Telekinesis

Pottsey · 29 Jun 2007 at 15:41

“Why are people quick to dismiss this? For all we know it could be possible as the mind is a very powerful thing.“
People don’t believe it, as after all these years there’s no evidence. If it’s real it should be very easy to prove. No one has ever managed to prove its real which more then likely means it’s not.

Kreeeee · 29 Jun 2007 at 15:43

Radiation said:
Yeah this is one phenomena which i believe has quite some reality to it and could be explained one day by science, often its the family or twin connection that seems to be the key, probably via some sort of entanglement with mirror neurons or something, perhaps structures in their brains are so similar that a type of communication via a resonance effect is made, we know that the basic magnetic energies that flow though everything transmit vibrations so its not in the realms of impossibility, obviously its highly unlikely to be radio frequencies as we know them but perhaps they do so in a more obscure or alternative dimensional route that they travel?

Entanglement certainly seems like a plausable explanation.

Noxis · 29 Jun 2007 at 15:59

Where's Yoda? Need him we do.

sanaxe1 · 29 Jun 2007 at 16:14

could very well be possible as physically we are all connected to everything in the universe.

Dolph · 29 Jun 2007 at 16:27

Benjarghmin said:
Form a decent theory with evidence, analysis and explanation and you'll be believed. Otherwise, you won't. Simple.

What if a situation doesn't follow cause and effect rules reliably? Could you test it scientifically then? Or would you just dismiss it out of hand?

Perywinkle · 29 Jun 2007 at 16:52

Surfer · 29 Jun 2007 at 16:55

some people are thinking about telepathy not telekinesis

........

YEP

Hawk Tuah · 29 Jun 2007 at 17:03

Anyone who convinces themselves that they can do telekinesis is deluded, or a con artist.

iCraig · 29 Jun 2007 at 17:29

It's a load of bloody rubbish. :rolleyes:

*punches himself in the face*

:eek:

sunama · 30 Jun 2007 at 02:06

This thread has provided me with much comedy.

Simmz said:
Anyone practise any form of telekinesis?

Does anyone else have any experiance with this, or anything they would like to share?

Dogoid said:
ya, i can make my peen bigger with the power of my mind , and a mag

The above had me in fits of laughter and I can confirm that I am also able to perform this feat.

Then we had the following:

Alex_6n2 said:
Which book and where from? Sounds interesting

Simmz said:
the art of Telekinesis Vol: I

Picked it up from Waterstones in oxford street.

dmpoole said:
Vol 2 tells you its all bull.

Brilliant.

Personally, I think its all a load of nonsense. However, I would love for the original poster to put up some video footage of him bending spoons. Until he does that, I find it difficult to believe that he can do this. Sorry man.

Nebzor · 30 Jun 2007 at 02:09

Dolph said:
What if a situation doesn't follow cause and effect rules reliably? Could you test it scientifically then? Or would you just dismiss it out of hand?

Since when did you need a standard pattern including cause and effect to gather evidence to form a believable case?

Shoseki · 30 Jun 2007 at 02:09

If I could move things with the power of my mind... the world would be MINE!

1) Unhooked bra straps PING!
2) Internal mechanisms of ATM machines... free money!

and most importantly of all...

VENDING MACHINES ARE MY PLAYGROUNDS! Salty snacks all around...

In other words, stop talking rubbish

dafloppyone · 30 Jun 2007 at 02:11

Simmz said:
Anyone practise any form of telekinesis?

I'm not to sure on the "moving things with your mind", but I do believe you can do strange things.

I DO MANY STRANGE THINGS.. I like to look at naked pictures......OF MYSELF BECAUSE IM SOOO SEXYY
http://www.alanjohns.fsnet.co.uk/goldmember/fat-*******.jpg
GIMME A KISS

Dolph · 30 Jun 2007 at 07:54

Benjarghmin said:
Since when did you need a standard pattern including cause and effect to gather evidence to form a believable case?

If you want to use the scientific method, you need something reliably repeatable. Remember many people here believe that science provides truth, and therefore if science can't predict it, they won't believe it to be real or possible.

Nebzor · 30 Jun 2007 at 07:56

Dolph said:
If you want to use the scientific method, you need something reliably repeatable. Remember many people here believe that science provides truth, and therefore if science can't predict it, they won't believe it to be real or possible.

You don't need something reliably repeatable to form a half-decent explanation. Where's the reliable repeatability of the Big Bang? :confused:

All I'm saying is that in all the time people have claimed telekinesis exists, not once has someone tried to come up with a logical and rational explanation with some grounds in modern science.

Dolph · 30 Jun 2007 at 08:08

Benjarghmin said:
You don't need something reliably repeatable to form a half-decent explanation. Where's the reliable repeatability of the Big Bang?

That's why the big bang is firmly in the 'origin sciences' category, where standards of proof are much lower. It's also worth noting that the big bang describes what could have happened, not necessarily what did

If something can be tested in the here and now, then you won't get away with the standards of proof the big bang can get away with.

All I'm saying is that in all the time people have claimed telekinesis exists, not once has someone tried to come up with a logical and rational explanation with some grounds in modern science.

Indeed they have, and you're right, they haven't. There have been interesting experiments with shaolin monks and chi, but that's not the same thing and they certainly aren't understood (and are frequently dismissed by those who want to be skeptics and will construct their experiments/proof levels to reflect that).

The question is does the fact that no-one has yet come up with a logical and rational explaination based in science mean that something cannot be true? I can give you a list of experiences that happened in our old house over the three years we lived there that defied logical and rational explaination based in science, yet they still occurred...

Nebzor · 30 Jun 2007 at 08:32

The Big Bang sentence simply proves my point. You don't need cold hard repeatable evidence to come up with a decent explanation for something.

And I've not said if something cannot be proved it doesn't exist. You can't prove many things currently believed by the general public. I'm simply commenting you will not get the mass public to accept that telekinesis exists without some form of evidential proof and a decent theory.

Dave · 30 Jun 2007 at 09:41

flat-6 said:
I have the power to kill a yak, from 500 yards away. With mind bullets.

Wow, that's long range. JB can only do it from 200 yards, according to his song

Radiation · 30 Jun 2007 at 12:06

If its true and if even one person can do it repeatedly with no silly excuses and needs in a controlled environment then science would have to accept the fact its true and science would probably have no problem with that as truth matters, but the fact is theres never been anyone with the ability as far as we know, so believing in something no one can make use of is pointless, on a slightly similar but different note, its like aliens may exist and you could see all the videos of flying craft but until you can actually get something out of it more than belief that its real or fake then whats it good for?

THMRK · 30 Jun 2007 at 12:49

In regards to ESP it has been shown, under scientific conditions at the PEAR in Princeton. The PEAR team found that humans could alter the behavior of random number producing machines very slightly, changing about 2 or 3 flips out of 10,000. Now that's a very small amount of change, yes. But it's statistically significant none the less.

Obviously the real debates lies in if it can be tested under scientific conditions. Many people show signs of ESP when in stressful situations. Obviously this is something that can't be tested in calm conditions in a lab.

Also, to quote the wiki on ESP:

Critics have also argued that the very large number of trials which must be conducted to obtain statistically significant results constitutes a problem for verifying the legitimacy of ESP. However, other areas of science, such as the medical field, rely heavily on this method of data collection. For example, the statistical indications of the positive effect of aspirin on the heart are less than many ESP results, yet their existence is considered well-evidenced.[16]

.

I'm not saying that I think ESP exists. I personally have never seen or any kind of example of it. But I certainly think it needs more research.