My best friend - a soulmate and indeed Wanderer - moved to Australia last year (I'm in the UK).
When living in the UK, we'd meet up a few times a year, contact ETs using Greer's method (which proved successful time and time again - some incredible results, I highly recommend trying this) and playing with ESP. We always had great results with ESP cards.
I got a call from him over Skype the other day, he was with two other like minded people, and we got talking about ESP. He got the cards out that I gave him years back and we decided to give it a pop for fun. While we were all aware that distance is an illusion, it was still incredible fun to do it.
They chose a card and placed it alone on the table (one from the usual five card selection: square, circle, plus, wave and star) and sent it together as a group, myself as the receiver. I would 'hear' the card and pull it from my own selection to show them.
In short - 6 out of 6 correct. Each time roaring cheers, great fun! We wanted to do more but they were a tad tipsy and we were talking/laughing throughout most of the conversation.
The mathematical chances (6 tries, with 5 potential cards):
1/5 x 1/5 x 1/5 x 1/5 x 1/5 x 1/5
(Or 5^6.)
Which equals 1 chance in 15,625.
In terms of probability: 0.000064 (out of 1). Incredibly small odds indeed :¬)
When they chose a wave, one guy was sending the sea, movement and crashing waves, which is exactly what I was perceiving. It was easier to send/receive related concepts rather than the 2D symbol itself. Something with tangible structure.
Myself and my friend have done this many times in person with consistent results, usually 7 or 8 out of 10 correct. Over the years, the accumulated probably is so far over the statistical probability it is mind boggling (we recorded them all).
Why not grab some yourself and try it with someone? Someone you resonate with - the perfect person being someone who you often share thoughts with, i.e. "jinx!".
The setting is vital, the more relaxed and open you are the much higher the chances of getting it right. Any doubt/fear will block it with ridiculous efficacy.
Playing while seeking can be very productive indeed. Have fun with it!
I highly recommend you look into Dean Radin's "the Conscious Universe".
Thanks Parsons. I've watched much of Radin on various programmes, but not read one of his books. I'll grab it!
Here's my story. Decades ago, the community college offered not-for-credit classes in many areas, and I chose one called something like "Discover Your Psychic Abilities." The first session, they paired everybody up and gave each of us an envelope with some cards inside. I had never met my partner before.
The instructor said, "One of you send, the other receive. Receivers close your eyes and pay attention to whatever image or idea pops into your head, then say what it is. Senders say a soft yes or no, without emotion, whether the receiver says something that resembles, maybe only symbolically, or not, the picture on the card you send."
I sent first, and the first card from my envelope was a postcard of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC. He took awhile before saying anything, then said, "All I see is a marble box!" I said, "Yes" and he was very surprised because he thought it was just something random, but the Lincoln Memorial is just that, a square building made of marble.
This went on with both of us and with most of the people, say around 25 or 30, in the room. We all were excited and delighted with our "new" powers.
Cool story =)
Reminds me of when I was living with a friend and he came out of the shower singing a song and he Went; Why the hell am I singing that!? he let it go Went to my laptop to start some music, and there it was! on a playlist with 10000+ songs playing on random, that song was playing on the muted computer =)
(02-05-2014, 08:30 AM)Raz Wrote: [ -> ]Cool story =)
Reminds me of when I was living with a friend and he came out of the shower singing a song and he Went; Why the hell am I singing that!? he let it go Went to my laptop to start some music, and there it was! on a playlist with 10000+ songs playing on random, that song was playing on the muted computer =)
remember the song?
Cool..thanks for sharing. I'll have to try it! I've done something similar with a Christian skeptic who doesn't believe in certain paranormal phenomenon. Love the guy, we just have differing opinions on certain things. I had him draw an image and over the next few days I tried to tune into it. The image had two parts and I guessed it to a T. What's interesting is that I changed my opinion at the last minute and went with another image. It was if his free-will was being preserved or something.
(02-05-2014, 11:50 AM)truesimultaneity Wrote: [ -> ]remember the song?
No idea, this was about 8 years ago, I only remeber that is was not my kind of song (or my friends for that matter), thats why it was so trippy.
I suggested this to the husband the other night and he gave me a look of horror. To prove a point, we had an extra amount of mini mind reads for the rest of the evening, including while I was cooking I was singing a song, and he came and joined me from the other room, whistling the same song. I asked if he had heard me and he said, "not consciously!" Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
(02-05-2014, 08:17 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ]Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
lol, a million dollars if you can successfully do that.
(02-05-2014, 10:03 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 08:17 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ]Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
lol, a million dollars if you can successfully do that.
On it!
(02-05-2014, 10:22 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:03 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 08:17 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ]Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
lol, a million dollars if you can successfully do that.
On it!
Good luck with the project!
(02-05-2014, 10:34 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:22 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:03 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 08:17 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ]Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
lol, a million dollars if you can successfully do that.
On it!
Good luck with the project!
And good luck coming up with the million!
(02-06-2014, 03:01 AM)kycahi Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:34 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:22 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 10:03 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-05-2014, 08:17 PM)Jade Wrote: [ -> ]Rigorous testing yet to be concluded.
lol, a million dollars if you can successfully do that.
On it!
Good luck with the project!
And good luck coming up with the million!
Not to worry.
James Randi has that covered.
The Randi challenge is 'somewhat' biased :¬)
There are many experiments conducted under scientific rigour (accounting/controlling external influences and requiring repeatable results) which conclusively prove ESP; the mind affecting the 'external'. One very simple example is the RNG (random number generator). It essentially flips a coin, by choosing either a 1 or 0, thousands of times a second.
Running this for days/weeks (obviously) yields 50/50 probability. Repeated tests proved that the percentage can be influenced, significantly above the statistical average/mean, by thought.
Having said that, my own ESP card results are all the evidence I need for ESP, external recognition isn't necessary. Whether I could repeat such in a testing environment is another thing, as fear of failure would be hard to manage.
The setting is the key to the mind being unlocked.
No, they don't conclusively prove ESP. The responsibility involves establishing causal relationship with particular test conditions and purported phenomena. This has never been done. Instead, conditions and/or results were either selected by the experimenter afterwords or were ambiguously defined in the first place.
Yes, they do. A mathematically predictable probability can be skewed, repeatably, by intention. It's been done and documented very clearly. How can, considering the maths that it is based upon, you consider that not proof of ESP? Perception and affect external the body.
Have you ever experience it yourself?
I've met skeptics who changed their mind quite quickly upon their own experience of it. Until then, it remained nothing but a theory to them, an abstract concept.
Nope. Has not been proven because the experiments are constructed in a manner which fails to sufficiently define the effect. That is, the effect is so ambiguous that we can not rule out selection or cherry picking. The great thing about science is that it throws out bullshit experiments which do not serve to promote knowledge advancement.
My own personal theory is that we have 3rd density "safeguards" against any sort of definitive proof of what would be considered 4th density abilities. It always seems when people are trying to secure hard evidence that something always goes wrong, malfunctioning electronics is a common one. As long as we've had photographic evidence, we've had the ability to manipulate it. Most "paranormal" experiences are entirely subjective and I believe this is part of what makes 3D fun, and serves to preserve free-will in the same way that it's unlikely to see the Obama confirm ETs anytime soon. "Conclusive proof of ESP" would be an end-game for many who are still working on 3D catalyst here on Earth.
No such safeguards exist. It's simply that there is a failure to elicit what we think the intuition is suggesting. The failure is due to lack of knowledge foundation which can interpret the effect.
With all due respect ZM, your viewpoint is based upon the intellect (knowledge), and not experience (wisdom).
You can argue a viewpoint from an intellectual understanding indefinitely, but it will never shed light to those who have actual experience in the matter. Your own belief system is built only from the words of others and constructs within your intelligence. When you attempt to apply that (project) to those with wisdom, the only thing achieved is the highlighting of your own distortions, which are evidently in this case, the promotion of your own belief system as truth, rather than accepting the experience/truth of another.
In other words:
Quote:The only source of knowledge is experience.
- Albert Einstein
Which
polyhedron am I imagining? I will try to hold the image all day till someone gets it.
____
I feel I should also point out that when Don asks or makes statements that are blatantly or even not obviously incorrect, Ra will correct him if possible within his free will, or say that is unimportant or temporal.
That is to say (and this defies my very being to this day) that there is
an underlying logic which is indisputable; This I am very apprehensive about due to experience but it is not very explicable. And this material evidently leaves small gaps for infinite possibilities which seems relevant/important to me.
edit;
Quote:82.5 Questioner: Does Ra have any knowledge of the number of previous octaves; and if so, how many?
Ra: I am Ra. As far as we are aware we are in an infinite creation. There is no counting.
(02-07-2014, 11:40 AM)primordial abyss Wrote: [ -> ]Which polyhedron am I imagining? I will try to hold the image all day till someone gets it.
____
I feel I should also point out that when Don asks or makes statements that are blatantly or even not obviously incorrect, Ra will correct him if possible within his free will, or say that is unimportant or temporal.
That is to say (and this defies my very being to this day) that there is an underlying logic which is indisputable; This I am very apprehensive about due to experience but it is not very explicable. And this material evidently leaves small gaps for infinite possibilities which seems relevant/important to me.
edit;Quote:82.5 Questioner: Does Ra have any knowledge of the number of previous octaves; and if so, how many?
Ra: I am Ra. As far as we are aware we are in an infinite creation. There is no counting.
a regular tetrahedron?
please try again
Way to ruin a perfectly valid experiment
actually the answer is the dual of the tetrahedron
(02-07-2014, 06:24 AM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]With all due respect ZM, your viewpoint is based upon the intellect (knowledge), and not experience (wisdom).
With all due respect Nam, experience *is* knowledge, whereas intellect is a faculty. Redefining terms will get you nowhere fast. "Wisdom" is also experience, just relatively more refined.
When you say I don't have experience to make my claims on this matter, what do you actually think you mean? Do you mean I haven't read the current research on the subject?
That's just syntax. The basis was clear; personal experience over external learning.
No, it's not about reading research, it's about experience. Your skeptical viewpoint is (I would guess) because you've not experienced it. Those who have experienced it do not need to read anything about it, and do not need external sources to prove or validate it for them.
Do you consider the mechanics behind Ra telepathically sending information to humans different from human to human?
(02-09-2014, 02:54 PM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]That's just syntax. The basis was clear; personal experience over external learning.
No, it's not about reading research, it's about experience. Your skeptical viewpoint is (I would guess) because you've not experienced it. Those who have experienced it do not need to read anything about it, and do not need external sources to prove or validate it for them.
Do you consider the mechanics behind Ra telepathically sending information to humans different from human to human?
Well I have experienced it, yet you still went head first with your projections. I wonder why?
zenmaster Wrote:Nope. Has not been proven because the experiments are constructed in a manner which fails to sufficiently define the effect[/u]. That is, the effect is so ambiguous that we can not rule out selection or cherry picking. The great thing about science is that it throws out bullshit experiments which do not serve to promote knowledge advancement.
You act as an authority on the subject. That kind of attitude is consistent with skeptics without experience.
Stating that being able to consistently skew repeatable, mathematical results as not being proof (and instead labelling them in a derogatory manner) especially considering your high intelligence, seemed more argumentative than considered. The tests were conducted using strict protocols, just as any other scientific experiment. Is science not based on repeatable, controllable results?
Why do you think that testing the effect of ESP us both "bullshit" and in no way helpful to evolution?
(02-09-2014, 06:15 PM)Namaste Wrote: [ -> ]zenmaster Wrote:Nope. Has not been proven because the experiments are constructed in a manner which fails to sufficiently define the effect[/u]. That is, the effect is so ambiguous that we can not rule out selection or cherry picking. The great thing about science is that it throws out bullshit experiments which do not serve to promote knowledge advancement.
You act as an authority on the subject. That kind of attitude is consistent with skeptics without experience.
Stating that being able to consistently skew repeatable, mathematical results as not being proof (and instead labelling them in a derogatory manner) especially considering your high intelligence, seemed more argumentative than considered. The tests were conducted using strict protocols, just as any other scientific experiment. Is science not based on repeatable, controllable results?
Why do you think that testing the effect of ESP us both "bullshit" and in no way helpful to evolution?
Never said that about *testing* and that's a rather silly interpretation if I may say so. Your hangups on the subject are evident. Actual knowledge advancement is adequately accommodated by scientific protocol. The interpretation of evidence submitted so far has not been particularly compelling nor enlightening on the subject - the evidence is just not available *period*. This is a simple matter of fact if you ever bothered to study the subject. There is a rather huge gulf of value between in the application of rational, unbiased evaluation involved in scientific study and mere anecdotes. It's no coincidence that knowledge advancement always requires actual effort, not flighty notions and personal wishes.
Why is that ESP and other phenomena have yet to be proven? If these things exist (which I believe they do) how come it has been so hard to provide proof of their existence? These phenomana seem to occur rather frequently, yet all the tests done on them have yet to conclusively provide evidence for them. Anyone know why?