We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Psi evidence (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next]
Michael Daniels
View Profile
Inner circle
Isle of Man
1513 Posts

Profile of Michael Daniels
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 17:42, Slim King wrote:
I suggest that EVERYONE on this thread look up the REAL MEANING of the word Paranormal ...Not Scientifically Explainable ... It's pretty simple once we use the correct definition.


The problem is that we can never know whether or not something is scientifically explainable. We often cannot even agree whether something is already scientifically explained.

Mike
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
17682 Posts

Profile of Slim King
If the scientists can't explain it ... It's paranormal ...simple!!!! LOL
I just like to keep it REAL!!!
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
Amirá
View Profile
Inner circle
MentalismCenter.com
5134 Posts

Profile of Amirá
Our audience really care if we are doing scientifically proven demonstrations?

It´s fine to know this facts and believe in the "invisible" , but at the end our focus must be on the emotions evoked, I think.


Best
Pablo
Performer and Author

Mentalism Center: The best online space to get quality Mentalism
www.mentalismcenter.com

Arkanosophy: The Boutique for Mystery Performers
www.arkanosophy.com
Tom Jorgenson
View Profile
Inner circle
LOOSE ANGLES, CALIFORNIA
4452 Posts

Profile of Tom Jorgenson
Quote:
On 2013-05-28 23:35, Curtis Alexander wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-05-27 13:28, Tom Jorgenson wrote:
No one who has ever actually had an Out of the Body Experience will say they think it was an hallucination.


I've got to call BS on this one. Unless we have a different definitions of "Out of Body Experiences" and "hallucination", I think there are many people who would come to this conclusion, including myself.



You have had full Out of Body Experiences?
We dance an invisible dance to music they cannot hear.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 17:48, Slim King wrote:
If the scientists can't explain it ... It's paranormal ...simple!!!! LOL
I just like to keep it REAL!!!


There are countless things that science, as yet, cannot explain. Take gravity, for example.

http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativit......ity.html

By your definition, gravity must be paranormal. But, obviously, it is not.

Not so simple, after all.
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9119 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 17:42, Slim King wrote:
I suggest that EVERYONE on this thread look up the REAL MEANING of the word Paranormal ...Not Scientifically Explainable ... It's pretty simple once we use the correct definition.


not sure what source you are looking at. It appears that the first documented use of the word was in Webster's 1913 addition of their popular dictionary.

"Of or pertaining to parapsychology; pertaining to forces or mental processes, such as extrasensory perception or psychokinesis, outside the possibilities defined by natural or scientific laws; as, paranormal phenomena."
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
17682 Posts

Profile of Slim King
Might I suggest something LESS than 100 years old ROTFLMAO
SOMETIMES YOU GUYS CRACK ME UP!!!!!
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
17682 Posts

Profile of Slim King
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 19:25, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 17:48, Slim King wrote:
If the scientists can't explain it ... It's paranormal ...simple!!!! LOL
I just like to keep it REAL!!!


There are countless things that science, as yet, cannot explain. Take gravity, for example.

http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativit......ity.html

By your definition, gravity must be paranormal. But, obviously, it is not.

Not so simple, after all.
Or you are taking something paranormal for GRANTED!!!! Like DeJaVue ... There is absolutely no agreed upon scientific explanation for someone knowing the future before it happens.... just theories upon theories that change every year.
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
So you're saying that gravity is paranormal?

BTW- there is, in fact, a scientific explanation for deja vu, which is not foreseeing the future, but having the feeling that you've experienced a particular event before.
DWRackley
View Profile
Inner circle
Chattanooga, TN
1909 Posts

Profile of DWRackley
I’ve been called down before for committing “etymological fallacy” but specific words (and parts thereof) have specific meanings. Para (in English borrowed from Greek) usually refers to “other than, alternative, or beside, or ancillary to” the base word. Think of paramilitary or paramedical. If we consider paranormal to be “other than normal” or maybe even “ancillary to normal” we might have a suitable springboard. These experiences are most assuredly outside the normal range of expected daily occurrence, and apparently outside the ability of science (at its present level) to quantify or even verify.

I think at some point we’re going to have to accept that even (especially?) in science, we don’t have all the facts. An old argument for sure, but radio waves existed long before Marconi discovered them (or DeForest or Telsa or…). They might not have been modulated to carry information but they existed nonetheless, and may have had effects that were unrecognized at the time; static discharge, corona displays, even “spooky noises” have all been attributed to various frequencies of EM radiation in specific circumstances.

Like Michael Daniels, I was also uncomfortable with the word Skeptic as anything other than closed minded, at least in recent times, even though technically it should not have that meaning. Inquirer can include those on both “sides”; not all believers are ignorant and not all doubters are blind.

For an Inquirer to state simply “I don’t know” even if it’s followed up with “but I doubt it”, then we have something to work with.

Often the answer to one question produces only more questions. (Sounds like a cliché, huh?) In Randy’s test for dowsers, a buried system of water pipes might be the wrong test. What if (another question) what if the dowser’s information comes not so much from the presence of water, but from water-related deformations in the natural terrain, which are geologically reliable but not recognized on a conscious level? A better question might be how can we test that?

I enjoy MythBusters, but a few times they’ve missed it completely for lack of knowledge. I’m thinking of a particular episode where they “busted” the idea of an arrow being split by another arrow. The single feature they missed was that today’s arrows are not manufactured in the same way as “ye arrows of olde”, which were not lathed or turned, but were found and shaped from the straightest of live tree branches. The difference? The lay of the wood grain. In turned wood the grain may have no relation whatsoever to the final shape, which is exactly what M.B. demonstrated. In a natural branch, the grain runs end to end, and it is actually quite difficult to get a branch NOT to split full length.

Digression finished Smile : at least a part of the search has to be in asking the right question.
...what if I could read your mind?

Chattanooga's Premier Mentalist

Donatelli and Company at ChattanoogaPerformers.com

also on FaceBook
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Those who need scientific evidence will never convince those who don't that scientific evidence is needed.

Case in point, deities.

I'll leave it at that.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
DWRackley
View Profile
Inner circle
Chattanooga, TN
1909 Posts

Profile of DWRackley
Good point, Pakar. But more to the point, if it could be put into a bottle, it wouldn't be a god, right? Smile
...what if I could read your mind?

Chattanooga's Premier Mentalist

Donatelli and Company at ChattanoogaPerformers.com

also on FaceBook
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
17682 Posts

Profile of Slim King
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 23:14, mastermindreader wrote:
So you're saying that gravity is paranormal?

BTW- there is, in fact, a scientific explanation for deja vu, which is not foreseeing the future, but having the feeling that you've experienced a particular event before.
Science has never agreed upon Deja vu ... for years they had theories but all have been debunked.
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Where, exactly, has the explanation by psychologist Edward B. Titchener in his 1928 book A Textbook of Psychology, been "debunked?"

A few popular authors have suggested that the phenomenon is somehow proof of reincarnation, but that's about it.
Smoking Camel
View Profile
Inner circle
UK
1042 Posts

Profile of Smoking Camel
I recon that in the moments right before death, all skepticism crumbles.
I no longer smoke camel cigarettes.
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On 2013-05-30 01:42, Smoking Camel wrote:
I recon that in the moments right before death, all skepticism crumbles.


Skepticism about which religion?
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Sean Giles
View Profile
Inner circle
Cambridge/ UK
3727 Posts

Profile of Sean Giles
Quote:
On 2013-05-30 01:42, Smoking Camel wrote:
I recon that in the moments right before death, all skepticism crumbles.


I reckon that in the moments right AFTER death, all religion crumbles Smile
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On 2013-05-30 02:49, Sean Giles wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-05-30 01:42, Smoking Camel wrote:
I recon that in the moments right before death, all skepticism crumbles.


I reckon that in the moments right AFTER death, all religion crumbles Smile


:applause:
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9119 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-05-29 21:55, Slim King wrote:
Might I suggest something LESS than 100 years old ROTFLMAO
SOMETIMES YOU GUYS CRACK ME UP!!!!!


you cited the "REAL MEANING" of the word Paranormal. Where else would you go except the original source. Again -- what is your source?

Please explain why some later source (if it exists) is more valid than the original. You allude to people having the wrong definition. Did you just make yours up?

I 'might suggest" you look up the meaning of "source"

You might have been trying to make some valid point with your earlier post. That is now lost in your waffling. What respect I had for you before is now dwindling away.

The real issue is that your claimed definition is WRONG -- neither accurate nor valid as has been pointed out by others.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
funsway
View Profile
Inner circle
old things in new ways - new things in old ways
9119 Posts

Profile of funsway
Quote:
On 2013-05-30 00:08, Slim King wrote:

Science has never agreed upon Deja vu ... for years they had theories but all have been debunked.
[/quote]

Wrong again. Recent publications of neurobiology offer explanations that have not been debunked or even challenged.

Your suggestion that a scientific theory that cannot be prove, or is proved wrong, means the scientists involved must have been "full of bunk" is insulting. "Debunking" implies some fraudulent attempt by the claimant. Do you have any evidence of this? -- or something else you just made up?
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst

eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Psi evidence (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.23 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL