| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> so i come back and.. | Start A New Topic | CLOSED |
| Post Info | TOPIC: so i come back and.. |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 707 | RE: so i come back and.. i described them but was to vague and i never refused im not going to try to convince you anymore i know its real and thats all that matters |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 706 | RE: so i come back and.. also i have done this over the internet plenty of times with people i have never met look at the video (remote viewing 3) |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 706 | RE: RE: so i come back and.. comments |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 703 | RE: so i come back and.. Talk is easy. You say you have done it over the Internet many times yet when I test you you fail. And you expect me to believe you. Grow up. Get real. Talk, Talk, talk, talk, that is all you and the other nutters are good for. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 701 | RE: so i come back and.. why do you have to |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 701 | RE: so i come back and.. take so many posts |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 701 | RE: so i come back and.. to say so little? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 700 | RE: so i come back and.. Is it yet another example of your stupidity? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 699 | RE: so i come back and.. or do you get a kick out of typing the numbers in the little box? |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 694 | RE: so i come back and.. how about you read that link smartguy thats your excuse!thats how you debunk you pull bull out of your ass get a clue man its obvious your in denial and will never change your views |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 28, 2007 Views: 690 | RE: so i come back and.. Telepathy is a pretty strange idea. According to Dean Radin, author of The Conscious Universe, scientific evidence for its existence has been accruing for decades. So do we follow the evidence and, at the very least, provisionally grant the possibility that telepathy is real, or do we simply banish it as being too weird? While the former is the scientific approach, the latter appears to be the favored response of skeptics. As any ESP or 7th sense researcher knows, the only way to scientifically demonstrate telepathy is through statistics. When I asked Randi if its true that he refuses to accept statistical evidence in his famous million dollar contest, not only did he deny this charge, but after a skeptic protested that statistics can be bent any old way to prove whatever you want, Randi informed him that statistics is a branch of mathematics. While he would insist on checking the findings with his own statistician, this would only be to ensure that the math was done correctly. Two days later, Richard Dawkins said he was worried that Randi would eventually have to pay up. Dr. Dawkins had just delivered a truly fine lecture - the high point of the conference, in fact - and Randi had joined the famed author onstage for a public chat. About the million dollar prize, I would be worried if I were you because of the fact that we have perinormal possibilities. Dawkins had just introduced this neologism during his talk. An alleged phenomenon is perinormal (from the Greek peri, in the vicinity of) if it seems impossible but which, in contrast to the paranormal, turns out to be a 100% natural, skeptic-approved phenomenon. Electromagnetic fields, for instance, were once perinormal but eventually came to be recognized as real. The question, then, is which phenomena currently dismissed by skeptics as paranormal are actually perinormal. I mean, what if somebody-what if there really is a perinormal phenomenon which is then embraced within science and will become normal, but at present is classified conventionally as paranormal? Randi agreed he might have to pay up someday. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 29, 2007 Views: 686 | RE: RE: so i come back and.. So with so many crackpots, like yourself, claiming to have paranormal powers, how come he hasn't ALREADY paid out and how come it has NEVER been demonstrated? What is your answer to that??????? Your stupidity is astounding. |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 29, 2007 Views: 680 | RE: so i come back and.. ok keith no matter what you say there is evidence for its existance and science admits that now so dont comment until your actually informed on the subject yeah the physicist and professors and psychologist who support are all crackpots and you know everything rite what a joke |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Nov 29, 2007 Views: 674 | RE: so i come back and.. So the the 'physicist and professors and psychologist' have 'evidence for its existance'. That's amazing. Just two questions then: 1) Where is this 'evidence'? 20 If there is 'proof' from all these clever renowned people how come it is still regarded as a myth? You are dumb beyond belief. You see a crackpot site on the Internet that says it is real so as far as you are concerned it must be. Duh! Show us the proof then. If there were any the world would all know about it. You do understand what 'evidence' means? If there were any evidence then it would be a fact instead of a school boy myth and we would not be arguing about it, can't you see that? You do talk nonsense. |
| Posted By: cj Posted On: Nov 29, 2007 Views: 668 | RE: RE: so i come back and.. ok keith then how about you give me some research proving its nothing but a myth ????u cant cuz its not and while your at it give me a explanation for dean radins work hes a nut 2 rite you crack me up keith http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4482243720228695882&q=dean+radin &total=23&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2 keith can you honestly say this man does not have a point/why dont you look at it like me theres no definitive evidence for esp but theres something interesting at work so bring it on and lets see whats up rite? |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 ] Next Page -> |