Author Topic: Personal telepathy experiences  (Read 856 times)

Offline transient amnesia

  • ***
  • Posts: 211
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 12:21:14 PM by transient amnesia »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: transient amnesia

I don't know have you been interpreting quantum mechanics wrong?


I have not. I don't need any youtube videos to tell me about QM either.

In our current science this is where alternate dimensions pop up:

In string theory there are 11 hypothetical rolled up subatomic dimensions (not dimensions outside of our universe), remember they are subatomic so there are no Bigfoots living there.
More importantly string theory is very hypothetical and cannot be shown to be real as the scale of the strings and hidden dimensions are near the Planck length 10^-34cm.

In cosmology there is speculation about other universes but of course it's just speculation at this point.



The videos:

1) A video on purturbation theory? Ok. Has nothing to do with portals opening up from alternate dimensions. Not even close?

2) A pilot wave video? Again nothing to do with Mothmen and space portals?

3) dimensions, I've already covered the use of dimensions in modern science. Could you just put into words whatever you are trying to say instead of posting 3 non-related science videos?

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: transient amnesia
Quote from: Joelr

A much bigger discovery than finding a mothman or big foot would be the fact that there are other universes and not only are they connected to ours, they open holes up and things pass through. That's a much more fantastic discovery.

Now if a hole opened up and a Mothman came through that means that the holes are not rare. Because to open up just at the time a Mothman is walking through that space (or Bigfoot) would mean that holes probably open up quite often.
In order for a random hole to open and actually have a large creature pass through you would need holes opening up fairly frequently as there aren't just 7 foot tall creatures walking around all over the place.
So why don't we see holes opening up? Why not in cities? Why don't intelligent creatures come out?

The How 2's and the 'in and outs'...

ARYAN MINING IN ANCIENT NORTH AMERICA
Q:  What group mined the copper in northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan, like in Isle Royale? A:  Aryans. Q:  What did they want the copper for? A:  Weapons. Q:  Wouldn't iron make better weapons? A:  Not in 4th density.  Q:  (L)   What sort of 4th density weapons was copper used for? A:  Mostly conduction of EM energies. Q:  I'm getting the feeling that there have been bleed-in, bleed-out situations with 4th density on this planet a lot more often than we suspect. A:  Yes. Q:  Are these situations sometimes manufactured by those who know how? A:  Close. Q:  Do they just happen to know where those window points are? A:  Yes.

Mostly conduction of EM energies.
A quick search of Electro Magnetic energies....I don't know, maybe they are still at it.

Scavenging ambient electromagnetic energy to power small electronic devices
https://newatlas.com/scavenging-ambient-electromagnetic-energy/19163/

Electromagnetic Energy in the Air
https://www.activistpost.com/2016/01/electromagnetic-energy-in-the-air.html




What does "4th density" mean??

It's not a science term, I think it's just a wu-wu thing?

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH
Quote from: Joelr
...but here is the thing with the double split experiment - the results are still consistent, if we choose to measure a particle then we always get a particle and if we measure for a wave then we always get a wave.
It has nothing to do with emotions.

The way we "choose" a particle in that experiment is to observe it. The way we "choose" a wave is to not observe it. You are correct that it has nothing to do with emotions. But it does have to do with consciousness. Consciousness collapses the waveform. Without consciousness, we have no stuff. Quantum physics 101.



No Larry, it isn't Quantum Physics 101, it's New-Age mysticisim 101, congrats on being yet another person misled by new age hype.

"It has nothing to do with consciousness. The observer doesn't have to be human. If information about which slit the photon passes through is collected by a piece of equipment, the interference pattern is destroyed."

From: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/consciousness-of-double-slit-observer.240731/#post-1769463

I would suggest getting your knowledge of physics from actual physics people. Search this site for physics answers not What the Bleep Do We Know.




Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH
Quote from: Joelr
It's probably confirmation bias, we notice the hits and ignore misses.

It stands to reason that it might also be confirmation bias if we notice the misses and ignore the hits. An example is claiming that the military has "no results to show" regarding ESP. You dismiss every study that shows positive results as being because the scientists who did the study believe in ESP. It is just as logical to say that every study that shows negative results is because the scientists who did the study did not believe in ESP.


There ARE no positive results on ESP that have been done that were not later found to have been cooking the data.
There have been studies done that claimed success but then when repeated by independent labs they always failed.
Like that water guy Dr Emoto who showed that emotions effected water.
Well his experiment was tried by hundreds of people and it's NEVER worked.

There is simply no person who can consistently demonstrate ESP in a controlled setting.

Psychics, cold-readers, mediums and mentalists use trickery. Derren Brown has tons of videos where he amazes people with his skills in all those areas and admits it's all a trick.

He even used NLP to make a girl have a profound religious experience.


James Randi offer 1 million dollars to anyone who can show ESP. No one has ever been able to demonstrate ESP.

Offline transient amnesia

  • ***
  • Posts: 211
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 12:20:16 PM by transient amnesia »

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Derren Brown is highly entertaining and educational. I have been a fan for years. However, his demonstrations do not prove that ESP is not real, they just show that people can be duped.

I have no opinion about Randi except that his snark turns me off. I have heard in an interview with someone who looked into his conditions for applying for the million dollar prize that he makes it impossible for anyone to accept, and it has nothing to do with the conditions of the experiment, rather that it has to do with conditions of secrecy and ownership of the information. I do not recall the details, though. I watched an interesting documentary on Randi, and it did not focus much on his million dollar challenge, but rather on his tragic and tortured personal life. It helped me to understand his snark and humanized him, somewhat.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Wow, this topic is beginning to sound like it will end up in a brawl.

An explanation from Seth, if you're open to Seth, why scientific proof can be difficult to find:

"I have mentioned earlier the particular problems of your scientists as with tools and instruments they attempt to reduce reality to their terms. Any instruments made on your plane are like your outer senses, constructed to perceive camouflage patterns. The instruments of the scientists, and the outer senses themselves, are camouflage patterns and cannot, and never will, dissect themselves." Session 37, Early Sessions 1

He goes into more detail in DEaVF1, Session 884:

"Your scientists can count their elements. . . . That is, they will create more and discover more until they are ready to go out of their minds, because they will always create [physical] 'camouflages' of the real [nonphysical] thing. And while they create instruments to deal with smaller and smaller particles, they will actually see smaller and smaller particles, seemingly without end.

"As their instruments reach farther into the universe they will 'see'—and I suggest that you put the word 'see' into quotes —they will 'see' farther and farther, but they will automatically transform what they apparently 'see' into the camouflage patterns with which they are familiar. They are and they will be the prisoners of their own tools.

"Instruments calculated to measure the vibrations with which scientists are familiar will be designed and redesigned. All sorts finally of seemingly impossible phenomena will be discovered with these instruments, until the scientists realize that something is desperately wrong. The instruments will be planned to catch certain camouflages, and since they will be expertly thought out they will perform their function. I do not want to get too involved. However, by certain means the instruments themselves will transform data from terms that you cannot understand into terms that you can understand. Scientists do this all the time."

I suppose someone's working on it. Using an approach that reminds me of radio, tv or even modem technology: [Their] "results provide evidence for a rudimentary form of direct information transmission from one human brain to another using non-invasive means." http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111332 I haven't read the entire article (not my thing), but read a couple of mainstream articles that lead me to it. Not exactly what you're looking for, but it's a beginning I suppose.

This too has come into my radar a couple of times recently: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-shatters-ldquo-spooky-action-at-a-distance-rdquo-record-preps-for-quantum-internet/ Not human telepathy, but interesting enough. Source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6343/1140

And this made me laugh https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25011: "It has been shown theoretically that the quantum Hall effect can be generalized to four spatial dimensions, but so far this has not been realized experimentally because experimental systems are limited to three spatial dimensions." They may as well have said "limited to our camouflage reality." :)

So they're looking for evidence of a 4th dimension. I already found the 5th, AGES ago.


Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: transient amnesia
Quote from: Joelr
The videos:
1) A video on purturbation theory? Ok. Has nothing to do with portals opening up from alternate dimensions. Not even close?

2) A pilot wave video? Again nothing to do with Mothmen and space portals?

Oh...those...
you're the one who 'keeps' bringing up the 'double slit experiment' THEORY ... seems it's not a sure thing, and not much is.

ESP, seems to be on a 'need to know' basis.  so.....


Right but what is it you are trying to say? If we can't "know" ESP.......in other words, if we can't understand, use, predict, create or validate ESP then it's basically not a "thing" at all?

Quantum physics has predictable results, there are waves and then when forced to localize they act as particles. Their reality in this sense is confirmed. Experimenters don't say "we can't test quantum physics because people aren't ready for it or don't believe in it or it doesnt' work during experiments", it's very reliable in the predictions it makes.

We test those predictions and they turn out to be true. Quantum electrodynamics actually makes a prediction that has been confirmed down to a decimal point far greater than any other theory science.

Offline transient amnesia

  • ***
  • Posts: 211
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 12:18:11 PM by transient amnesia »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH


Right but the only people ever to demonstrate ESP are the tricksters, psychics readers, cold-readers. Just like playing an instrument, if it's real I feel that someone could develop it and demonstrate it at any time.
If you remove all the trickery there isn't any evidence of brain magic.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: transient amnesia
Yeah, I know huh...
Thanks Deb, and I apologize for wave making.  I seems that our friend Joel is trying soooo hard not to see the other side of the coin here and making broad generalizing statements/ crushing your 'Neo' poster and blah, blah, b l a h..... I put up enough videos that show the science is NOT right and links that fill in some answers that fit right in with the Seth material it's unbelievable Joel is even interested in a Seth Forum. 

Parallel Worlds Could Explain Wacky Quantum Physics
https://www.livescience.com/48806-parallel-worlds-quantum-mechanics-theory.html

PistonHeads DoDaMaff
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=219&t=1575350


It may be unbelievable to you that someone wants to put their beliefs to the test but I am of a different mind.

It may be unbelievable to you that I'm interested in a Seth forum but it's very cult-y, and close minded to say it out loud.

It seems it's ok for you to make broad generalizing statements that reinforce your beliefs so it's hypocritical to speak that way of me.
Saying "I put up enough videos that show the science is NOT right" and dismissing it off like you are correct is as broad and general as it gets.

So is using a quote from a hypothetical science article to say "look what I believe is true". Google surfing for one science article with the word "paralell dimension" is super general and dismissive.
If your not up for in depth discussion then there is nothing wrong with that. However you seem to be saying "if you don't accept my copy/paste generalizations then you shouldn't be on a Seth forum". which is just overall poor quality posting. Talking about me in the 3rd person is simply creepy and smacks of a self centered attitude.


Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Wow, this topic is beginning to sound like it will end up in a brawl.

An explanation from Seth, if you're open to Seth, why scientific proof can be difficult to find:

"I have mentioned earlier the particular problems of your scientists as with tools and instruments they attempt to reduce reality to their terms. Any instruments made on your plane are like your outer senses, constructed to perceive camouflage patterns. The instruments of the scientists, and the outer senses themselves, are camouflage patterns and cannot, and never will, dissect themselves." Session 37, Early Sessions 1

He goes into more detail in DEaVF1, Session 884:

"Your scientists can count their elements. . . . That is, they will create more and discover more until they are ready to go out of their minds, because they will always create [physical] 'camouflages' of the real [nonphysical] thing. And while they create instruments to deal with smaller and smaller particles, they will actually see smaller and smaller particles, seemingly without end.

"As their instruments reach farther into the universe they will 'see'—and I suggest that you put the word 'see' into quotes —they will 'see' farther and farther, but they will automatically transform what they apparently 'see' into the camouflage patterns with which they are familiar. They are and they will be the prisoners of their own tools.

"Instruments calculated to measure the vibrations with which scientists are familiar will be designed and redesigned. All sorts finally of seemingly impossible phenomena will be discovered with these instruments, until the scientists realize that something is desperately wrong. The instruments will be planned to catch certain camouflages, and since they will be expertly thought out they will perform their function. I do not want to get too involved. However, by certain means the instruments themselves will transform data from terms that you cannot understand into terms that you can understand. Scientists do this all the time."

I suppose someone's working on it. Using an approach that reminds me of radio, tv or even modem technology: [Their] "results provide evidence for a rudimentary form of direct information transmission from one human brain to another using non-invasive means." http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111332 I haven't read the entire article (not my thing), but read a couple of mainstream articles that lead me to it. Not exactly what you're looking for, but it's a beginning I suppose.

This too has come into my radar a couple of times recently: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-shatters-ldquo-spooky-action-at-a-distance-rdquo-record-preps-for-quantum-internet/ Not human telepathy, but interesting enough. Source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6343/1140

And this made me laugh https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25011: "It has been shown theoretically that the quantum Hall effect can be generalized to four spatial dimensions, but so far this has not been realized experimentally because experimental systems are limited to three spatial dimensions." They may as well have said "limited to our camouflage reality." :)

So they're looking for evidence of a 4th dimension. I already found the 5th, AGES ago.



Those are good Seth quotes. What he says makes sense, I wish he would have elaborated instead of saying "I'm not going to elaborate" or whatever..



That brain study is about a device measuring waves from a brain and sending the information to someone else through technology. Basically a very advanced telephone.

The quantum experiment is confirming entanglement to an even greater degree.

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
The title of this topic is "Personal telepathy experiences". I have had personal experience of telepathy, but I don't think there is much point in describing my experience here. If someone does not want to believe in telepathy, no amount of anectodal or scientific evidence will convince him. String theory, on the other hand, is scientifically respectable, but I don't believe in it.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 09:24:40 PM by Sena »

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Joelr
Those are good Seth quotes. What he says makes sense, I wish he would have elaborated instead of saying "I'm not going to elaborate" or whatever..

I am no expert on the Seth materials, I have not yet read all of the books but was very excited when I found Seth and realized there were enough books to keep me busy for years. I'm also in contact with Laurel Butts and am constantly trying to convince her to allow me to help her get more unpublished materials into print. There's a chance Seth did elaborate and I have just not come across it yet. Try the Seth search engine and see what you come up with. http://search.sethtalks.com/

I don't feel the need for hard core scientific proof of telepathy/esp because I've had enough personal experiences that, while I'm not as convinced as, for instance, I have to file my tax return by April 15, I do feel that telepathy is real but not obvious to us at this point. My mind is open to the possibility. I'm still collecting data. Out of curiosity, I used to be a paranormal investigator while being an "optimistic skeptic." At some point I ditched most of the recording devices and technology because I realized I was not looking to prove anything to the world, only to myself. I've had experiences I can't explain, and refuse to label. It's enough for me to know that there is more to our reality than what meets the eye.

Quote from: Sena
The title of this topic is "Personal telepathy experiences". I have had personal experience of telepathy, but I don't think there is much point in describing my experience here. If someone does not want to believe in telepathy, no amount of anectodal or scientific evidence will convince him. String theory, on the other hand, is scientifically respectable, but I don't believe in it.

Thank you Sena. That's what I'm talking about.

Joel you've been a hard nut to crack. My sense is that you are not so much looking for proof of telepathy as debunking anything that anyone here has contributed. That's okay. But I hope you can be more patient with others' posts, since this IS a forum rooted in the Seth materials and so we are more open to metaphysics rather than being wedded to hard core physics and science. Which, by the way, are all theory as you previously mentioned. Theory touted as absolute truth until something better comes along.

« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 10:47:25 PM by Deb »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb


I am no expert on the Seth materials, I have not yet read all of the books but was very excited when I found Seth and realized there were enough books to keep me busy for years. I'm also in contact with Laurel Butts and am constantly trying to convince her to allow me to help her get more unpublished materials into print. There's a chance Seth did elaborate and I have just not come across it yet. Try the Seth search engine and see what you come up with. http://search.sethtalks.com/

Have you ever asked Laurel Butts on her opinion about the Seth material. Does she get a sense of what was going on or have any input either way?

Quote from: Deb
I don't feel the need for hard core scientific proof of telepathy/esp because I've had enough personal experiences that, while I'm not as convinced as, for instance, I have to file my tax return by April 15, I do feel that telepathy is real but not obvious to us at this point. My mind is open to the possibility. I'm still collecting data. Out of curiosity, I used to be a paranormal investigator while being an "optimistic skeptic." At some point I ditched most of the recording devices and technology because I realized I was not looking to prove anything to the world, only to myself. I've had experiences I can't explain, and refuse to label. It's enough for me to know that there is more to our reality than what meets the eye.

There is more to reality than what meets the eye for sure. There will be many more discoveries in just science alone.

Quote from: Deb"
[quote="Sena
The title of this topic is "Personal telepathy experiences". I have had personal experience of telepathy, but I don't think there is much point in describing my experience here. If someone does not want to believe in telepathy, no amount of anectodal or scientific evidence will convince him. String theory, on the other hand, is scientifically respectable, but I don't believe in it.

Thank you Sena. That's what I'm talking about.[/quote]

If there were scientific evidence for ESP then I would believe in it. There isn't any evidence to support string theory either and as such I don't consider it to be a truth at all.
She could still post her experiences of telepathy for people who might believe it's telepathy. We don't need a consensus of belief systems just to talk?
I simply feel random ESP experiences are very likely to be random chance happenstance. That shouldn't be a bad thing, even on a Seth forum.
It's not asking for a lot to be expecting a controlled experiment that will demonstrate telepathy before I choose to believe it's a real thing?



Quote from: Deb
Joel you've been a hard nut to crack. My sense is that you are not so much looking for proof of telepathy as debunking anything that anyone here has contributed. That's okay. But I hope you can be more patient with others' posts, since this IS a forum rooted in the Seth materials and so we are more open to metaphysics rather than being wedded to hard core physics and science. Which, by the way, are all theory as you previously mentioned. Theory touted as absolute truth until something better comes along.


In your signature you have the word "black sheep". Doesn't that refer to someone who doesn't just follow things blindly but challenges their beliefs?

I am open to metaphysics, for one thing there is definitely a lot more physics we have yet to discover. Consciousness may have a role there also. But on the other side there is an awful lot of metaphysics out there that is already explainable by our current sciences.

My agenda is not debunking, it's truth. I want to figure out what is real and what isn't.

Like I said above, I don't think it's asking a lot to not just have a faith-based belief system. If I wanted to do that I could just go to a religion.

In the long run there is a reason why figuring out what metaphysics is real and what is imaginary. There are many reasons. For one, if ESP is real and our consciousness has effect outside of our physical selves then visualization/meditation would be as important as eating and sleeping. You could create your reality just through visualization.
On the other hand if none of this is true then changing our reality requires 100% physical action, our thoughts and feelings play little role.

After that movie The Secret came out there were people were convinced they were going to create their reality and become rich or cure their illness by thought alone. Some actually died and many were just left broke and disappointed.
This doesn't disprove Seth because the Seth material is much more complicated than The Secret but for sure creating your reality is not as easy as that new-age movement led people to believe.


Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Quote from: Joelr
...if ESP is real and our consciousness has effect outside of our physical selves then visualization/meditation would be as important as eating and sleeping. You could create your reality just through visualization.
On the other hand if none of this is true then changing our reality requires 100% physical action, our thoughts and feelings play little role.
Per Seth, we are always creating our reality, not simply through "positive" attitudes, trust in All That Is, and intentional visualization of what we want. We are creating it when we obsess and worry about and focus on the worst things that can happen, giving energy to those probabilities. We are creating it when we accept beliefs that diminish our value, identify us as "sinners" by virtue of having been born, suggesting that we have to constantly be on guard from all the evils of the world, requiring that we must eat just the right foods in order to avoid dread diseases, presuming the worst from our bosses, spouses, children, etc. Inner shifts in attitude, belief, and focus create seemingly magical events in my experience, including when my actions have nothing to do with those outside events.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
I think it's going to be hard to find believable proof of anything considering at this point we are somewhat limited to, as Seth calls it, this camouflage reality. Test result reports can be tweaked. I have to consider things like the observer effect. I've heard the standard procedure for results outside what is expected is to reject them. Equations can be written to 'prove' theories, yet they are still theories. I also take studies and statistics with a grain of salt since people with their own agendas are always invested in them. I lost faith in the sciences early on when things I was told were the absolute truth in school turned out to be 'wrong.' Taught with the same conviction as God made the world and Adam and Eve and that whole ball of wax. Even Seth said not to make his words into dogma, we need to go by what feels right for us. Do I know that everything written in a Seth book is the truth? Nope. It just makes more sense to me, "feels" closer to the truth than anything else I've come across. I also can't help but consider the shear amount of information in the Seth books, the consistency, the diversity and range of information, the details. It seems more than little ole Jane Roberts could just pump out of her own brain.

Quote from: Joelr
On the other hand if none of this is true then changing our reality requires 100% physical action, our thoughts and feelings play little role.

OK, what I will say here is limited to our physical bodies and so doesn't cover things like our creating solid objects or the weather, but have you ever looked into spontaneous remissions (such as Anita Moorjani's total recovery from stage 4 cancer, at the point her organs were shutting down)? If you're looking for statistics and studies, the placebo and nocebo effects would have some (easy reading: You are the Placebo by Joe Dispenza). Of course the information is again coming from someone else, but things like this are pretty much based in thoughts, feelings, beliefs and the power of our minds. I do think our thoughts are as important as eating and sleeping. How many times have I read this statement: "the brain doesn’t really distinguish between whether you’re doing something or whether you’re just imagining it."  I'd go off quoting Joe Dispenza or Bruce Lipton here, but this guy has a PhD in organic chemistry, so maybe more believable. There's a lot on the web about the mind-body connection. Not much about the mind-coffee table connection. :)

Laurel Butts: She married Rob in 1999 and lived the Seth life, totally into it. Still is. I'm not personal friends with her so haven't asked her what her take was on the whole Jane/Seth thing, but it appears she was and is totally on board from what she's written. Laurel moved to Elmira from California in 1985 to help them keep up with mail and proofreading. My guess is she was a Seth fan long before that and probably corresponded with them until they or Rob asked if she would help.

Quote from: Joelr
In your signature you have the word "black sheep". Doesn't that refer to someone who doesn't just follow things blindly but challenges their beliefs?

Do I give the impression that I follow things blindly? Once I was old enough to think independently and not have to depend on adults to tell me what was real, I lost the ability to believe anything based purely on faith. I have been searching for the "truth" all my life, questioning everyone or thing that says they have the truth, including science and medicine, questioning myself, while still trying to keep an open mind so I can examine what I am told and feel it out to see if it feels right.

Even when I have personal experiences that could indicate there is telepathy involved, I don't take it as absolute proof, but instead an unusual experience that could have been telepathy—or at the very least a pretty amazing coincidence. A little one the other day: I have been sporadically emailing with someone in Russia. For not quite a year. On January 9 I sent a quick email to say I had a lot going on and would properly respond to his email some other time. A couple of days ago I came across the last email from this person and thought I really needed to respond, time had gotten away from me. Less than 30 minutes later I received an email from him asking if I was ok, it had been a long time since I'd written, did an email get lost, etc. I've never met this person, we've only exchanged emails a few times. So, another interesting coincidence.

As far as The Secret, the story goes that Byrne stole the idea for the book from Abraham Hicks, saw an opportunity to make money, and it was basically fluff. Abraham Hicks is all based on Seth, Esther and Jerry read all of the Seth books and took it from there. People more interested in getting the concepts and details from the source end up finding Seth. Who knows, there could be just as many or more people who benefited from the book/movie, maybe we don't hear about them. Any self-help results depend on our personal follow-through.

"[You] are the black sheep of the universe. You want to go your own way. You do not want dogma. You will not be satisfied with hearts and flowers. It is not an easy way, and all of you know that. It is past the time for you to be entranced by other personalities including my own. It is time for you to become entranced with your own personality. It is time for you to feel independent enough to launch yourselves from your own subjective reality into others; to emerge, to drop the paraphernalia of all dogma. Not for new dogma but for new freedom. Not to substitute one authority for another, but to allow yourselves the freedom to recognize that the prime authority is All That Is that resides within you and that speaks with your own voice."
—TECS4 ESP Class Session, June 15, 1971

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: LarryH
We are creating it when we accept beliefs that diminish our value, identify us as "sinners" by virtue of having been born, suggesting that we have to constantly be on guard from all the evils of the world, requiring that we must eat just the right foods in order to avoid dread diseases, presuming the worst from our bosses, spouses, children, etc. Inner shifts in attitude, belief, and focus create seemingly magical events in my experience, including when my actions have nothing to do with those outside events.
Larry, that's a very useful interpretation of the Seth teachings.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
I think it's going to be hard to find believable proof of anything considering at this point we are somewhat limited to, as Seth calls it, this camouflage reality. Test result reports can be tweaked. I have to consider things like the observer effect. I've heard the standard procedure for results outside what is expected is to reject them. Equations can be written to 'prove' theories, yet they are still theories. I also take studies and statistics with a grain of salt since people with their own agendas are always invested in them. I lost faith in the sciences early on when things I was told were the absolute truth in school turned out to be 'wrong.' Taught with the same conviction as God made the world and Adam and Eve and that whole ball of wax. Even Seth said not to make his words into dogma, we need to go by what feels right for us. Do I know that everything written in a Seth book is the truth? Nope. It just makes more sense to me, "feels" closer to the truth than anything else I've come across. I also can't help but consider the shear amount of information in the Seth books, the consistency, the diversity and range of information, the details. It seems more than little ole Jane Roberts could just pump out of her own brain.

Quote from: Joelr
On the other hand if none of this is true then changing our reality requires 100% physical action, our thoughts and feelings play little role.

OK, what I will say here is limited to our physical bodies and so doesn't cover things like our creating solid objects or the weather, but have you ever looked into spontaneous remissions (such as Anita Moorjani's total recovery from stage 4 cancer, at the point her organs were shutting down)? If you're looking for statistics and studies, the placebo and nocebo effects would have some (easy reading: You are the Placebo by Joe Dispenza). Of course the information is again coming from someone else, but things like this are pretty much based in thoughts, feelings, beliefs and the power of our minds. I do think our thoughts are as important as eating and sleeping. How many times have I read this statement: "the brain doesn’t really distinguish between whether you’re doing something or whether you’re just imagining it."  I'd go off quoting Joe Dispenza or Bruce Lipton here, but this guy has a PhD in organic chemistry, so maybe more believable. There's a lot on the web about the mind-body connection. Not much about the mind-coffee table connection. :)

Laurel Butts: She married Rob in 1999 and lived the Seth life, totally into it. Still is. I'm not personal friends with her so haven't asked her what her take was on the whole Jane/Seth thing, but it appears she was and is totally on board from what she's written. Laurel moved to Elmira from California in 1985 to help them keep up with mail and proofreading. My guess is she was a Seth fan long before that and probably corresponded with them until they or Rob asked if she would help.

Quote from: Joelr
In your signature you have the word "black sheep". Doesn't that refer to someone who doesn't just follow things blindly but challenges their beliefs?

Do I give the impression that I follow things blindly? Once I was old enough to think independently and not have to depend on adults to tell me what was real, I lost the ability to believe anything based purely on faith. I have been searching for the "truth" all my life, questioning everyone or thing that says they have the truth, including science and medicine, questioning myself, while still trying to keep an open mind so I can examine what I am told and feel it out to see if it feels right.

Even when I have personal experiences that could indicate there is telepathy involved, I don't take it as absolute proof, but instead an unusual experience that could have been telepathy—or at the very least a pretty amazing coincidence. A little one the other day: I have been sporadically emailing with someone in Russia. For not quite a year. On January 9 I sent a quick email to say I had a lot going on and would properly respond to his email some other time. A couple of days ago I came across the last email from this person and thought I really needed to respond, time had gotten away from me. Less than 30 minutes later I received an email from him asking if I was ok, it had been a long time since I'd written, did an email get lost, etc. I've never met this person, we've only exchanged emails a few times. So, another interesting coincidence.

As far as The Secret, the story goes that Byrne stole the idea for the book from Abraham Hicks, saw an opportunity to make money, and it was basically fluff. Abraham Hicks is all based on Seth, Esther and Jerry read all of the Seth books and took it from there. People more interested in getting the concepts and details from the source end up finding Seth. Who knows, there could be just as many or more people who benefited from the book/movie, maybe we don't hear about them. Any self-help results depend on our personal follow-through.

"[You] are the black sheep of the universe. You want to go your own way. You do not want dogma. You will not be satisfied with hearts and flowers. It is not an easy way, and all of you know that. It is past the time for you to be entranced by other personalities including my own. It is time for you to become entranced with your own personality. It is time for you to feel independent enough to launch yourselves from your own subjective reality into others; to emerge, to drop the paraphernalia of all dogma. Not for new dogma but for new freedom. Not to substitute one authority for another, but to allow yourselves the freedom to recognize that the prime authority is All That Is that resides within you and that speaks with your own voice."
—TECS4 ESP Class Session, June 15, 1971



Scientists do not throw out test results, you want to find weird results. If you can get other teams of scientists to confirm your results then it's a big deal and you can win a Nobel prize. Scientists are always looking to shake things up. The way Einstein brought on a new physics is what every PHd student wants to do.


Spontaneous remissions have a probability, like 1 in 100 million for stage 4 lung cancer say.
There are 6 billion people in the world and after so many years 100 million people get stage 4 lung cancer and then we see 1 spontaneous remission.

They show that it can happen but the why is a mystery.
New age people get terminal illnesses and get their diet, exercize, yoga, meditation, visualization, all going on. They try to stay positive and think healthy and all that stuff. But those remissions still don't happen, doing all that stuff fails for 99.9999% of people who try to have remissions.

So it's really more of a mystery. We know for sure there are many mind-body connections, definitely. But does our consciousness create reality? I don't know?


I didn't mean you follow things blindly, I mean I am the black sheep, always questioning, never satisfied, always examining my beliefs and never fitting in to one group.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 11:52:39 PM by Joelr »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH
Quote from: Joelr
...if ESP is real and our consciousness has effect outside of our physical selves then visualization/meditation would be as important as eating and sleeping. You could create your reality just through visualization.
On the other hand if none of this is true then changing our reality requires 100% physical action, our thoughts and feelings play little role.
Per Seth, we are always creating our reality, not simply through "positive" attitudes, trust in All That Is, and intentional visualization of what we want. We are creating it when we obsess and worry about and focus on the worst things that can happen, giving energy to those probabilities. We are creating it when we accept beliefs that diminish our value, identify us as "sinners" by virtue of having been born, suggesting that we have to constantly be on guard from all the evils of the world, requiring that we must eat just the right foods in order to avoid dread diseases, presuming the worst from our bosses, spouses, children, etc. Inner shifts in attitude, belief, and focus create seemingly magical events in my experience, including when my actions have nothing to do with those outside events.



I do know all that.

But, it seems like when I obsess and worry about and focus on the worst things that can happen, giving energy to those probabilities - they don't always happen. Almost like experiencing them in my mind first takes their power away.

I know the Seth view but before I read Seth I would always do the opposite and things would often still work out. So I'm not convinced that that is always true.

I have used Seths visualization exercises and after 1 year they did seem to produce results however.

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Quote from: Joelr
But, it seems like when I obsess and worry about and focus on the worst things that can happen, giving energy to those probabilities - they don't always happen. Almost like experiencing them in my mind first takes their power away.

I know the Seth view but before I read Seth I would always do the opposite and things would often still work out. So I'm not convinced that that is always true.
Per Seth, Framework 2 knows the intents and desires of all living creatures, so your thoughts and beliefs alone do not create your reality if they conflict with the greater pattern (en masse). Worry about nuclear war does not create nuclear war unless it somehow serves the intentions of enough people. Also Framework 2 builds in resistance to destructive events unless those events serve as needed lessons. There is a place for "worry", as opposed to obsession. If out of worry comes focus on creative solutions, a questioning of beliefs, and a trust that whatever happens is for the greater good, then Framework 2 can provide the most useful outcomes.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: LarryH
your thoughts and beliefs alone do not create your reality if they conflict with the greater pattern


Really nice!

I think I'd like to look into that more, it reminded me of a topic I have planned on free will, a similar situation. From what I found on the Seth search engine, his comments on worry pertained more to the wear and tear on the human body rather than creating unwanted situations.

A sneak preview of free will:

"A quick review. Free will exists on a limited scale on your plane, but it does exist, and the very limitations themselves are the result of free will choices made on another plane by the various entities."
—TES1 Session 36 March 18, 1964

The idea of this ticked me off originally, because of all the talk about the self being unlimited and our only limitations are ones that we put on ourselves. But since I've been looking into the topic of free will and limitations, it started to make sense to me and now feels more like a safety net.

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Deb
But since I've been looking into the topic of free will and limitations, it started to make sense to me and now feels more like a safety net.
Deb, if I understand you correctly, what you seem to be saying is that if we had more free will than we have at present, that could present a danger to the human race. An example which comes to mind is the maternal instinct. If the maternal instinct were weaker than it is at present (on average), mothers would have more free will, and that could mean that more mothers abandon their babies. To put it in another way, a mother abandoning her baby is a rare event at present unless she is in extreme poverty and facing starvation, and this may be partly due to the limitation of free will.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2018, 10:45:09 PM by Sena »

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Quote from: Deb
"A quick review. Free will exists on a limited scale on your plane, but it does exist, and the very limitations themselves are the result of free will choices made on another plane by the various entities."
—TES1 Session 36 March 18, 1964

An example might be, if at the entity level we plan to die of cancer at age 22, we may have some influence in the physical plane, but it may be harder (though not impossible) to depart from a script than to influence conditions that are not part of the script.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Sena
Deb, if I understand you correctly, what you seem to be saying is that if we had more free will than we have at present, that could present a danger to the human race.

I hadn't considered that angle. I was thinking more along the lines that minimizing our choices keeps us on track with our original F2 intentions/accomplishments on the physical plane. I also have the feeling that while there are some limitations as far as free will goes, we still have a lot more options than we realize or take advantage of because I think our (belief-based) self-limitations are already more limiting than what's imposed upon us. My safety net feeling is that because there are some limits, we can't veer too far off course and 'waste' our opportunity. Having some limitations in our ability to create also keeps some sense of order since we're all sharing this space and there are some basics we need to agree to in order to function en masse.

I've already got some quotes pulled together for a new topic Seth on Limitations, will get something up here later today and will just continue to add to it as I find more. It would probably make sense to also include Seth on us being unlimited beings as there is some confusion there.

Quote from: LarryH
An example might be, if at the entity level we plan to die of cancer at age 22, we may have some influence in the physical plane, but it may be harder (though not impossible) to depart from a script than to influence conditions that are not part of the script.

This brings to mind Seth talking about how someone intending to die during birth or shortly thereafter (only looking for the experience of gestation), may be "saved" with modern medical techniques, but then will find another way to die at an early age. Another quote I need to track down.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH
Quote from: Joelr
But, it seems like when I obsess and worry about and focus on the worst things that can happen, giving energy to those probabilities - they don't always happen. Almost like experiencing them in my mind first takes their power away.

I know the Seth view but before I read Seth I would always do the opposite and things would often still work out. So I'm not convinced that that is always true.
Per Seth, Framework 2 knows the intents and desires of all living creatures, so your thoughts and beliefs alone do not create your reality if they conflict with the greater pattern (en masse). Worry about nuclear war does not create nuclear war unless it somehow serves the intentions of enough people. Also Framework 2 builds in resistance to destructive events unless those events serve as needed lessons. There is a place for "worry", as opposed to obsession. If out of worry comes focus on creative solutions, a questioning of beliefs, and a trust that whatever happens is for the greater good, then Framework 2 can provide the most useful outcomes.


Doesn't this sound like framework 2?


"in addition to our immediate consciousness, which is of a thoroughly personal nature and which we believe to be the only empirical psyche, there exists a second psychic system of a collective, universal, and impersonal nature which is identical in all individuals. This collective unconscious does not develop individually but is inherited. It consists of pre-existent forms, the archetypes, which can only become conscious secondarily and which give definite form to certain psychic contents.

The collective unconscious comprises in itself the psychic life of our ancestors right back to the earliest beginnings. It is the matrix of all conscious psychic occurrences, and hence it exerts an influence that compromises the freedom of consciousness in the highest degree, since it is continually striving to lead all conscious processes back into the old paths"

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
The collective unconscious comprises in itself the psychic life of our ancestors right back to the earliest beginnings. It is the matrix of all conscious psychic occurrences, and hence it exerts an influence that compromises the freedom of consciousness in the highest degree, since it is continually striving to lead all conscious processes back into the old paths"
Is this a quote from Jung? There is a lot of truth in Jung's teachings, but Seth goes further. Framework 2 as I understand it is a collective consciousness rather that a collective unconscious.

"Dictation: You must understand that in a manner of speaking, Framework 2 is on the one hand an invisible version of the physical universe. On the other hand, however, it is far more than that, for it contains within it probable variations of that universe — from the most cosmic scale, say, down to probable versions of the most minute events of any given physical day.

In simple terms, your body has an invisible counterpart in Framework 2. During life that counterpart is so connected with your own physical tissues, however, that it can be misleading to say that the two — the visible and invisible bodies — are separate. In the same way that your thoughts have a reality in Framework 2, and only for the sake of a meaningful analogy, thoughts could be said to be the equivalent, now, of objects; for in Framework 2 thoughts and feelings are far more important even than objects are in physical reality.

In Framework 2 thoughts instantly form patterns. They are the “natural elements” in that psychological environment that mix, merge, and combine to form, if you will, the psychological cells, atoms, and molecules that compose events. In those terms, the physical events that you perceive or experience can be compared to “psychological objects” that appear to exist with a physical concreteness in space and time. Such events usually seem to begin somewhere in space and time, and clearly end there as well."

—Nature of Mass Events Chapter 4: Session 826, March 8, 1978
« Last Edit: March 10, 2018, 04:59:49 AM by Sena »

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Joelr
James Randi offer 1 million dollars to anyone who can show ESP. No one has ever been able to demonstrate ESP.

Sorry but you are not allowed to view spoiler contents.

"As an April Fool's prank on April 1, 2008, at the MIT Media Lab, Randi pretended to award the prize to magician Seth Raphael after participating in a test of Raphael's "psychic abilities"." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge

"Effective 9/1/2015 the JREF has made made major changes including converting to a grant making foundation and no longer accepting applications for the Million Dollar Prize from the general public." https://web.randi.org/home/jref-status
« Last Edit: March 12, 2018, 02:21:35 PM by Deb »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Sena
Quote from: Joelr
The collective unconscious comprises in itself the psychic life of our ancestors right back to the earliest beginnings. It is the matrix of all conscious psychic occurrences, and hence it exerts an influence that compromises the freedom of consciousness in the highest degree, since it is continually striving to lead all conscious processes back into the old paths"
Is this a quote from Jung? There is a lot of truth in Jung's teachings, but Seth goes further. Framework 2 as I understand it is a collective consciousness rather that a collective unconscious.

"Dictation: You must understand that in a manner of speaking, Framework 2 is on the one hand an invisible version of the physical universe. On the other hand, however, it is far more than that, for it contains within it probable variations of that universe — from the most cosmic scale, say, down to probable versions of the most minute events of any given physical day.

In simple terms, your body has an invisible counterpart in Framework 2. During life that counterpart is so connected with your own physical tissues, however, that it can be misleading to say that the two — the visible and invisible bodies — are separate. In the same way that your thoughts have a reality in Framework 2, and only for the sake of a meaningful analogy, thoughts could be said to be the equivalent, now, of objects; for in Framework 2 thoughts and feelings are far more important even than objects are in physical reality.

In Framework 2 thoughts instantly form patterns. They are the “natural elements” in that psychological environment that mix, merge, and combine to form, if you will, the psychological cells, atoms, and molecules that compose events. In those terms, the physical events that you perceive or experience can be compared to “psychological objects” that appear to exist with a physical concreteness in space and time. Such events usually seem to begin somewhere in space and time, and clearly end there as well."

—Nature of Mass Events Chapter 4: Session 826, March 8, 1978



I see. Never read that Seth book. He talks about this in Seth Speaks and N.O.P. Reality, a dimension where thoughts are manifest instantly.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Quote from: Joelr
James Randi offer 1 million dollars to anyone who can show ESP. No one has ever been able to demonstrate ESP.



"As an April Fool's prank on April 1, 2008, at the MIT Media Lab, Randi pretended to award the prize to magician Seth Raphael after participating in a test of Raphael's "psychic abilities"." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge

"Effective 9/1/2015 the JREF has made made major changes including converting to a grant making foundation and no longer accepting applications for the Million Dollar Prize from the general public." https://web.randi.org/home/jref-status



Tell me about it, I sat through that whole thing until I realized it was a joke. That's 1 hour I can't ever get back.

I considered just speculating that there are so many people trying to take the Randi challenge and every single time it's been a failure that Randi is tired of it and resources might be strained. Just wading through applications must be exhausting - try offering a million dollars to demonstrate ESP and imagine how many applicants you would get!

Anyway, a minimum of investigation revealed that they are continuing the challenge but have to change the protocols as people are abusing Randi's good nature. Even though he may be a skeptic, it's cool that he's even making some sort of effort to see if psychic power could be a reality. It sounds like some people are just being A-holes. While most people in the psychic world may be great people there are always idiots who ruin things for everyone else. I can totally see that that could happen.

The national ufo reporting center (nuforc) is constantly putting up posts about getting endless strings of prank phone calls and once even traced a problem back to a youtube video of children daring each other to make crank calls and posting the nuforc number in their video. A$$holes!



"We plan on continuing the Million Dollar Challenge as a means for educating the public about paranormal claims, but the process for consideration of claims has been changed effective September 1, 2015.  No application submitted under the previous procedures or relying in whole or in part on the previously published terms of the Challenge will be considered.

Over the years, we have spent a great deal of time dealing with claims ranging from yet another dowsing claim to some VERY eccentric and untestable claims. The overwhelming majority refused to fill out the application or even state a claim that can be tested. Some of them show up in person and demand to be tested while they wait. We can no longer justify the resources to interact with these people.

Effective immediately, JREF will no longer accept applications directly from people claiming to have a paranormal power. Previously available Application Forms shall not be used and will be rejected without any review of the contents. We anticipate providing minimum required protocols for the preliminary test early next year. No one should make any effort to pursue the Challenge until those minimum required protocols are issued. The only exception is that any established psychic may contact JREF via email to be tested directly (preferably with an independent, third party TV crew.)"

Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
Tell me about it, I sat through that whole thing until I realized it was a joke. That's 1 hour I can't ever get back.
Thanks for the warning. I saved one hour.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Joelr
Tell me about it, I sat through that whole thing until I realized it was a joke. That's 1 hour I can't ever get back.

Sorry about that, that's the reason I put up the quote from the Wiki about it being a prank. I was listening to some YouTubes yesterday while doing chores and did listen to the whole thing. I found the Wikipedia article after listening, but still thought it was enjoyable. I'll encase the video within a spoiler alert to spare others. It was 27 minutes, not an hour, although it may have seemed that way. So you regained 33 minutes. That should give you enough time to read this post. ;) I do realize this post is way too long, TMI, but I just kept finding more interesting 'stuff.'

I did listen to a Russell Targ video that was interesting for me (a cancelled TED talk that popped up elsewhere, "Is ESP Real?"), although some of his 'proof' for telepathy seemed pretty underwhelming. But he did say that not much effort has gone into research, there is a greater number of people discounting than supporting research and the concept in general. I suppose orthodox scientists still consider parapsychology too airy fairy.

From Targ:

“In this $25 million program we used ‘remote viewing’ to find a downed Russian bomber in North Africa, for which President Carter commended us. We found a kidnapped US general in Italy, and the kidnap car that snatched Patricia Hearst. We looked in on the US hostages in Iran, and predicted the imminent release, who was soon sent to Germany. We described a Russian weapons factory in Siberia, leading to a US congressional investigation about weakness in US security, etc. Our scientific findings were published in Nature, The Proc, IEEE, Proc. AAAS, and Proc. American Institute of Physics. I thought a TED audience would find this recently declassified material interesting. And no physics would be harmed in my presentation.”

From an OLD (1984) NY Times article:

"Dr. Targ, a physicist with expertise in lasers, optics and microwaves, worked for a decade at SRI International on what he calls a ''multimillion-dollar'' program of psychic research financed by the Defense Department and intelligence agencies."

I thought this 2017 article was interesting as it gives more info about Targ and also mentioned a Targ documentary on ESP, which was just completed Feb. 2018. Not sure where to see it yet. https://thirdeyespies.com/ There are a couple of trailers on that page.

The US government did become interested in esp when the Soviets started experimenting with it during the Cold War. And while the CIA had denied in the past the research or money spent for research, it did release this 1995 American Institutes for Research report in 2002: An Evaluation of Remote Viewing: Research and Applications. I'm assuming since it's available as a PDF at the CIA web site, it's legit. The purpose behind the evaluation was to examine studies presented and decide whether it is feasible to use remote viewing or telepathy for intelligence purposes. I didn't read the entire thing (206 pages) but skipped to the reviews. Unfortunately the PDF is scanned and not searchable, so I'll try to bracket the locations of my quotes by page numbers. Two decades of research on psychic functioning were conducted at SRI (Stanford Research Institute) and  SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation). Reviews of the research results contain the conclusions drawn by two experts, Dr. Jessica Utts (pro parapsychology) and Dr. Raymond Hyman (known parapsychology critic).

First review from Dr. Utts [3-2], An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning: "Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud." There are several more pages to her report, tables of data, etc. She concludes that anomalous cognition is possible and has been demonstrated, however she felt "it would be wasteful of valuable resources to continue to look for proof."

The second reviewer [3-43], Dr. Ray Hyman, Evaluation of Program on "Anomalous Mental Phenomena" spent a lot of time reporting the history of "real" science, what makes it real and the history of parapsychology and why it can never considered real science. It seemed to me his biggest argument was that parapsychology is not real science, his mind is closed to the possibility, and may have had a hard time even considering the evidence from the experiments. More pages are spent challenging Utt's conclusions but to his credit he did manage to say [3-67]:

"I will suggest one more reason for my belief that it is premature to try to account for what the SAIC and the ganzfeld experiments have so far put before us. On the basis of these experiments, contemporary parapsychologists claim that they have demonstrated the existence of an "anomaly." I will grant them that they have apparently demonstrated that the SAIC and the ganzfeld experiments have generated significant effect sizes beyond what we should expect from chance variations. I will further admit that, at this writing, I cannot suggest obvious methodological flaws to account for these significant effects."

While he comes right out and says he does not believe that the findings from the SRI/SAIC program "justify concluding that anomalous mental phenomena have been proven" he also adds "The case for psychic functioning seems better than it ever has been. The contemporary findings along with the output of the SRI/SAIC program do seem to indicate that something beyond odd statistical hiccups is taking place. I also have to admit that I do not have a ready explanation for these observed effects." [3-59]

Another interesting statement, "Finally, I should add that some parapsychologists, at least in the recent past, have agreed with my position that parapsychological results are not yet ready to be placed before the scientific community." [3-69]

This could be one reason why it's so hard to find any solid proof at this time. At least that door is not completely closed.

Basically the final conclusion by the AIR was that there was no real conclusion other than the value and utility to the Intelligence Community of the information provided by the process could not be readily discerned. The project and funding were discontinued. [5-1]

« Last Edit: March 12, 2018, 06:18:58 PM by Deb »

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Ron Card, Facebook. He's definitely made a lifetime commitment to the Seth materials. A prolific FB poster. A controversial character. But he does come up with some great quotes and often his topics parallel what's going on here at SoS. He's not a member here as far as I can tell. I came across his post about scientific proof (he posted it to the SoS Facebook page), so I decided to tack it on for grins:

"...ron speaks...Science, in general, looks for tangible physical proof of the existence of things. Science wants to smell, taste, see, touch and feel something before scientists acknowledge it is real. Science wants to put specimens under microscope and examine them and made deductions based upon the physical senses. How can science look for or isolate or even acknowledge non-physical "anything?" Yet the scientist uses his non-physical thought processes while examining the physical world. It is thought that forms matter, and not the other way around.

In light of my horribly long preceding post, it brought to mind a Max Plank quote: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Ron added one of his typical photo memes with a nice Seth quote:

"The scientist probing the brain of an idiot or a genius will find only the physical matter of the brain itself.

Not one idea will be discovered residing in the brain cells. You can try to convey an idea, you can feel its effects, but you cannot see it as you can the chair. Only a fool would say that ideas were nonexistent, however, or deny their importance."

—NoME Chapter 1: Session 803, May 2, 1977

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Dr. Targ,


I understand what you are going for here, I've been down this road. The trick isn't to find stuff that validated ESP but to also see if it's been properly debunked (not just from a skeptic because that's his job to debunk) or if it has been reproduced or reviewed by a third party.

Just the first guy you mention I see this on his Wiki:

"The psychologists David Marks and Richard Kammann attempted to replicate Targ and Puthoff's remote viewing experiments and disputed the claims that the experiments were successful - for example, they were able to successfully identify targets from cues given by the investigators and recorded in the transcripts. They concluded: "Until remote viewing can be confirmed in conditions which prevent sensory cueing the conclusions of Targ and Puthoff remain an unsubstantiated hypothesis."[38] The researchers said that Targ and Puthoff had not provided unpublished transcripts when requested, but that after obtaining them from a judge in the study they were able to find "a wealth of cues".[39]

Simon Hoggart and Mike Hutchinson described Targ as willing to believe and overly credulous.[40] A 1988 report by the United States National Research Council (NRC) concluded: "There should remain little doubt that the Targ-Puthoff studies are fatally flawed."[41]"



This next part is important, like I've been saying if the gov found any truth in ESP they would be putting billions of dollars into it because it can be militarized.

"Remote viewing was popularized in the 1990s upon the declassification of certain documents related to the Stargate Project, a US$20 million research program that had started in 1975 and was sponsored by the U.S. government, in an attempt to determine any potential military application of psychic phenomena. The program was terminated in 1995 after it failed to produce any useful intelligence information. David Goslin, of the American Institutes for Research said: "There's no documented evidence it had any value to the intelligence community."[42]

A variety of scientific studies of remote viewing have been conducted. Some earlier, less sophisticated experiments produced positive results, but they had invalidating flaws.[36] None of the more recent experiments have shown positive results when conducted under properly controlled conditions.[29][42][43] This lack of successful experiments has led the mainstream scientific community to reject remote viewing, based upon the absence of an evidence base, the lack of a theory which would explain remote viewing, and the lack of experimental techniques which can provide reliably positive results.[37]"

For every positive review I always find something that suggests the results are not really what they claimed to be.
Every successful experiment in science first confirms their results then waits. They wait and wait because the experiment has to be reproduced by multiple separate teams. THEN we might be on to something.
I find it disappointing that ESP studies have been such a flop but that's where we are so I pick up the pieces and move on. Maybe there will be some breakthroughs someday but right now the basic tests of ESP don't really work. Which also means that people who do psychic work for a living are not using any psychic power but are using a psychological skillset.

Usually just a little further investigation reveals doubt on these ESP studies. I've been down this rabbit hole many many times that's why I'm skeptical when it comes to this subject.

In fact the only thing related to any ESP that hasn't been vastly debunked is the Seth material itself.
I found an essay on how Seth philosophy is contradictory, it was well written and thought out. I didn't agree with it's premise however.

Supposedly in The Seth Material Seth was tested by a psychiatrist but the results were never given as far as I know.
Seth must have done some ESP testing, like guessing numbers on flashcards and that type of thing?
I've never seen any results? I remember it being talked about in that book. Why didn't Jane publish the results?

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb

"...ron speaks...Science, in general, looks for tangible physical proof of the existence of things. Science wants to smell, taste, see, touch and feel something before scientists acknowledge it is real. Science wants to put specimens under microscope and examine them and made deductions based upon the physical senses. How can science look for or isolate or even acknowledge non-physical "anything?" Yet the scientist uses his non-physical thought processes while examining the physical world. It is thought that forms matter, and not the other way around.

This isn't entirely true. In physics it's become obvious that the universe follows mathematical laws, often very precisely. In quantum physics and Newtonian physics math is truth.
Many times things have been discovered because the math told us something about nature that we couldn't see for ourselves.

Quantum mechanics AND cosmology deal with non-physical things all the time. We know about them through mathematics, through their influence on other things or from predictions made about the effects these non-physical things might have on physical things.

All of this is common in modern science.

Making general statements like "It is thought that forms matter, and not the other way around" is fine but why would we expect science to be like "oh, ok, didn't know that but thanks, I'll update our theories!"

Right now the concept of thoughts forming matter is philosophy and maybe metaphysics. In order for it to be science we have to figure out what is it that leaves our brain, enters into the world and begins forming objects. We would need a mathematical model of what this is, a model that makes sense, fits in with quantum mechanics, a model that makes predictions we can then test for. All of those things have to come together and if you can't quantize a phenomenon in that way then it's just a philosophical idea.

Philosophy is fine, it's great! But it's weird when people expect science to just start treating philosophy like it's a science fact?!
It's no different than a Hindu saying "Don't you scientists realize Brahman is everything, he is all things...."


Ron should get a PHd in physics then he can work on showing scientists how it is thought that forms matter, and not the other way around by developing a model to explain what he's talking about and making experiments that we can test to see if he's on the right track.

There is one physicist Anton Zeilinger who does a lot of work with the double slit experiment and with the weirdness of QM. He's worth checking out. Then there is William Tiller who has an actual model of how consciousness/intention effects matter but his work has not been successfully repeated so that whole thing seems to be stalling out?

This stuff is hard, we don't have any idea how consciousness could be linked to matter creation in a scientific way. So people shouldn't criticize science. Go get a degree and try to figure it out. As for funding, that's going to be a problem.
Tiller accepts donations, I don't know how that's working out for him. I did buy his book back in 2009.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2018, 08:36:15 PM by Joelr »

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Where I was going with that is simply hope. You want scientific proof that telepathy exists and question why there isn't any. It bothers me that The American Institutes for Research could not come up with two neutral experts to study the results rather than "two noted experts in the area of parapsychology... In addition to their extensive credentials, they were selected to represent both sides of the paranormal controversy." But what I found interesting was while they didn't say telepathy is real, even Hyman couldn't say 100% it was fake. The jury is still out, with room for possible future breakthroughs. There are somewhat reputable sources still experimenting (one example) so there is still hope. I'm not completely sure whether our government is doing any research. They denied it in the past. The Stargate project was retired, I don't know most of what our government is up to. OK, I'll stop with the links now.

I'm all for debunking, I've been on a life-long search for truth, at this point question whether there is a truth. I'm not an especially technical person, my background is in the graphic arts, no experience with scientific experiments other than high school chemistry. I don't have the head for it. I do question everything, look at studies, who is doing the studies and what their investment is in them. I'm only mildly interested in proof of telepathy because I value my own personal experiences over outside authorities and have had enough little hints to feel there is such a thing. I see it as a subtle undercurrent that most of us don't notice—our outer senses are so much more obvious. Actually I think the only time I get feedback is when I have coincidences that are observable with the outer senses.

Quote from: Joelr
In fact the only thing related to any ESP that hasn't been vastly debunked is the Seth material itself.
I found an essay on how Seth philosophy is contradictory, it was well written and thought out. I didn't agree with it's premise however.

Not sure how debunking Seth would even be accomplished. I saw an essay or something a long time ago, could have been the same one. Seems there was some question about Jane's mental health. I had searched for things like that when I first came across the Seth materials, was surprised at how little negative stuff was out there. Since then I've just decided to accept my own feelings about the materials. Jane thought she was losing her mind in the beginning.

Quote from: Joelr
Supposedly in The Seth Material Seth was tested by a psychiatrist but the results were never given as far as I know.
Seth must have done some ESP testing, like guessing numbers on flashcards and that type of thing?
I've never seen any results? I remember it being talked about in that book. Why didn't Jane publish the results?

Well, Jane did some tests with her esp class, I remember reading about them somewhere. It could have been in Jane's The Coming of Seth/How to Develop Your ESP Power, or Speaking of Jane Roberts or Conversations with Seth by Susan Watkins. I don't think any of these are in the Seth search engine because they're not actual Seth books. But there were never official experiments as far as I know.

Quote from: Joelr
I find it disappointing that ESP studies have been such a flop but that's where we are so I pick up the pieces and move on. Maybe there will be some breakthroughs someday but right now the basic tests of ESP don't really work. Which also means that people who do psychic work for a living are not using any psychic power but are using a psychological skillset.

I'm not sure I could come to the conclusion that people doing psychic work are essentially frauds. Maybe the problem is in the testing methods or lack of definitive evidence. I can't say. Not enough information at this point.

Quote from: Joelr
Philosophy is fine, it's great! But it's weird when people expect science to just start treating philosophy like it's a science fact?!

Agreed that the sciences and math are the bases for our current understanding of reality. Scientific 'facts' are updated with new discoveries, improvements in equipment that let us see more than ever. There were things I was taught as absolute facts in childhood science classes which were later proven false. It happens in medical science all the time. The thing is, not everyone is 100% invested in science. There are still SO many people whose belief systems are completely rooted in religion (and SO many religions), superstition, magic, pharmaceuticals (placebo effect), conspiracies, parapsychology, pseudosciences—Seth. Ron has a Seth Group on Facebook with more than 1,000 members. Ron believes in Seth over science. He's entitled to believe what he wants. He shares that and sometimes people get outraged and vent. But it's because they feel they know more about Seth and feel Ron is distorting the "facts." It's happened here. Not pleasant. While the sciences are, should be, impartial, we're still humans and there are emotions and ego involved. I have one child, he's almost 23, and we've gone round and round about science and philosophy. He's die-hard science, no excuses, so not a new argument for me. His mind is closed. We still manage to get along.


Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb
Where I was going with that is simply hope. You want scientific proof that telepathy exists and question why there isn't any. It bothers me that The American Institutes for Research could not come up with two neutral experts to study the results rather than "two noted experts in the area of parapsychology... In addition to their extensive credentials, they were selected to represent both sides of the paranormal controversy." But what I found interesting was while they didn't say telepathy is real, even Hyman couldn't say 100% it was fake. The jury is still out, with room for possible future breakthroughs. There are somewhat reputable sources still experimenting (one example) so there is still hope. I'm not completely sure whether our government is doing any research. They denied it in the past. The Stargate project was retired, I don't know most of what our government is up to. OK, I'll stop with the links now.

I'm all for debunking, I've been on a life-long search for truth, at this point question whether there is a truth. I'm not an especially technical person, my background is in the graphic arts, no experience with scientific experiments other than high school chemistry. I don't have the head for it. I do question everything, look at studies, who is doing the studies and what their investment is in them. I'm only mildly interested in proof of telepathy because I value my own personal experiences over outside authorities and have had enough little hints to feel there is such a thing. I see it as a subtle undercurrent that most of us don't notice—our outer senses are so much more obvious. Actually I think the only time I get feedback is when I have coincidences that are observable with the outer senses.


There have been lots of different studies done over the decades and there are lots of people (like Dean Radin) who would love to have actual scientific proof of ESP. Some experiments might have been sketchy but the overall average from all the tests hasn't been favorable.

When I decided to check out the skeptic side I found lots of forums that go into detail about experiments and this and that. People are always trying to one-up the skeptics with experiment results but overall nothing definitive has happened. skepticforum.com has some good threads

The thing with proving something false is you almost can't do it. You can't prove anything is false just that the probability is low that it's a real thing.

If personal experience works for you then that's great. My investigations into psychology (confirmation bias, memory, cognitive science) has convinced me that we can convince ourselves of anything so I don't find it to be very reliable. I've tricked myself into thinking I was seeing certain numbers all the time for example.
I eventually learned that the brain processes billions of bits of information per second. Much of this is visual and most of it is thrown aside, not brought up to the conscious level of awareness. So if one has a thing with say number "11", your vision sees numbers constantly but passes over them but if you hold seeing this number as an important or emotional event your brain will alert you and say "look a number 11 on the lic. plate in front of you!"
So it ends up seeming like the number is being shown to you by the universe.

But these confirmation bias can work with anything, with telepathy we might notice any hits but the many other times where we didn't display telepathic powers just goes unnoticed, like a non-event.

But again, you can develop ESP if it is real. If you feel you have a psychic connection to someone then have them hold an image and read their mind. Draw what they are seeing. Do it like over the course of years, hundreds of times to rule out the idea of having a bad telepathic day. Then average out your hits and misses. Random chance would probably account for 10% of hits so see if you can do better.

I have definitely had a few telepathic experiences. Well, one. But now 20 years have gone by and I haven't had any other so the idea that I just happened to have a dream that coincided with the next days reality was a coincidence. Actually coincidence are supposed to happen here and there. SO that fits with random chance perfectly.

A lot of people talk about the time they were thinking about a person they had not seen in a long time and then right when they call that person the other person was thinking about them or thinking about calling them.

If you think about it, when we lose touch with someone important we tend to think about them often. As years go by the thoughts get more intense because it's become more emotionally charged. Same for the other person. Our minds go to that person a lot more than we realize.
So when that coincidence happens it's really hardly even a coincidence.

What would be more like possible ESP would be if anyone had a dream the night before 9/11about the WTC plane crashes. Or some psychic who posted a vision of that event happening the day before.
There wasn't one single report of that happening. It would have been a big deal and the FBI would have interviewed that person to check for terrorist ties but it would have been some legit ESP at work. You never see that.


Quote from: Deb


Not sure how debunking Seth would even be accomplished. I saw an essay or something a long time ago, could have been the same one. Seems there was some question about Jane's mental health. I had searched for things like that when I first came across the Seth materials, was surprised at how little negative stuff was out there. Since then I've just decided to accept my own feelings about the materials. Jane thought she was losing her mind in the beginning.

https://www2.rivier.edu/faculty/pcunningham/Research/Problem_of_Seths_Origin.pdf

This is a good essay and if I remember correctly it's in favor of Seth being legitimate.
I can't find the other one but it was based on a misunderstanding of some of Seths philosophies.




Quote from: Deb


Well, Jane did some tests with her esp class, I remember reading about them somewhere. It could have been in Jane's The Coming of Seth/How to Develop Your ESP Power, or Speaking of Jane Roberts or Conversations with Seth by Susan Watkins. I don't think any of these are in the Seth search engine because they're not actual Seth books. But there were never official experiments as far as I know.

There were official experiments. They are listed in The Seth Material a book about early Seth. They did work with ESP and sealed envelopes . There were a few psychologists, one who's name they changed for the book. I can't imagine why they wouldn't release the results. The book is SUPER frustrating as they detail all the meetings and tests then just move on and never show what happened.

It's mentioned in the essay I linked to:
A series of more formal clairvoyance tests, held tw    ice weekly, ran for one year that were conducted by Dr. Instream (pseudonym for Dr. George N. Estabrook, professor of psychology at Oswego State University College) on Monday and Wednesday nights at 10:00 p.m.  The 76 clairvoyance tests with Dr.Instream ran from the 189th session on September 20, 1965 to the 272nd session on June 29, 1966.  The clairvoyance impressions given by Seth are documented in the written record (Roberts, 1998b, 1999a, 1999b).

Jane Roberts wrote to Dr. Instream on July 10, 1966 canceling the series of experiments because she had received no correspondence from him since January of that year and no feedback from him regarding the outcomes of any of the tests.  Seth offered some clarification about the matter almost two years later in the 420th session on July 1, 1968"




Quote from: Deb

I'm not sure I could come to the conclusion that people doing psychic work are essentially frauds. Maybe the problem is in the testing methods or lack of definitive evidence. I can't say. Not enough information at this point.

The traditional psychics and cold readers are not even trying to tap into any psychic abilities that humans might have. I think Seth gives exercises to increase psychic skills.
Traditional psychics use a skillset that you learn which involves mostly wordplay and psychology.
There is a well known school for psychics that Derren Brown attends and he does readings for the teachers and blows them all away. Derren explains in his videos that all of the psychic readings he does are 100% trickery. It's for fun.
The skillset of psychic readings is so thorough that some psychics don't even know they are not using psychic powers. It's designed to take advantage of our psychology and produce results that seem meaningful to us but they use generalizations that apply to everyone and then there are tricks for finding specific information.
There are a lot of hits and misses but Derren showed the video of people getting readings and the people thought that the psychic was very impressive and had all hits and so on. But when you review the video Derren shows that the psychic actually was all over the place and the misses (which was the majority) were skillfully discarded or blamed on the person.

I think if people really have psychic powers the thing we would do first is find someone you are compatible with and practice meditating together while holding one image in your mind. See if you can get into a state where you can see their thoughts.
From there it would be like playing an instrument, people would set up a system using trial and error (just like the first instruments) and it would require much practice and dedication.

The idea that we can go to people and they tell us our future and tell us what path to take on our life journey is ludicrous.
I gaurantee if you go to ANY psychic anywhere in the world and say "I'm holding an image in my mind, tell me what it is" they will either give some excuse why they can't or kick you right out.
I'm not ruling out psychic power but that industry is NOT ESP in any form. That is entertainment, same as magic or mentalists.



Quote from: Deb
Agreed that the sciences and math are the bases for our current understanding of reality. Scientific 'facts' are updated with new discoveries, improvements in equipment that let us see more than ever. There were things I was taught as absolute facts in childhood science classes which were later proven false. It happens in medical science all the time. The thing is, not everyone is 100% invested in science. There are still SO many people whose belief systems are completely rooted in religion (and SO many religions), superstition, magic, pharmaceuticals (placebo effect), conspiracies, parapsychology, pseudosciences—Seth. Ron has a Seth Group on Facebook with more than 1,000 members. Ron believes in Seth over science. He's entitled to believe what he wants. He shares that and sometimes people get outraged and vent. But it's because they feel they know more about Seth and feel Ron is distorting the "facts." It's happened here. Not pleasant. While the sciences are, should be, impartial, we're still humans and there are emotions and ego involved. I have one child, he's almost 23, and we've gone round and round about science and philosophy. He's die-hard science, no excuses, so not a new argument for me. His mind is closed. We still manage to get along.

Science is always looking to change with new discoveries which is the opposite of religion. Some pseudoscience may become science. Parapsychology is just a big dud featuring lots of tall tales and zero evidence. Conspiracies are fun and help keep some people honest and some conspiracies are true or partially true.
Metaphysics, the realm where ESP may exist is a given, maybe not ESP but there is almost definitely a science above/beyond our current science. A vast amount of science, this is for sure. Our ancestors may seem like gods to us just through their science. Most metaphysics will turn out to be wrong but not all. The best stuff is the stuff we haven't even though about yet.

Pharmaceuticals have a dark side but they are a big part of the benefits of science starting with penacillin.


One thing about Seth that makes me sad is he said he could see into probable futures. So why couldn't he look into a probable future and see how we unified gravity with quantum mechanics? Or even where computers were going? Imagine if he had said "in 20 years you will all be connected by computers and computer phones." Even if he just looked into probable futures he could have written a whole book on it.

He said he had several past lives that he remembered clearly. So what about his future lives? Why didn't he talk about those and what was society like? Or what was technology like?
Even if it was a probable future it still MIGHT have also happened in our reality. See what I mean? He didn't mention word one about what the future holds but he did say he lived many lives on Earth and some were future lives?? Did we have quantum computers? War? A.I.? Does A.I. take over, do humans become integrated with AI into a new species?? With genetic research, DNA manipulation, stem cell research, do we reverse aging and live indefinite amounts of time??? Not one peep about these crazy possibilities???

That is one of my biggest stumbling blocks to Seth. It's like Jane purposely would not speak about the future. But the only reason why I can think of is because Jane wasn't as legit as she said???




Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Quote from: Joelr
Science is always looking to change with new discoveries which is the opposite of religion.
Joel, it is questionable whether science is always looking to change. Academic scientists have to stay close to the "consensus" or their jobs could be at stake. Medical researchers depend heavily on funding from drug companies.

Most religions are non-rational, the exception possibly being Buddhism. The Seth teachings are not a religion.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 07:21:20 AM by Sena »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69

Quote from: Sena

Joel, it is questionable whether science is always looking to change. Academic scientists have to stay close to the "consensus" or their jobs could be at stake. Medical researchers depend heavily on funding from drug companies.

Most religions are non-rational, the exception possibly being Buddhism. The Seth teachings are not a religion.

I don't know if any metaphysics is rational but being rational isn't always the most important thing. It's ok to try and find new concepts and truths.

It's true that academia can be rigorous. A good book on that is Faster Than Light by physicist João Magueijo. The first half is a really good laymans explanation of general and special relativity and the 2nd half go into what it was like in academia trying to put forth a new theory of light (VFL - varying light speed) that says light might have been faster in the early universe.
He developed a mathematical model and was able to show how this theory solved some puzzles that we currently do not understand. His theory was compatible with relativity so he had a decent theory. It didn't turn out to be true according to some experiments he designed but the whole journey was difficult and met with resistance.

On the other hand physicists come up with new models all the time. The big goal in physics, the rock star level in physics is not to get a high level degree and teach it's to come up with something new, win a Nobel prize and be the next Einstein. So by nature that requires change, big change. It's just a rigorous system of checks and balances.
If one were to expect physicists to take a concept seriously like "thoughts effect matter" that's where you would be mistaken because to take something serious it has to first have some type of model, usually a mathematical model that makes sense and can join with other established models.

With all ESP there is no model to explain any of it so the only way to approach it is through human testing. That route hasn't panned out (as far as I know) so there isn't anything left to do.

If someone did testing and was able to show over and over with repeated experiments and different teams that someone has telepathic abilities then scientists would begin thinking of ways to detect the mechanism involved. The theorists would begin work on models of what mechanisms are interacting and ways we could directly or indirectly see these things and experimental physicists would carry out actual experiments. Eventually we would figure out exactly what was leaving our brains and passing information into another brain.

But before any of that happens we would have to see telepathy done in a reliable way by many different teams. That just hasn't worked out, it's not that science doesn't like telepathy or is resisting change, they just need something to work with.

Environmental scientists have in the past gone to the northeastern US too look for signs of a big ape. They tried many different ways. Eventually the lack of an ape body or other compelling evidence just wore the whole thing down. You can't blame science when some metaphysics concept isn't considered legit. Scientists have been looking into ESP as far back as the 1920s! Mediums were huge back then and science jumped right in and did lots of tests. Those were just old-school scams with like, the medium moving the table and stuff like that.


In the pharma world there is definitely corruption. That same corruption exists in the new age world as well. There was an explosion of new age books (starting with Deepak Chopra Quantum Healing) that convinced many people we can heal any illness any time and illness is just an imbalance we can set right.
There may be some truth to this but it's more complicated than these books made it seem. As a result, over the last decade there have been many deaths from people refusing chemo and such because they were all geared up to "quantum heal" with their mind.
I've read some of those books and what always surprised me was how certain the author sounds about how the teachings are 100% confident that this is how it works.

I know Seth goes there also but he goes deeper and explains that if one is used to western medicine they must continue to use that because it's so ingrained in our minds that this is how we heal illness that we can't just quit cold-turkey. He advises western medicine along with working on your belief systems.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Sorry, I'd fallen (down a rabbit hole) and couldn't get up. :-) Just really busy and have been thinking about this topic, started writing this days ago. The hole I went down was doing some research on what was the actual cause of Jane's death, prompted by comments below from a skeptics' site. There's enough info to make a new topic. I know she had serious thyroid problems, arthritis, some complications from that, but I'm curious what actually killed her. Truthfully I think she just gave up. Or iatrogenisis. I should probably take another look at a Way Toward Health and buy the deleted sessions.

Quote from: Joelr
On the other hand physicists come up with new models all the time.

I have to admit that physics is more open minded than other sciences. But typically, from what I've read, is that throughout the history of science, any new concepts are ridiculed and treated with scorn until they pass the test of time, directly proportionate to how way-out they seem outside what's been accepted. Which is a good thing, but sometimes extreme (I'm thinking along the lines of Galileo). Here's just one article of many.  And while these days heretics are not executed, their reputations sometimes are. Bruce Lipton tells about teaching genetics to doctors, realized what he was teaching (according to the books) was wrong due to all the research he had done as a cellular biologist, and was ostracized and ridiculed to the point that he quit his job. He was called a heretic. When you look up the definition, the first is "a person who differs in opinion from established religious dogma," which is where Galileo ran into trouble.

Quote from: Joelr
What would be more like possible ESP would be if anyone had a dream the night before 9/11about the WTC plane crashes. Or some psychic who posted a vision of that event happening the day before.

I have to admit it was pure horror for me. I watched the towers being built, not far from where I was living at the time. Over the years I've heard plenty of stories of people who claim to have had precognitive dreams of 9/11, but I don't think the scientific community pays much attention to that type of stuff. There's no way to either prove or discount someone's dreams or precognition unless they're recorded under test conditions. Otherwise they're just stories.

I found this article a little interesting and sounded familiar: 911 and Global Consciousness, "You may be surprised, however, to learn that Princeton University researchers believe that so many people around the world were affected in the same way that their collective mental energy actually altered the operation of computers." It's about data from Princeton's Global Consciousness Project. If you like data, the results are here. So I guess there are some studies taking place. Or were. Hopefully are.

"But the world paid relatively little attention to their efforts, until Nelson published this paper,  “Coherent Consciousness and Reduced Randomness: Correlations on September 11, 2001,” in the Journal of Scientific Exploration in 2002. It reported that the traumatic terrorist attack, which caused a powerful  outpouring of emotions across the planet, had a measurable effect upon the network’s computers that was extremely unlikely to have been caused by chance."

Thanks for the link to the paper on Seth, I found that one early one when I started reading Seth. It does favor Jane for the most part. Actually, there seem to be a few dissertations and mentions in clinical books about Seth and Jane. I find it interesting that so many academics, psychologists, physicists were interested enough in Jane Roberts to take the time to read, study and write about her. I don't imagine other psychics or channelers get that much attention. This one is 248 pages long. So far the only people that are able to say with conviction that Jane was a fraud and that Seth was a scam are the skeptics on forums such as here, presenting such unsubstantiated facts as:

"Jane Roberts was a mid 1950's, B-grade science fiction writer, with her SF stories appearing in Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction She simply saw Ron L Hubbard (Scientology) in Astounding Stories convert popular SF story themes, into a controlled religion for profit and Jane Roberts joined that band wagon."

"Jane was an alcoholic and died from alcoholism. If you review her "performances" you can see she is drunk as a skunk." 

"I know and that's why Jane Roberts lied about being an alcoholic and indeed died from alcoholism. It's why her followers, like Barrie, still try make money off her corpse by releasing books of bad poetry."

"She sold books for profit based on a imaginary religion, she made up. Her "Seth" predictions were never right and the cult collapsed when she died. She was a 100% con artist. Barrie, your fellow elderly cult member, is trying to sell poetry books by flogging this same dead horse of Seth. It's sooooo Dark ages."

Barrie went head to head with them, I think he finally gave up.

Quote from: Joelr
There were official experiments. They are listed in The Seth Material a book about early Seth. They did work with ESP and sealed envelopes . There were a few psychologists, one who's name they changed for the book. I can't imagine why they wouldn't release the results. The book is SUPER frustrating as they detail all the meetings and tests then just move on and never show what happened.

Yes, I came across that a few days ago when looking for something else. It's in the Early Sessions books, it seems there was a problem with the professor doing the testing, he was not keeping up with it. I have scans of only a couple of the Early Sessions, not all, but if I come across more information about this I'll update.

I just found this in the dissertation you linked to:

"A series of more formal clairvoyance tests, held twice weekly, ran for one year that were conducted by Dr. Instream (pseudonym for Dr. George N. Estabrook, professor of psychology at Oswego State University College) on Monday and Wednesday nights at 10:00 p.m. The 76 clairvoyance tests with Dr. Instream ran from the 189th session on September 20, 1965 to the 272nd session on June 29, 1966. The clairvoyance impressions given by Seth are documented in the written record (Roberts, 1998b, 1999a, 1999b). Jane Roberts wrote to Dr. Instream on July 10, 1966 canceling the series of experiments because she had received no correspondence from him since January of that year and no feedback from him regarding the outcomes of any of the tests. Seth offered some clarification about the matter almost two years later in the 420th session on July 1, 1968: Our results with him [Dr. Instream] were good as far as the tests were concerned, through there was considerable distortion simply because Ruburt's [Jane's] abilities had not been sufficiently developed. There were direct hits, in other words, but these results could not be mathematically appraised in terms of the odds against them; and this was what Dr. Instream was looking for. Robert and Jane operated in a vacuum, since he did not tell them anything regarding the tests, negative or favorable. No academic psychologist, including Dr. Instream, will given you a statement to the effect that I am a survival personality. Dr. Instream will give a statement I believe, as to Robert and Jane's character, the quality of the Seth material, and the fact that no fraud of any kind is involved (Roberts, 2000, pp. 331-332). " 

Estabrook was getting on in years, very much into hypnosis and that was his priority. I found some old declassified FBI files containing correspondence with him (and J. Edgar Hoover!), the government was using his expertise to decide whether information collected from a witness or party to crime would be useful in court. He had bigger fish to fry. I wonder what happened to any notes or data he had regarding Jane and Seth. We'll never know.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2018, 03:38:10 PM by Deb »

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb




I have to admit that physics is more open minded than other sciences. But typically, from what I've read, is that throughout the history of science, any new concepts are ridiculed and treated with scorn until they pass the test of time, directly proportionate to how way-out they seem outside what's been accepted. Which is a good thing, but sometimes extreme (I'm thinking along the lines of Galileo). Here's just one article of many.  And while these days heretics are not executed, their reputations sometimes are. Bruce Lipton tells about teaching genetics to doctors, realized what he was teaching (according to the books) was wrong due to all the research he had done as a cellular biologist, and was ostracized and ridiculed to the point that he quit his job. He was called a heretic. When you look up the definition, the first is "a person who differs in opinion from established religious dogma," which is where Galileo ran into trouble.


Galileo was punished by the church not by science.
If you look at a science news website you will see there is new science emerging every day. Sometimes with new concepts that re-write textbooks and cause a large shift in thinking it will be challenging but that's because there are so many wrong scientific theories that if you make it too easy we would ultimately never get anywhere.
Most of the time the heretic ideas are actually wrong, in fact there are 1000s of bad theories at any given time. So statistically here and there science will reject something that turns out to be true.
Again, just visit some science news sites, there are groundbreaking studies being published every week.https://www.sciencedaily.com/

Bruce Lipton did not present any of those ground breaking studies. His work on adaptive mutation was not confirmed in experiments. I'm almost certain he is another scientist writing books to sell to the new-age crowd.
Yes meditation and such is good for you but that isn't why his reputation was ruined, it's because he was trying to pass off facts about genes and evolution that wasn't true.
He allowed his reputation to reflect the fact that he is selling pseudoscience. Look at his "store" webpage, he has like 40 products for sale including a lecture for $12. Nothing wrong with having a business but I think he's just selling wordy re-writes of The Secret.

I do think the debunking of his work is correct:
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-bruce-lipton-and-the-biology-of-belief.t1003/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_mutation

A lot of new age concepts DO get their day in the sun, it's just that experiments don't turn out favorable so funding has to go elsewhere. But then people will complain as if it never happened.

A good guy to follow is physicist Anton Zeilinger http://discovermagazine.com/2011/jul-aug/14-anton-zeilinger-teleports-photons-taught-the-dalai-lama

he does some interesting stuff with quantum physics and reality and does real experiments with real results and isn't selling fake science. Some of it is Seth-like and is the reason I still find Seth interesting.

Quote from: Deb

I have to admit it was pure horror for me. I watched the towers being built, not far from where I was living at the time. Over the years I've heard plenty of stories of people who claim to have had precognitive dreams of 9/11, but I don't think the scientific community pays much attention to that type of stuff. There's no way to either prove or discount someone's dreams or precognition unless they're recorded under test conditions. Otherwise they're just stories.

I found this article a little interesting and sounded familiar: 911 and Global Consciousness, "You may be surprised, however, to learn that Princeton University researchers believe that so many people around the world were affected in the same way that their collective mental energy actually altered the operation of computers." It's about data from Princeton's Global Consciousness Project. If you like data, the results are here. So I guess there are some studies taking place. Or were. Hopefully are.

"But the world paid relatively little attention to their efforts, until Nelson published this paper,  “Coherent Consciousness and Reduced Randomness: Correlations on September 11, 2001,” in the Journal of Scientific Exploration in 2002. It reported that the traumatic terrorist attack, which caused a powerful  outpouring of emotions across the planet, had a measurable effect upon the network’s computers that was extremely unlikely to have been caused by chance."

Thanks for the link to the paper on Seth, I found that one early one when I started reading Seth. It does favor Jane for the most part. Actually, there seem to be a few dissertations and mentions in clinical books about Seth and Jane. I find it interesting that so many academics, psychologists, physicists were interested enough in Jane Roberts to take the time to read, study and write about her. I don't imagine other psychics or channelers get that much attention. This one is 248 pages long. So far the only people that are able to say with conviction that Jane was a fraud and that Seth was a scam are the skeptics on forums such as here, presenting such unsubstantiated facts as:


That Doctrate dissertation is really interesting.
Do you know what he is saying? I'm personally open to Seth as a separate entity but he isn't. He is treating Seth as a purely anthropological concept and as a cultural source of "new age" or spiritual concepts and ideas.

"Consciousness of oneself as both oneself and another and even of oneself as a plurality of selves." He is saying Jane is experiencing herself as 2 selves unlike the French/JeanPaul Sartre idea that one must enter an altered state to access other parts of our mind (sleep, hypnosis). He explains it all in the abstract right in the beginning.

I don't get the Global Consciousness thing, for one the results are all over the place - negative, positive with no regards to the emotional content of the event.
Some bad events are negative some positive. But that isn't their point, it's that the results show some type of outside influence which must (or might) be related to these big global events.

Mainly what they need to show is a control. Not a simulated control like they have but they need to take "Z-scores" from 500 random days and see if that score also gives a trillion to one result. If it did then we would know that those results are actually just standard for this particular test.
Why they don't show that is weird? It seems so obvious.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2018, 01:52:46 AM by Joelr »

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Quote from: Joelr
Mainly what they need to show is a control. Not a simulated control like they have but they need to take "Z-scores" from 500 random days and see if that score also gives a trillion to one result. If it did then we would know that those results are actually just standard for this particular test.
Why they don't show that is weird? It seems so obvious.
It would take on average a trillion days to get a trillion to one result. I don't know how throwing in 500 random days would prove anything except to verify that their statistical analysis is valid. But my understanding is that they look for statistical anomalies continuously, thus all the days where the significant events don't happen are the control. 

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: LarryH
Quote from: Joelr
Mainly what they need to show is a control. Not a simulated control like they have but they need to take "Z-scores" from 500 random days and see if that score also gives a trillion to one result. If it did then we would know that those results are actually just standard for this particular test.
Why they don't show that is weird? It seems so obvious.
It would take on average a trillion days to get a trillion to one result. I don't know how throwing in 500 random days would prove anything except to verify that their statistical analysis is valid. But my understanding is that they look for statistical anomalies continuously, thus all the days where the significant events don't happen are the control. 


Stats are really not my thing, this NASA scientist suggests findings are inconclusive but the authors of the study itself seem optimistic.
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/papers/jseScargle.pdf

My suggestion was could they look at 500 Z-scores on 500 random days and see what the results looked like? They are comparing results to what a statistical model "should" look like. What if they looked at 500 random scores and that gave the exact same results? What is a Z-score? What exactly is it measuring?

My problem with the authors of the study is I'm very sketchy regarding Dean Radin. He always claiming statistics and meta-analysis have shown mental healing and remote viewing are proven within 10^100 and so on and so forth but his experiments don't seem to be duplicated by any one else or his statistical analysis is highly criticized.

I am highly critical of things like Jesus historicity studies done by known fundamentalist scholars so it would be hypocritical of me to just take psi studies on faith by a researcher who makes his living selling 4 new age books he has written. Why is it all of the researchers who do metaphysics just happen to also have several books for sale?? This is highly suspicious.
Is anyone doing psi research that isn't selling merchandise?

I have enjoyed some of Radins work however, before The Secret ruined new age for me. This quote sums it up pretty good:

" “Radin fatigue” set surely in so that data that might have been convincing presented on its own became suspect when issuing from the pen of the fellow who had taken me on so many rides already. "
https://www.csicop.org/si/show/when_big_evidence_isnt_the_statistical_pitfalls_of_dean_radins_supernormal


Offline Sena

  • ****
  • Posts: 755
Seth on science and religion:

"Men can become deranged if they believe life has no meaning. Religion has made gross errors. At least it held out an afterlife, a hope of salvation, and preserved — sometimes despite itself — the tradition of the heroic soul. Science, including psychology, by what it has said, and by what it has neglected to say, has come close to a declaration that life itself is meaningless. This is a direct contradiction of deep biological knowledge, to say nothing of spiritual truth. It denies the meaning of biological integrity. It denies man the practical use of those very elements that he needs as a biological creature: the feeling that he is at life’s center, that he can act safely in his environment, that he can trust himself, and that his being and his actions have meaning.

(9:44.) Impulses provide life’s guide to action. If you are taught that you cannot trust your impulses, then you are set against your very physical integrity. If you believe that your life has no meaning, then you will do anything to provide meaning, all the while acting like a mouse in one of science’s mazes — for your prime directive, so to speak, has been tampered with.

[... 1 paragraph ...]

The most private agonies of the soul were assigned a more or less common source in man’s primitive “unconscious” drives. The private unquelled thrusts toward creativity were seen as the unbalanced conglomeration of chemicals within a person’s most private being — a twist of perversity. Genius was seen as a mistake of chromosomes, or the fortunate result of a man’s hatred for his father. The meaning of life was reduced to the accidental nature of genes."

—The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events, Chapter 9: Session 863, June 27, 1979

https://findingseth.com/q/session:863+science/

Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
Years ago when I was married, my wife and I experienced a shared dream. In my dream, we walk into a room with a number of other people. In the middle of the room is a glass box. In the box is a particular threatening animal. It pushes the lid open and begins to escape. Its head turns into a human boy's head, and it looks directly at me and makes a frightening statement. At that point, I wake up. I immediately notice my wife is whimpering. I nudge her to wake her. Nothing is said. The next morning, we both record our dream in our dream journals. After this, I describe my dream to her. She had the same dream, with the only difference being that her creature did not speak or have a boy's head. But the group of people walking into a room, the glass box, the creature escaping the box all were the same. Also, she had previously recorded a dream that I had not been aware of in which a human had that same creature's head.

Offline Deb

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • ~We are the black sheep of the Universe.~
    • Like us on Facebook!
Quote from: Joelr
Galileo was punished by the church not by science.
If you look at a science news website you will see there is new science emerging every day.

That's because back then the church was science. The church controlled what could be studied and theories could not contradict the beliefs taught by the Christian church. The word 'heretic' used even today in the medical sciences appears to remain from this mindset.

http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/intro/histo-frame.html:

"In popular mythology, the 'scientific revolution' of the seventeenth century is commonly said to mark a fundamental break between science and religion. But nothing could be further from the truth. Almost all the great pioneers and founders of the new science were religious men who wanted a science that would harmonize with their faith. All three founders of the new heliocentric cosmology - Nicholas Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Isaac Newton - saw their new vision of the universe as an offshoot of their theology. Newton, in particular, was a religious fanatic whose whole life work can be seen as a search for God. Even the infamous Galileo was a committed Catholic who wanted nothing more than for the Pope to endorse his vision of the heavens."

Sorry for the perpetual citations, but I have a background in law and switched horses for the graphic arts, so my habit of substantiating anything I say remains.

And then there's this—but I realize that anyone can find articles to support their point of view, it's more a matter of finding articles from credible sources:

Scientific Theories Never Die, Not Unless Scientists Choose To Let Them
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/16/scientific-theories-never-die-not-unless-scientists-choose-to-let-them/#41ff61a74ccb

Yes, I agree there is new science emerging every day. I just wonder how long it has taken the new 'truths du jour' to be permitted to emerge. But I'm am not very left brained, so now I'll go back to my original intent with this topic, personal experiences.

Quote from: LarryH
my wife and I experienced a shared dream

Larry, that is a great example. While people that spend a lot of time together will often think the same things at a time or finish each other's sentences out of familiarity, I think dreaming is a whole separate area. Too many specifics in the dream(s) to write them off as coincidence.

This was brought to my attention recently, fits in with the entanglement idea. Could there be other explanations? Of course. But still, this is outside of mainstream occurrences:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/perfectly-healthy-twin-displayed-cancer-12245851


Offline LarryH

  • **
  • Posts: 60
I have had at least one precognitive dream. I dreamed that I was in an area of Laguna Hills, CA not far from my home at the time that in waking life consisted only of empty hills. But in the dream, there was a regional park and an Indian museum on top of a flat-topped hill. I told my fiance at the time about the dream that morning. Two days later, I flew to St. Louis to attend my sister's wedding. I was picked up by my cousin in S. Illinois. I told him that my fiance's father was in a hospital in St. Louis, and that I would like to visit him. He said, "No problem, and by the way, Cahokia Mounds is on the way. Have you ever been there?"

I had not, so we stopped there on the way. We walked up the largest mound, which was a flat-topped hill. As I looked out at the vista from the top, I said, "This looks like Laguna Hills." Then, we went to the Indian Museum at the bottom of the mound.

It really did not even occur to me at the time that my dream was precognitive - a regional park that looked like Laguna Hills with a flat-topped hill and an Indian museum - until two days later when I was with my brother. He described a dream that he had the night before, after which I said, "I also had an interesting dream the other morning...", and then my jaw dropped as I realized the precognitive nature of the dream.

Offline Joelr

  • **
  • Posts: 69
Quote from: Deb


That's because back then the church was science. The church controlled what could be studied and theories could not contradict the beliefs taught by the Christian church. The word 'heretic' used even today in the medical sciences appears to remain from this mindset.

http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/intro/histo-frame.html:

"In popular mythology, the 'scientific revolution' of the seventeenth century is commonly said to mark a fundamental break between science and religion. But nothing could be further from the truth. Almost all the great pioneers and founders of the new science were religious men who wanted a science that would harmonize with their faith. All three founders of the new heliocentric cosmology - Nicholas Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, and Isaac Newton - saw their new vision of the universe as an offshoot of their theology. Newton, in particular, was a religious fanatic whose whole life work can be seen as a search for God. Even the infamous Galileo was a committed Catholic who wanted nothing more than for the Pope to endorse his vision of the heavens."


Scientific Theories Never Die, Not Unless Scientists Choose To Let Them
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/16/scientific-theories-never-die-not-unless-scientists-choose-to-let-them/#41ff61a74ccb

Yes, I agree there is new science emerging every day. I just wonder how long it has taken the new 'truths du jour' to be permitted to emerge. But I'm am not very left brained, so now I'll go back to my original intent with this topic, personal experiences.



It takes a while for new science to be accepted, like the article says sometimes things have to wait until people get old and die and a new generation who isn't indoctrinated in some weird belief can be more open. Some of the anti-science rhetoric is misinformed and focusing on a few times where science held on to old beliefs when they should have moved forward. That will happen with big paradim shifts but most science isn't that groundbreaking and everyone is open to new discoveries. The important thing is eventually science moves forward.

 Newton was a Christian but his contributions were pure science and his century was the beginning of a major split between church and science. Mainly because a new picture of the universe was emerging that was not spoken about in the bible. People could start to see that there was much more to the universe than just scripture. It opened up a whole new world while suggesting scripture might just be a creation of literature made by people of those times.



Recently some new work in the biblical history field is pushing the mythicist theory (Jesus was just a myth - currently scholarship considers Jesus to have been a man). Because it's a hotbed subject there hasn't been a PHd historicity study done on Jesus since 1926 and that work relied heavily on assumptions that were passed down through centuries. The new work is showing the assumptions were based on non-existing evidence. Just like in the 1970s when that Thompson PHd historian showed that Moses and the patriarchs were all mythology based on analysis of the historical mistakes and such. His career went to shit but later his work was accepted.

So we are moving forward, each decade. I obviously don't need to point out the computer revolution. It's literally exploding, in 2000 who would have thought that we would be carrying around supercomputers as phones with touch sensitive screens??
Insane technology, life expansion, stem cell injections are on the market right now - you can heal injuries 10x faster or even non-healing injuries can be healed.
There are children alive now who will live to be 200 years old!

I feel like some of the anti-science rhetoric is definitely misinformed.



 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.
Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
The opposite of black:
Twelve divided by two (word):