| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> A problem with your 'proof' | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: A problem with your 'proof' |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Jul 10, 2006 Views: 694 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' o.- |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 11, 2006 Views: 690 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' This is what I posted...... "Mordak, So, according to your amazing new theory, the human body strips electrons from the atoms of our body and sends these electrons in a wave like manner to the object to be moved. When they arrive they revert to being a particle and cause a magnetic disturbance that moves the object." I am astounded that anyone can believe that the human body can do any of that, and even if it could (lol) that it would have any effect. It's truly amazing what some people will come up with in an attempt to support a belief. And people wonder why I don't engage in long 'intelligent' debates with Tkers!!! |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Jul 11, 2006 Views: 688 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Well, you did say that you consider this site to be a source of entertainment to you. Isn't that a reason in itself to discuss topics with Tkers? Of course, I don't think it would be particularly entertaining for very long either. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 11, 2006 Views: 684 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Well, I was hoping to come to some sort of half way sensible conclusion as opposed to a flight of fantasy. Should have known better.... |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jul 13, 2006 Views: 677 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' A sort of halfway conclusion?! How? You either agree or disagree. It's that simple. Surely there's no middle ground? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 14, 2006 Views: 672 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' So in your world everything is either black or white is it? What I was trying to say was it would be good , if just once, a tker could come up with an argument that could possibly have a scientific explanation. Note 'possibly'. There are of course no facts to support TK, that is why I said it the way I did. |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jul 14, 2006 Views: 668 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Oh I see. No, my world isn't totally black and white, but some things are. "...it would be good , if just once, a tker could come up with an argument that could possibly have a scientific explanation. Note 'possibly'. There are of course no facts to support TK." Yeah that's true it would be nice, but I think it's possible most telekinetics aren't that interested in why or how tk works (if it does). So unless someone like JoeT posts here you probably aren't going to get one. "There are of course no facts to support TK." There is an inherent problem in science, and that is that science tends not to accept evidence that isn't in line with their way of thinking. This is easily shown with a recent example. A couple of years back, a newspaper reported that a scientist researching CJD had discovered the presence of a microbe in large quantities in the brains of people with CJD. He had also discovered this same microbe in large doses in the brains of people with MS, and wondered whether this microbe was actually responsible for causing the two diseases. If that was the case, CJD and MS could probably be cured or at least treated. So he wrote up his findings and submitted them. What happened? Instead of getting more money to fund further research into this interesting discovery, they cut of his grant completely. You'd think a discovery like that would hold the attention of the entire scientific community, wouldn't you? And it isn't the first time that's happened either - look what happened to Galileo. So, part of the reason there are no facts to support tk might be because the scientific community would not/have not accept(ed) them and scientists are not willing to lose their reputations in such a high-risk field of research. It is not a respectable field of research because the very idea is a scientific taboo. Having said that, hat you think of JB Rhine's dice rolling research? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 14, 2006 Views: 665 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' We will have to agree to differ regarding scientific research. I feel certain that if TK could be demonstrated under test conditions any scientist would be happy to publish the findings. A result is a result, whether or not you happen to like it, so if it can be reproduced it will be published. Regarding the rolling dice example the web site does not give any details on exactly how it was carried out, only a very brief outline. I cannot therefore comment on the results one way or the other, I would need to know the exact conditions on how it was carried out. Do you have any further info on it? |
| Posted By: Mike Posted On: Aug 15, 2006 Views: 631 | RE: RE: RE: RE: A problem with your 'proof' How about this IF the brain uses electrical signals then there are electrical conductors through which they flow. Since these signals can be turned on off or varied in magnitude they WILL generate Electromagnetic waves ALL varying electrical signals do - I refer you to the works of people such as Maxwell. Finally after reading many of the threads throughout this site and seeing on at least TWO occasions Keith being proven wrong I notice he does NOT respond afterwards. I think it's a shame he is not able to admit he is wrong when found out he is clearly NOT prepared to change his mind and should therefore NOT consider himself as a scientific authority on any subject. As to who should prove what, a good scientist is one who not only can prove his own theories but also one who attempts to DISPROVE them as well. When he can prove but not disprove then he may lay claim. An example in recent history was 'cold fusion' it was announced before the scientists involved could either reproduce it or refute it. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Aug 15, 2006 Views: 621 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Mike, I am not aware of any occasions where I have been proven wrong, let alone refused to answer. Please enlighten. As for the brain creating electromagnetic waves please show me where you found this information so that I may share it. Thank you. |
| Posted By: Gifted Posted On: Aug 17, 2006 Views: 618 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' My hypothesis on telekinesis is the manipulation of atomic or molecular vibrations (energy), and as such it may pass through the skull and almost anything else. TK is a misunderstood part of a misunderstood universe, but it doesn't mean it isn't possible. Keith, do you really have the audacity to accuse everyone of ever having done TK to be a liar, a fraudalent loser with a thirst for attention? Perhaps you don't have the intellectual capacity to perform or understand TK. You certainly haven't proven that you are competent. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Aug 18, 2006 Views: 616 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' So you think that it requires 'intellectual capacity' to do TK. Amazing. Go to ppsociety and tell me that those that claim to do tk have 'intellectual capacity'. |
| Posted By: Gifted Posted On: Aug 18, 2006 Views: 613 | RE: RE: A problem with your 'proof' I simply mean that you are held back by your own obstinate belief that since you can't see it, it must not be real. And since you haven't experienced TK, I can assume that you would have doubt. That doubt would prevent you from ever experiencing it, even from another person. Doubt destroys the conscious relationship attained with the subconscious and thus hinders, if it doesn't destroy, the innate mental ability to perform TK. Another thing, though extremely off topic. You remind of Mr. Gradgrind from Charles Dickens' classic novel Hard Times. Base your life on what is in from of you and never (fully) consider the possibility that you may be wrong. You attack any ideas that contrast your own, insinuating that the believers of said ideas are incompetent, usually by refusing to give them a reason why their "argument" is silly or off topic. You also pick out anything that convienences you and answer however you want. I.E. You won't respond to everything in this post, as it goes against your idea that TK is not possible to hide, and as YOU can't see it, it must all be a lie. I've already read ppsociety, and I am well aware that they aren't grammatically correct, and it's obvious that some are just stupid as far a intellegence goes. However, most of them seem to have the capacity to make sense and seem to know what they have experienced and are trying to find a way to explain TK, psi energy, or what not. Most TKers, I believe, don't care how it works. They feel it and that's all they care for. Many do want to know, and try just to fail. You have failed at disproving anything. Your psi wheel video is pathetic. You've found one way to move paper: heat. Okay, so heat must be the only way that can be done, according to you. In a similar case, a tilted desk may cause the off center axis and increased pull of gravity on one side of the psi wheel that it may begin to spin. the point is that their are many ways to do something. If you are going accuse TKers of lying, then use more than just three examples, two of them so similar that some may think that they are the same. Try performing the psi wheel test in reverse, without the use of your hands. Stop the wheel from spinning by disapating the heat. Can you, with only the psi wheel, and your mind? Proving it that way might actually bring you some allies who previously believed in TK. It would make you seem more reliable. Most of what I have said was completely off topic, but not because you decided so. Maybe you'll respond to some of it. I know you won't respond to anything you can't think of a viable(by your standards) answer for. Good luck with being less ridiculous. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Aug 18, 2006 Views: 609 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' So what you are saying is this. If a person doubts TK then it will not work. You are not alone in this claim of course, many who believe in TK have said the same. In other words, you should not doubt, you should not be skeptical, you should not question, you should have blind unquestioning faith in TK. And you don't have a problem with that? If everyone were as blind, ignorant and closed mind as you we would be still be living in caves. And you know what's so funny? Tkers accuse me of having a closed mind! The truth is simple. If a thing requires faith before it works then that is all it has. My car will start regardless of whether I have faith in it or not. A fact does not require faith, that is reserved for belief systems. Wise up. Your argument is childish gibberish, a speciality of those who believe in TK. If this post makes you angry zap me with a psi ball. Run along and amuse yourself by spinning a psi wheel, bet it keeps you happy for countless hours on end watching it spin round. Its just the sort of thing that would also amuse and amaze a canary. I think there is a similarity there somewhere..... |
| Posted By: Gifted Posted On: Aug 21, 2006 Views: 605 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' I don't blindly believe in anything. I do my research. I try to debunk my own experiments with TK, but I still believe that it is possible. I simply make sure that the situation I'm practicing TK doesn't call for a draft, rising heat, a jar of a desk. When anything does happen, I attempt to debunk it, keeping in mind the possibility that something other than TK happened. I don't doubt TK, I simply make certain that nothing is happening that I'm not aware of. You're arguments are the pathetic ones, or most of them at least. Your self-righteousness actually allows you to believe you have an important purpose. Preventing the youth from believing in such nonsense? Well, I guess that it is indeed better to have a purpose, however faulty or misguided it may be, let alone unimportant. You exaggerate far too much for your own good. Perhaps your own exaggerations of what TK may actually be have led you to lend yourself to the idiocrity of believing for the sake of believing. |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next Page -> |