that says "if you talk to me I will rip your face off" people won't talk to you. Even if you look normal, look content, etc., people will be less likely to talk to you than if you put off a vibe that says "i love everyone and I want to meet new friends and party". Even if you looked reserved, people would be more likely to talk to you even if you're a complete stranger. 
> 
> And those are just examples with humans. Those are more common sense ideas than the ideas that are in "The Secret", but they are all true, and they are all proved within the movie/book. I'd take a look at it, it's pretty interesting.




So basically your trying to say that organisms can pick up human emotions and/or hear English language ECT.  I highly doubt it.  If it aint a coincidence maby it has to do with the yelling harming them (Idk).

Sorry, I have no strong opionion, but I doubt thats true.

----------


## Bad Wolf

> Alas, noone has bothered to answer DopeyGuy's question.



He hasn't been here since January, but I'll go ahead and post an answer. Although all of his questions have been answered anyway...





> Are psi abilities real or not? I mean, how come many people in this forum claim they have those "powers", but they do not prove it, and if they do have those powers, how come scientists are not putting them into their labs and start doing some testings? If psi abilities are real, i don't need any videos that show they are real because those videos can be edited. 
> Oh yeah, if these things are real, how come they are in websites, but not the news channel on tv?



1) Yes, they are real.
2) What makes you think people are even interested in attempting to provide proof to others? They have nothing to gain from travelling to where you live, just to provide you with evidence that you wouldn't even accept. Sure, someone could try to use telepathy on you while you're both on a chat, but if they were either not very skilled or were having an off day then you'd instantly dismiss psionics as fake.
3) Yes, because everyone enjoys nothing more than to be expirimented on. Besides, as has been said, most scientists pretty much refuse to believe it's possible anyway.
4) Of course they can be edited, which is why the best way to find the proof you want is to find it yourself.
5) Hah, there's a laugh. Do you have any idea what would happen to any respectable news channel that tried to say anything paranormal is real? I can tell you this much, whoever decided to put that on the air would be fired in a heartbeat, assuming the news station's reputation wasn't already irreparably torn to shreds.

----------


## Xyn

> He hasn't been here since January, but I'll go ahead and post an answer. Although all of his questions have been answered anyway...
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Yes, they are real.
> 2) What makes you think people are even interested in attempting to provide proof to others? They have nothing to gain from travelling to where you live, just to provide you with evidence that you wouldn't even accept. Sure, someone could try to use telepathy on you while you're both on a chat, but if they were either not very skilled or were having an off day then you'd instantly dismiss psionics as fake.
> 3) Yes, because everyone enjoys nothing more than to be expirimented on. Besides, as has been said, most scientists pretty much refuse to believe it's possible anyway.
> 4) Of course they can be edited, which is why the best way to find the proof you want is to find it yourself.
> 5) Hah, there's a laugh. Do you have any idea what would happen to any respectable news channel that tried to say anything paranormal is real? I can tell you this much, whoever decided to put that on the air would be fired in a heartbeat, assuming the news station's reputation wasn't already irreparably torn to shreds.



I tend to disagree with you.  IF it does exist, you think that people who have these "powers" have nothing to gain.  Well, if I was a scientist, what would I do?  Well, first of all, i'd pay someone to prove Psi powers exist.  Hell, then i'd be famous for proving they exist.

^ Actually, to be honest, I'm not disagreeing with you that they did not exist.  Because I seriously don't know.  But dont you think a scientist could easily prove it if he wanted too?

----------


## Bad Wolf

> I tend to disagree with you.  IF it does exist, you think that people who have these "powers" have nothing to gain.  Well, if I was a scientist, what would I do?  Well, first of all, i'd pay someone to prove Psi powers exist.  Hell, then i'd be famous for proving they exist.
> 
> ^ Actually, to be honest, I'm not disagreeing with you that they did not exist.  Because I seriously don't know.  But dont you think a scientist could easily prove it if he wanted too?



It'd take some pretty astounding proof to convince the scientific community psi exists. As has been mentioned previously, most scientists would only accept two scenarios from an expiriment that attempts to prove the existence of psi:

1) Nothing happens, just as they knew would happen because it's clearly impossible, and
2) Something happens, but the expiriment was somehow flawed, and any following expiriments that confirm the first one are also flawed.

In my oppinion, most of the world just isn't ready yet. And when it is officially confirmed, at least one of these things would probably happen:

1) Scientists that had previously denounced the possibility of it will say that they had known it existed all along
2) Most, if not all, Christian religions will immediately proclaim that it's the work of the devil, thereby causing many people to not even attempt to use it. And those who are born with the ability to use one or more psi ability naturally will be forced to undergo exercisms and such by their parents, even though there's nothing wrong with them.
3) All governments will begin to attempt to control it's usage, and will imprison anyone they think is using it in a way they don't want them to, even if said person either can't control it or doesn't even know he or she can/is doing it. There's also the fact that the governments will accuse people of using psionics just because said people don't like someone who has a lot of political power.

Also, I appreciate that you're not disagreeing with me. And yes, I believe a scientist could prove it. The only problem would be that all the other scientists would denie that proof, and therefore the truth would probably never get out.

----------


## ♥Mark

> *edit* by the way, the REAL secret is to make a movie about new-age nonsensically simple ways to be successful in life and make millions of dollars off of the dreams of gullible plebeians.  Then, at least _your_ pockets will be lined, and your dreams fulfilled.



Nice!

----------


## TheTimeKeep

I understand the effects of traveling at the speed of light, but can you explain _why_ it happens? And does this distort time around the object aswell, or does it only effect the matter traveling at such speed. Also, if the closer you travel to light, the more time slows down for you (even if it is miniscually as you'll see in my example), then wouldn't time slow down for anyone running by say .0000000000000000000001, or is this somehow impossible due some Earth related restraint?

Any answers would be VERY appreciated!

----------


## jefe

The reason why traveling near the speed of light affects time is kind of hard to explain.  But for a simple clock, it is easy to visualize.  I found a website with a good animation of what I'm thinking of.  I don't really understand how "normal" clocks (2 hands and 12 markings, digital clocks, subatomic particles) are affected by fast motion, but every experiment ever done suggests that they are affected in the same way.

To answer your second question, I'd say basically no.  The object in motion is the only thing that experiences this effect.  I say basically because there is another reason why time can be distorted.  And that is a gravitational field.  An object traveling near the speed of light has a LOT of energy, and hence creates a noticeable gravitational field.  But, I expect that unless the object was very massive, the amount it would distort time for nearby objects would be negligible.

And yes, time is distorted for any motion, no matter how small.  But for speeds that we normally deal with on earth, the amount time is distorted is so small that very sensitive instruments can't detect it, let alone human senses.

----------


## Goldney

> The only difference in the rooms were that one had angry people who were full of hate or were arguing with their spouse, etc. They would scream, and yell and say terrible things. We'll call that room A.



Have you seen the program Mythbusters. In it they did an experiment to see how music affected plants. They played all different types of music; classic, pop, a recording of someone shouting at the plants and another where they weren't and finally a control where no music was played.

Heavy metal music caused the plants to grow by a _significant_ amount. Heavy metal doesn't seem to fit in Room B's image of "nice".

----------


## thegnome54

> Vibrations are different from emotions and aura, i believe.
> 
> With the other study, people were involved.
> 
> I'm not sure how many of you believe in auras.. but they are very easy to "percieve" once you get the hang of it.
> Just look it up in google. Depending on your level of "want" this should be a quite easy and fast skill to discover.



"Auras" are a mystification of the complex social interactions going on between humans subconsciously at all times.  There is a reason why trees have no 'auras'.  It's because they have no faces and no way to betray thoughts through nuances in their physical actions.

----------


## Bonsay

Hmm, I always thought that aura is some magical cloud some people can see. The way you described it quite enligtened me. So I guess we do see auras, but it's subjective. It's quite true that some people seem to iradiate some kind of energy. But I do believe most of it is subconcious detection and evaluation. Same with objects, it's all about what kind of feelings it summons up in the observer.

----------


## thegnome54

> "Aura - A distinctive but intangible quality that seems to surround a person or thing."
> Do you see auras?
> Trees have auras.



I don't believe you understood my post, because that is exactly what I described.  I personally ignore the 'auras' around trees, because I do not consider them to be conscious entities with purposeful actions, so the feelings they instill in me come from my own past experiences and are pretty much irrelevant.  'Auras' around people can be useful, because they are the result of subconscious cues.  The 'quality' that you 'see' around trees is simply the collection of emotions and thoughts you associate with the image or presence of a tree, being called up by the input of your senses.

----------


## thegnome54

> In regards to thinking that they are just subconscious interpretations of our brain, how about, (if you can't already percieve auras) you find the colour of the aura on a person close to you. (perhaps whilst they are sleeping? so that they are not subconsciously sending physical signals to you on how they might be feeling etc.)
> Do this before you "look up" what the colour of their aura means, and afterwards you might be able to check by describing to the person (within a short time frame [auras change]), how they might be feeling, "miraculously" you will be extremely accurate. (that is, if you percieved the auras, and didn't "trick" yourself in seeing something that wasn't there)
> Of course, this is not a surefire way to convince someone; oh and, im not sure (i really haven't checked) if someone's aura changes in their sleep....
> Look it up on the net.




Okay, so you want me to look at someone who is asleep, and 'see' a color.  I then look up what this color means, wake up the person, and tell them - hopefully they agree, and it turns out that I was right about how they were feeling.  Of course, auras can change, so it might be different now that I've woken them up.  Or I could have tricked myself.

That is quite possibly the worst experiment I have ever heard of, no offense.  Have you heard of horoscopes?  It's the same idea.  You make a generic prediction, and hopefully the person will want to play along.  This is even worse, though, because if it seems that you were wrong, you can just claim that their aura has changed.





> I have noticed, thegnome54, you are very theoretical in what you believe.
> Not a bad thing of course, but your wording constantly implies correctness, which can subliminally enhance skepticness, or cynicalness tenfold.
> I do this myself sometimes, but to provoke openmindedness rather than provoking the view, that our scientist's views on the clockwork of our universe are impossibly flawed.



I really didn't get that, sorry  ::shock::   I'm theoretical and I imply correctness?

----------


## Goldney

Bumpity bump bump.

----------


## ClouD

*long yaaawwwnnn*

----------


## the real pieman

i used to be a strong believer in chi, and i still am, but not in the way that i used to be...

ive come to the conclusion after lots of time reflecting on life that rationally chi does exist and in this post i will prove it to you through science.

The first thing that you need to remember is that the concept of energy does exist scientifically, kinetic energy etc, energy does exist, just keep that in mind throughout this post.

Therefore as energy exists, then in a way that proves the existance of chi, as chi is energy, but does not answer the question about how people can manipulate it....

energy exists within all objects in the universe in some shape or form, it is therefore connected to all objects in the universe, meaning in theory all objects are connected to each other.

Another point i want to bring up is the chaos theory, a small action can have huge consequences, like the large rings a drop of water falling into a still river makes. Therefore we can apply the same principle to our minds and muscles. our muscles release a certain sound or small wave of energy, this is show emprically in electric eels which are able to store this energy and then release it. 

therefore through meditation people can have the same ability, storing wasted energy in a place where energy changes are most frequent and most complex, in the brain.

now re-apply the chaos theory, if you are able to release a small amount of energy and direct it as elecrtic eels prove is possible, then that small amount of energy will not disappear in the air (as energy can not be destroyed), it will simply travel to neighbouring particles and therefore those particles will affect the next ones and so on, causing a compact amount of energy to spread out and form a larger area of slightly less intense energy, but when all the particles energies are combined it equals the same amount as the original (none created or destroyed)

the connection of all things logically will therefore cause the enrgy to flow through the medium (air) into the object (pencil, pen etc) and cause it to move due to the amount of kinetic energy provided to it...

now i know there will be some harsh criticisms to this post and i will be looking forward to crush them... ::D: 

p.s. thank you for taking your time to read this post, hope it helps....

----------


## Explode

[EDIT] Nevermind...skeptic post
blah blah blah james randi blah blah...

----------


## RockNRoller123

> Are psi abilities real or not? I mean, how come many people in this forum claim they have those "powers", but they do not prove it, and if they do have those powers, how come scientists are not putting them into their labs and start doing some testings? If psi abilities are real, i don't need any videos that show they are real because those videos can be edited. 
> Oh yeah, if these things are real, how come they are in websites, but not the news channel on tv?



Reality is as perceived man...  ::shock::

----------


## EnergyWorker

Hi DopeyGuy,

Why would you even ask if psychic abilities are real? If someone claimed they were, would you believe them? If someone insisted they weren't, would you believe them?

There are only two ways to prove it to yourself: Either someone comes over to your house and you see them use abilities such as telepathy, telekinesis, levitating, flying, etc... or you become adept at it yourself.

Why trust claims or hearsay?

If you aren't sure whether or not they are real, the only valid question is: Are they possible? My stance is yes, they are possible, but I've never used the powers myself or had anyone show me that they can use them.

The general topic is very interesting, but taking someone's word for or against is pointless.

I'm not scolding you  :smiley:  Just saying that a better question would have been substituting "possible" for "real".

~EnergyWorker~

----------


## spellbee2

This thread hasn't had any responses in 7 years, and most of the original posters aren't here anymore. Please don't necropost, it's against forum rules.

 :lock:

----------

