# Psychic thread



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

... do you believe? why? why not? 

personally, i do. there's way more to this existance (imo) than what we can percieve with our six senses (i include the sense of balance, hence, the sixth sense.) so, that being said, who's to say that psychic phenomena is fake? seems mighty arrogant to say that there is no such thing with what we have available to us at this point in history (we haven't researched everything there is to know about the cosmos and biology.) 

granted, it makes me lol heartily when i see fakes like Sylvia Browne getting caught faking it or Uri Gellar being totally pwned by James Randi. it also fills me with joy when i see a "Sy-kick" get their ass handed to them with rational thought and observation.

but, that being said, i'm not going to say that i believe there is no such thing... because i don't know and i am not going to say that there is or is not because of that. kinda arrogant to say otherwise imo.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

No, because they're all cons out to make a quick buck. 

If there really were psychics, then you'd EVENTUALLY see someone decent enough to use it for something other than making money/getting famous.


----------



## Cain (Apr 18, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> No, because they're all cons out to make a quick buck.
> 
> If there really were psychics, then you'd EVENTUALLY see someone decent enough to use it for something other than making money/getting famous.


 
THIS. 
I think most of all that psychic stuff is bullcrap.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> No, because they're all cons out to make a quick buck.
> 
> If there really were psychics, then you'd EVENTUALLY see someone decent enough to use it for something other than making money/getting famous.


 
good point... and really, it kinda makes me think of one of the phrases taught to me by my teacher (witchcraft, not psychic stuffs) in that if they use their abilities for money, the money will soon control them.

though, gonna say it. because the charlatans and fakes are in the media making fools of themselves doesn't mean that there aren't any legit ones... but then again, this goes back to the whole "i don't know everything about the universe so i can't say for certain" bit.


----------



## Tabasco (Apr 18, 2011)

Supernatural phenomena? To an extent. 

The types of crazy, wishy-washy bats you normally see professing themselves as psychics? Lolno.


----------



## jeff (Apr 18, 2011)

they dont exist


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 18, 2011)

No, because there is not enough evidence to support it.



			
				Redregon said:
			
		

> personally, i do. there's way more to this existance (imo) than what we  can percieve with our six senses (i include the sense of balance, hence,  the sixth sense.) so, that being said, who's to say that psychic  phenomena is fake? seems mighty arrogant to say that there is no such  thing with what we have available to us at this point in history (we  haven't researched everything there is to know about the cosmos and  biology.)



There might be more than we can perceive but that doesn't mean that there are psychic phenomena. People are pretty much the same in what they can perceive. There's no reason to think that there are people who can read minds or see the future. That sort of thing is not supported by evidence (or at the best it is weak support) and doesn't fit into everything else that we know. There's a big difference between saying that it can't exist at all and saying that at our present time there is no reason to think that it exists.


----------



## Tycho (Apr 18, 2011)

I'm pickin' up good vibrations~

whoops, sorry, that was my cellphone

psychics are bunk until scientifically proven.  Just like God and Sasquatch.


----------



## Lemoncholic (Apr 18, 2011)

No I don't believe. My mum loves these things and has been to a few of these old bats. The things they've said about me are silly. Get married to a beautiful woman? Suffer if my parents split? Go into a career with a briefcase and earn lots of money?

You failed, I'm gay, my sister cried and I was apathetic and I'm doing creative media in college and doing it badly >.<


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> good point...


 
Should've seen that one coming.

zing


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2011)

relevant


----------



## Lobar (Apr 18, 2011)

Believe in what you have evidence for.  Any belief worth having must survive doubt.


----------



## Unsilenced (Apr 18, 2011)

Last time you heard "Major disaster averted to to psychic! Reliable sources confirm that without psychic intervention, nobody would have know that the earthquake would happen!"

Right. 

Now when was the last time you heard "This one psychic guy predicted something that came true! (Can't be reliably reproduce in laboratory conditions)" 

Yeah there's shit we don't understand. 

Yeah there's evidence of forces not yet known to science. 

No it is not the work of Casper the fucking ghost. 

No these forces do not manifest themselves in the entrails of animals, the scattering of bones, the palms of your hands, or a pack of cards.


----------



## Daisy La Liebre (Apr 18, 2011)

The Men Who Stare At Goats is a pretty good movie...


----------



## Jw (Apr 18, 2011)

If they were psychics, they'd realize advertising their "skills" to me would be a waste of time and leave me alone. But they don't. No matter how many of your damned advertisements you leave under my windshield wiper blades.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 18, 2011)

Jared said:


> The Men Who Stare At Goats is a pretty good movie...


 
Great movie.


----------



## Lobar (Apr 18, 2011)

Jared said:


> The Men Who Stare At Goats is a pretty good movie...


 
An awesome movie, but a work of comedic fiction.


----------



## Dreaming (Apr 18, 2011)

Eh, I don't believe in all that stuff. Though i've not even given it a try yet, don't really want to do so.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 18, 2011)

This one time I was talking to a guy who knew a guy whose brother correctly predicted 4 lottery numbers after 26 attempts


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Jw said:


> If they were psychics, they'd realize advertising their "skills" to me would be a waste of time and leave me alone. But they don't. No matter how many of your damned advertisements you leave under my windshield wiper blades.


 
maybe the real ones _are _realizing it and leave you alone...


----------



## buni (Apr 18, 2011)

Tycho said:


> psychics are bunk until scientifically proven.  Just like God and Sasquatch.



I realize that I'm no Hofstadter, so forgive me the cheap paraphrase, but in any formal system of logic of sufficient complexity, there will always be unprovable truths and undeniable falsehoods. That is, there will be statements which are true which cannot be derived from any axiom or set of axioms within the system, and there will be statements which are false which cannot be proven conclusively to be so. This is not a flaw, _per se_, so much as it's an inherent property of systemic complexity. Things will fall through the cracks.

That said, science has a few tricks to patch these holes. Falsifiability is a first good pass, but it only gets us as far as saying "nothing we can't prove false can be proven true." That, however, only covers the unprovable truths, leaving a lot of "untrue-but-undeniable" statements left over. The Null Hypothesis sort of plugs the other half, but formulating base assumptions isn't itself a rigorous process.

Personally, I doubt the reality of psychic phenomena, but I also recognize that there's no actual way to prove it that it doesn't. I try to reserve the word "bunk" for things that I can actually disprove, as distinct from that list of phenomena for which no proof one way or the other can be made. If I know something is false, I can assert it. If the best I can do is say "nobody's demonstrated it conclusively yet," then we're still in the realm of maybe. Vanishingly small odds, to be sure, but not "false."


----------



## Captain Howdy (Apr 18, 2011)

When psychic start performing a useful service for the world, we'll talk. And...humans have more than six senses :v

Sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, tempurature, motion, balance, pain, kinesthetic, and others~


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 18, 2011)

Lastdirewolf said:


> And...humans have more than six senses :v


 
Yup. Detecting heat, sense of balance, sensing strong electric currents, etc. 

I love little technicalities about "general knowledge".


----------



## Xenke (Apr 18, 2011)

I can detect when people are nearby. I can feel it in my skin.

But I am not psychic, I can just pick up on a body's electricity. I got it out of necessity, I absolutely hate being touched or snuck up on.


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

I _hear_ people's energies, if that makes sense. Like if I'm in a room alone, I "hear" when someone's energy is approaching the room and reaching for the door.

I hate to be touched or hugged, even by someone I trust, so I'm able to "hear" when someone's reaching toward me or just coming up behind me.

EDIT: I'm not psychic, however. :| I don't claim to be, either, though I do have Deja Vu quite a bit.

EDIT EDIT: And I just saw Xenke's post above mine. Hah.


----------



## Xenke (Apr 18, 2011)

Xenke said:


> I can detect when people are nearby. I can feel it in my skin.
> 
> But I am not psychic, I can just pick up on a body's electricity. I got it out of necessity, I absolutely hate being touched or snuck up on.


 


Gaz said:


> I _hear_ people's energies, if that makes sense. Like if I'm in a room alone, I "hear" when someone's energy is approaching the room and reaching for the door.
> 
> I hate to be touched or hugged, even by someone I trust, so I'm able to "hear" when someone's reaching toward me or just coming up behind me.


 
Gaz, we are like the same person. Let's grow old together and sit on opposite sides of a room for our whole lives.


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Gaz, we are like the same person. Let's grow old together and sit on opposite sides of a room for our whole lives.


My thoughts exactly, Xenke.


----------



## Unsilenced (Apr 18, 2011)

Random fact: People can tell when you're looking at them. If you don't want someone to notice you, keep them in the corner of your eye.


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

Unsilenced said:


> Random fact: People can tell when you're looking at them. If you don't want someone to notice you, keep them in the corner of your eye.


Is this a proven fact? Cuz I stare at people all the time, they don't even notice. Then again, I'm good at staying invisible (not literally but you know what I mean).


----------



## Cain (Apr 18, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Gaz, we are like the same person. Let's grow old together and sit on opposite sides of a room for our whole lives.


 
To the two quotes you have, (i can do this too) I think this may be our 6th sense o_o :V

Naw, i'm pretty sure you get it from usually being alone, secluded.


----------



## Ad Hoc (Apr 18, 2011)

I don't believe in psychic abilities. I do think that human instinct and physical sensory perception is greater than we tend to give it credit for. I think our unconscious mind is constantly interpreting small details about our surrounding and predicting their outcomes, sending warnings to us if it predicts danger, but we tend to ignore it, or rationalize it away because our conscious brain isn't picking up those subtle environmental signals. When we don't ignore it, however, it can turn out that the unconscious mind was right, which can have the appearance of being clairvoyance or something. (Alternatively, when we do ignore it, it can turn out that the unconscious mind was still right and we get in a bit of trouble for it.) 

I'll give an example. A friend of mine and I once went to a dog park, and we were having a really great time with it. About an hour into it, though, we both started feeling really uncomfortable and uneasy for no real reason at all. Even though we couldn't pin it on anything, the feeling wouldn't go away, so we decided to leave. When we came back a few days later, we found out that not ten minutes after we left, one of the unruly dogs at the park had latched onto another dog's throat and nearly killed it. I could say that was clairvoyance, but what I really think happened is that we saw or heard the aggressive dog, maybe even smelled some kind of aggression-linked pheromone, and picked up on something about it that was too subtle for the conscious mind to notice, but just obvious enough for the unconscious mind to flag as dangerous. Or, maybe we didn't notice the aggressive dog at all, but our own dogs did, and we were picking up on the subtle signs of their anxiety/tension. Whatever caused it, we and a few others trusted the feeling and left--others didn't trust it, or maybe didn't get it (too far away from the stimuli, talking n their cellphones, etc.,), and one of them nearly lost a dog for it. 

Or, maybe it's just a complete coincidence. I don't think so, though. You hear survivors talk about those particular actions that they did "just because of a feeling" all the time. Many of them claim it was guidance from God or a guardian angel or clairvoyance or some other supernatural thing, but I think that's a discredit to our evolutionary instinct, to the massive brain inside our skulls, to our sometimes surprisingly sharp senses. I really do feel that these are instances of us intuitively reacting to these tiny, otherwise unnoticeable stimuli. There's a wonderful book on the subject, Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker. The author is well respected on issues of self-defense and security, and has actually worked on security for high-level government officials.


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

Jagged Edge said:


> Naw, i'm pretty sure you get it from usually being alone, secluded.


More like out of fear of someone touching me. I seriously _hate_ to be touched, whether it's a tap on the shoulder or a hug. I just don't like the feeling.


----------



## Jw (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> maybe the real ones _are _realizing it and leave you alone...


 
Or maybe they're all real and just know it will fucking anger me. Those tits.


----------



## Unsilenced (Apr 18, 2011)

Gaz said:


> Is this a proven fact? Cuz I stare at people all the time, they don't even notice. Then again, I'm good at staying invisible (not literally but you know what I mean).


 I'm sure it's more complex than that, depending on what causes the phenomenon, but it's been observed by assassins and private investigators and such that looking directly at your target tends to tip them off.


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

Unsilenced said:


> I'm sure it's more complex than that, depending on what causes the phenomenon, but it's been observed by assassins and private investigators and such that looking directly at your target tends to tip them off.


Oh, I see. That's interesting...I might have to test that theory by stalking one of my friends. :V


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Lastdirewolf said:


> When psychic start performing a useful service for the world, we'll talk. And...humans have more than six senses :v
> 
> Sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, tempurature, motion, balance, pain, kinesthetic, and others~


 
wouldn't temperatiure, pain and kinesthetic be considered "touch" since they use the same mechanism to transfer information?



Jagged Edge said:


> To the two quotes you have, (i can do this too) I think this may be our 6th sense o_o :V
> 
> Naw, i'm pretty sure you get it from usually being alone, secluded.



if they're talking about what i think it is, i would personally consider this under the sense of touch.


----------



## Lobar (Apr 18, 2011)

Unsilenced said:


> I'm sure it's more complex than that, depending on what causes the phenomenon, but it's been observed by assassins and private investigators and such that looking directly at your target tends to tip them off.


 
p<0.05 in a double-blind study or it doesn't exist


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Lobar said:


> p<0.05 in a double-blind study or it doesn't exist


 
fairly easy to create your own experiment... go to mall with clipboard... sit on bench... stare at people... mark down if they notice or not. repeat roughly 500-10,000 times for proper statistical results.

or if you're a "true believer" sit on mall bench... stare at people... do it until one person notices and conclude as a success.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

WOW ZEKE I DIDNT EVEN DO ANYTHING
ALL I SAID WAS THAT I DONT BELIEVE IN PSYCHICS
god damn its like you follow me around to cockblock me from posting all day long


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> WOW ZEKE I DIDNT EVEN DO ANYTHING
> ALL I SAID WAS THAT I DONT BELIEVE IN PSYCHICS
> god damn its like you follow me around to cockblock me from posting all day long


 
Behave or Behead.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Behave or Behead.


 I am though. All I said was that I don't believe in psychics


----------



## Cain (Apr 18, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Behave or Behead.


 
Off with his head! xD

Anyways, to Gaz, I guess hating being touched (that's some sort of phobia i think) makes your brain/body more aware to this.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> I am though. All I said was that I don't believe in psychics


 
That's all that you had to say. :V


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> That's all that you had to say. :V


 
That's what I did say, I don't see reason to delete the comment? :S


----------



## Captain Howdy (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> wouldn't temperatiure, pain and kinesthetic be considered "touch" since they use the same mechanism to transfer information?





Well kinesthetic is your awareness of the parts of your body, it's often tested by touch, but even just standing there - Most people know where there limbs are when they can't see them. That's..the sense being used, being able to sense them without touch. 

Pain and temperature are senses of themselves, though can be lumped in with touch.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> WOW ZEKE I DIDNT EVEN DO ANYTHING
> ALL I SAID WAS THAT I DONT BELIEVE IN PSYCHICS
> god damn its like you follow me around to cockblock me from posting all day long


 
please leave your personal drama out of this thread.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> personal drama


I've gained braindamage from this post.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> That's what I did say, I don't see reason to delete the comment? :S


 
Honestly, all you had to say is "I don't believe in psychics" instead of shitposting.
Don't complain, at least you didn't get an infraction.

Now back to our regular scheduled topic. :V


----------



## Cain (Apr 18, 2011)

Well scientists did say we only use 15% of our brains...Maybe the other 85% or less operates that hidden 6th sense. (Maybe others too xD)


----------



## Monster. (Apr 18, 2011)

Jagged Edge said:


> Anyways, to Gaz, I guess hating being touched (that's some sort of phobia i think) makes your brain/body more aware to this.


Most likely. It's a mild phobia of mine, but phobias are still quite powerful.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

Jagged Edge said:


> Well scientists did say we only use 15% of our brains...Maybe the other 85% or less operates that hidden 6th sense. (Maybe others too xD)


 Ehhh I heard that fact was false though? idk. & I don't believe in psychics. I think it's just like magicians but tellin you what you wanna hear.


----------



## Unsilenced (Apr 18, 2011)

Lobar said:


> p<0.05 in a double-blind study or it doesn't exist


 
It's one of those annoying things that doesn't like to be disproved. Fairly easy to prove/disprove the "just looking at them" thing, but then someone who believed in spirits and whatnot would say that it has to be with hostile intent or some such, and a more scientific person might suggest that stalking someone while looking directly at them causes some other change like heavier footsteps or altered breathing in the stalker. Such signs might not appear in someone who knows they are in an experiment. 

Sitting in a mall and staring at people could fail because there are factors other than the stalker and the target, namely everyone else in the mall. If you're clearly stalking someone, other people will react, and thus any reaction on the part of the target could be attributed to the reaction of the crowd. 

Basically, there's very little you could do to convince most people to change their mind on an issue like this...

...

Short of, like, you know, mounting hidden cameras on a bunch of stalkers and assassins and monitoring their actions. 

...

BLOODSPORT TIME! 

FOR SCIENCE!


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2011)

Jagged Edge said:


> Well scientists did say we only use 15% of our brains...Maybe the other 85% or less operates that hidden 6th sense. (Maybe others too xD)


 
The fact that people keep propagating this myth makes me want to stab out their eyeballs with forks


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Jagged Edge said:


> Well scientists did say we only use 15% of our brains...Maybe the other 85% or less operates that hidden 6th sense. (Maybe others too xD)


 
i don't buy that one, personally... though, yeah... we use only 15% of our brains at any given moment, it's not like we're only using that 15% for all of the things that we do through our life. i.e. you are using 15% of your brain right now but if you're sitting, you're not utilizing the CNS to make your legs move... just as an example.

though, how much of our brains get used throughout our lifetime? i don't know... so, maybe there is some small bit of validity to that, but to be fair, i don't think that we have 85% of our grey matter being inert... evolution kinda doesn't work that way afaik.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Aden said:


> The fact that people keep propagating this myth makes me want to stab out their eyeballs with forks


 Do you remember Ibuuyk's theory on why he is smarter than everyone and how it involved that myth? And that we all think it's false because we don't have a high enough IQ to understand the theory?


----------



## Icky (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> fairly easy to create your own experiment... go to mall with clipboard... sit on bench... stare at people... mark down if they notice or not. repeat roughly 500-10,000 times for proper statistical results.
> 
> or if you're a "true believer" sit on mall bench... stare at people... do it until one person notices and conclude as a success.


 
So if your "target" turns to look at the creepy guy with a clipboard staring at people, you would consider that a valid conclusion?

lrn2science


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 18, 2011)

Icky said:


> So if your "target" turns to look at the creepy guy with a clipboard staring at people, you would consider that a valid conclusion?
> 
> lrn2science


it was saracasm, broseph


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> Do you remember Ibuuyk's theory on why he is smarter than everyone and how it involved that myth? And that we all think it's false because we don't have a high enough IQ to understand the theory?


 
oh man do I ever 

|3


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Aden said:


> oh man do I ever
> 
> |3


I miss that thread, as frustrating as it was. :C


----------



## Azure (Apr 18, 2011)

Hey guys, psychic here. I am currently remote viewing every last one of you using the bathroom at the same time.


----------



## Icky (Apr 18, 2011)

Clayton said:


> it was saracasm, broseph


 
I haven't been impressed with the user's mental abilities in the past, so I assumed he was serious.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Hey guys, psychic here. I am currently remote viewing every last one of you using the bathroom at the same time.


 Is it bad that I would be more impressed at the fact that EVERYONE was using the bathroom at the same time than you remote viewing them?


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Hey guys, psychic here. I am currently remote viewing every last one of you using the bathroom at the same time.


 
oh good... so, you're going to be the bathroom conierge then. 

use your mad telekinetic powers to get me a roll of toilet paper then. chop chop.


----------



## Azure (Apr 18, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> Is it bad that I would be more impressed at the fact that EVERYONE was using the bathroom at the same time than you remote viewing them?


 Don't question my powers.I compelled them to do so.



Redregon said:


> oh good... so, you're going to be the bathroom conierge then.
> 
> use your mad telekinetic powers to get me a roll of toilet paper then. chop chop.


 Hey, that'll be a dollar buddy. Cologne? Black and Mild? Mid grade molly? The bathroom steward at the club has all the makings of a fabu evening. Hot towel?


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Don't question my powers.I compelled them to do so.


 Oddest superpower ever.


----------



## Azure (Apr 18, 2011)

Got to the bathroom, you.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Azure said:


> Got to the bathroom, you.


 must....resist...


----------



## Redregon (Apr 18, 2011)

Icky said:


> I haven't been impressed with the user's mental abilities in the past, so I assumed he was serious.


 
... are you still butthurt over being served and shot down in that previous thread that you feel the need to insult me like this? nice to know who the petty people are here.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Apr 18, 2011)

Aden said:


> The fact that people keep propagating this myth makes me want to stab out their eyeballs with forks


 
Remember when it used to be 10% a few years ago? Now it's 15%. Maybe in a century the myth will work it's way up to 50% or somewhere near the actual amount.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ... are you still butthurt over being served and shot down in that previous thread that you feel the need to insult me like this? nice to know who the petty people are here.


 Yeah, no. 

I disagree with all parts of your post.


----------



## Commiecomrade (Apr 18, 2011)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Remember when it used to be 10% a few years ago? Now it's 15%. Maybe in a century the myth will work it's way up to 50% or somewhere near the actual amount.


 
Or maybe the entire thing is just a goddamned lie, like it has already been proven to be.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2011)

Commiecomrade said:


> Or maybe the entire thing is just a goddamned lie, like it has already been proven to be.


 Ummm, commie. He said specifically "the myth". He knows it's a myth. 

He's just remarking about how the rumored amount of brain usage grew.


----------



## Wreth (Apr 19, 2011)

I don't believe, though there are probably other ways of telling what someone is thinking, like picking up on subtle hints. Simply being able to read minds is impossible.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ... are you still butthurt over being served



You say this to anyone you have ever disagreed with, and yet always imagine yourself as some kind of argumentative overlord who wins every argument in a brilliant display of logic and wit, when instead it's usually people giving up after yet another "what the fuck are you saying?" response of yours.

Feel free to claim I'm another one of those. It hasn't worked before and it wont work now.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

LizardKing said:


> You say this to anyone you have ever disagreed with, and yet always imagine yourself as some kind of argumentative overlord who wins every argument in a brilliant display of logic and wit, when instead it's usually people giving up after yet another "what the fuck are you saying?" response of yours.
> 
> Feel free to claim I'm another one of those. It hasn't worked before and it wont work now.


 
ummm... no... when i've lost discussions before, i've admitted it. problem is, in these arguments, it always ends up with a statement which is completely ignored... when i call them on ignoring it, they decide to go "well, you're just an idiot anyway" which doesn't really do anything and if someone feels that the only response they have is to insult someone, that's where i consider them not even bothering or being able to reply... so, in a roundabout way, that's them admitting defeat.

basically, there are only three people whom i've said this kinda thing to... you, clayton and icky... and in each case they've turned into idiotic, lulzy bitches trying to shitpost in other threads or whiny "imma block you" cowards. so, in a sense, if this is you're attempt to try and make it sound like you're taking the high road, just stop and keep the thread on the main topic. though, if you really feel the need to call out someone online as being an idiot, i really feel a deep wellspring of pity for you since you must be incredibly pathetic in real life. 

now, go away (though i know you won't because i know your type too well... you'll either launch into some lulzy little bitchfit or call your online cadre of "friends" to defend your honour... which is incredibly ironic because one has to show that they are even capable of honourable behavior for their honour to be defended.)


----------



## Itakirie (Apr 19, 2011)

No. I don't believe in them. Although if you know what you're doing, it is possible to somewhat read people's minds, not exactly what they're thinking but enough to know what they could be thinking. And like Gaz, I don't have a phobia of being touched, but I can sense when someone is coming into a room, not really by "hearing" it but more like feeling it, I don't know, I just know, lol. I can also tell when someone is staring at me, and I can also "see" people's motions while my eyes are closed. It's freaking weird.

Although, if you apply "psychic" in a scientific sense, like with hormones and everything, then that's really, really, really likely to be true.


----------



## Paul'o'fox (Apr 19, 2011)

It's nothing to do with brain percentage, it's all part of the soul, chakras and all that religious shit.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ummm... no... when i've lost discussions before, i've admitted it. problem is, in these arguments, it always ends up with a statement which is completely ignored... when i call them on ignoring it, they decide to go "well, you're just an idiot anyway" which doesn't really do anything and if someone feels that the only response they have is to insult someone, that's where i consider them not even bothering or being able to reply... so, in a roundabout way, that's them admitting defeat.
> 
> basically, there are only three people whom i've said this kinda thing to... you, clayton and icky... and in each case they've turned into idiotic, lulzy bitches trying to shitpost in other threads or whiny "imma block you" cowards. so, in a sense, if this is you're attempt to try and make it sound like you're taking the high road, just stop and keep the thread on the main topic. though, if you really feel the need to call out someone online as being an idiot, i really feel a deep wellspring of pity for you since you must be incredibly pathetic in real life.
> 
> now, go away (though i know you won't because i know your type too well... you'll either launch into some lulzy little bitchfit or call your online cadre of "friends" to defend your honour... which is incredibly ironic because one has to show that they are even capable of honourable behavior for their honour to be defended.)


 I'm pretty sure none of this is right, yet again.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> clayton and icky... and in each case they've turned into idiotic, lulzy bitches trying to shitpost in other threads


Hello Redragon  I would like to ask you for the definition of "shitposting", as I do not know what it means. How does one avoid doing something when they don't know what they're supposed to avoid doing?
That's like telling a baby "don't touch the cat", yet it doesn't know what a cat is, and then it gets yelled at for touching the cat.
I have looked around on FAF but I have not found a definition for shitposting, so I was wondering if you could be so kind as to give it to me.  
The only "definition" I found on here was this: _*Stop shitposting.*
You know who you are. If it happens again, Iâ€™m not just giving an infraction. This applies to anyone else who thought it was funny and wants to give it a try now, too._
Yet that doesn't explain it at all. Shitposting could be eating a pomegranate or even tying my shoe.


Let me know when you find out, thanks!


----------



## Enwon (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> so, in a sense, if this is you're attempt to try and make it sound like you're taking the high road, just stop and keep the thread on the main topic. though, if you really feel the need to call out someone online as being an idiot, i really feel a deep wellspring of pity for you since you must be incredibly pathetic in real life.


Uhmm...



Redregon said:


> ... are you still butthurt over being served and shot down in that previous thread that you feel the need to insult me like this? nice to know who the petty people are here.


Okay.

That was a fun little bit of drama.  Now lets go back to the main point of this thread.

I don't believe that psychic ability exists.  There are some people who are incredibly perceptive and skilled at figuring out what a person is thinking, but that is likely because they observe the other person's body language, the tone of their voice, and other subtle cues closely.  It's very difficult to predict the future, and those that do so successfully usually do so through knowing as many of the facts and the processes behind what's going on.  Or, if the person whose future got predicted knows what the prediction is, it may end up a self fulfilling prophecy.  Telepathy is impossible.  Telekinetic ability is impossible.  Psychic ability is impossible.

And no, humans use every portion of their brains.


----------



## yiffytimesnews (Apr 19, 2011)

I know a few real psychics, and they keep it hidden. Why, if everyone knew a lot of their own friends would think they are crazy. From my understanding of what they really can do is quite limited. And no predicting lottery numbers isn't one of them. Knowing stuff maybe at best, but I never come across one of them knew when those events were going to happen.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

i'm not yet convinced we use ALL of our brains... or at least all of it in any active capacity but then again there are functions in the brain that work without deliberate, conscious thought... if that weren't the case, i doubt we'd have made it to where we are as a species.



Clayton said:


> deliberate ignorance...


 
http://bit.ly/gz9vqM


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:
			
		

> i'm not yet convinced we use ALL of our brains...



You fine with having part of your brain removed then? Though if you aren't convinced people use all of their brain perhaps it's true that you don't. As a general rule though people use every bit of their brain. If you damage or remove parts of the brain it has repercussions, lost memories, changed personalities, splits in conciousness etc.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> You fine with having part of your brain removed then? Though if you aren't convinced people use all of their brain perhaps it's true that you don't. As a general rule though people use every bit of their brain. If you damage or remove parts of the brain it has repercussions, lost memories, changed personalities, splits in conciousness etc.


 
if you're going to quote, don't selectively quote out of context. though to clarify just in case, when i say i don't believe we use all of our brain in an active capacity, i mean such that we don't use it all at once and at command.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:
			
		

> if you're going to quote, don't selectively quote out of context.  though to clarify just in case, when i say i don't believe we use all  of our brain in an active capacity, i mean such that we don't use it all  at once and at command.



I quoted just that part because that was a terrible starting point and the rest of your post didn't do much to help you. The entire subsequent sentence says something completely different which again means your starting words were poorly chosen. In any case I don't think you'll find anyone saying we use all of our brain at one time and consciously. Certain areas of the brain do certain things so the way you use your brain will be very different when running around and when reading a book. If you're going to recognise that then don't write poorly worded sentences like "i'm not yet convinced we use ALL of our brains..." which you know are patently false.


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> http://bit.ly/gz9vqM


Will you give me an example of shitposting?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shitpost
I think posts about the government are worthless and stupid, so therefore all government posts are shitposting?


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> I quoted just that part because that was a terrible starting point and the rest of your post didn't do much to help you. The entire subsequent sentence says something completely different which again means your starting words were poorly chosen. In any case I don't think you'll find anyone saying we use all of our brain at one time and consciously. Certain areas of the brain do certain things so the way you use your brain will be very different when running around and when reading a book. If you're going to recognise that then don't write poorly worded sentences like "i'm not yet convinced we use ALL of our brains..." which you know are patently false.


 
and now you're niggling on the details. *facepalms* but then again, why does this not surprise me?

case in point, if you need or want clarity on something, then ask for clarity. turning it around in such a way is a rather dumb tactic and really doesn't earn you any points for being smrt or whatever...

still, original point stands. if you're going to quote someone, don't selectively quote out of context. doing otherwise kinda makes you look like Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2011)

C'mon guys, play nice. Does Sir Infract-alot need to come in to teach a lesson?


----------



## Volkodav (Apr 19, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> C'mon guys, play nice. Does Sir Infract-alot need to come in to teach a lesson?


 I just wanna know what the FAF definition of shitposting is, and what constitutes as shitposting. Would you be so kind as to note me?


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2011)

Clayton said:


> I just wanna know what the FAF definition of shitposting is, and what constitutes as shitposting. Would you be so kind as to note me?


 

I will after my 'rounds.


----------



## Spatel (Apr 19, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> C'mon guys, play nice. Does Sir Infract-alot need to come in to teach a lesson?


 Did I guess the number you were thinking? :V


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Did I guess the number you were thinking? :V


 
The spirits tell me that I may infract a user to the point of them having their posts moderated, can you guess who?


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

yiffytimesnews said:


> I know a few real psychics, and they keep it hidden. Why, if everyone knew a lot of their own friends would think they are crazy. From my understanding of what they really can do is quite limited. And no predicting lottery numbers isn't one of them. Knowing stuff maybe at best, but I never come across one of them knew when those events were going to happen.


 
i'd be interested to know how they know they're psychic and how they have verified their ability. are we talking testing themselves in (as best they can towards) a blind or double blind study kinda thing or just "hey, i had a dream this would happen... i must be psychic?"


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> i'd be interested to know how they know they're psychic and how they have verified their ability. are we talking testing themselves in (as best they can towards) a blind or double blind study kinda thing or just "hey, i had a dream this would happen... i must be psychic?"


 
The "Deja'vu" syndrome?
The anaomaly of a memory or something that the brain elicits or somethingother. Wouldn't call that precognition.


----------



## VoidBat (Apr 19, 2011)

I believe it's a great idea to fork in some cash. 
Just like a fortune teller they have their tricks, they could most certainly make you believe night was day and day was night, it's quite entertaining.

But that's all it is, entertainment.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2011)

Smugmeister said:


> I believe it's a great idea to fork in some cash.
> Just like a fortune teller they have their tricks, they could most certainly make you believe night was day and day was night, it's quite entertaining.
> 
> But that's all it is, entertainment.


 
Cold readings anyone?


----------



## Trichloromethane (Apr 19, 2011)

Has anyone won James Randi's prize yet?
Didn't think so.

Confirmation bias lies at the heart of every psychic claim and as stated before it would have been monetized if it actually existed. 
It would only take one psychic to cause the entire stock exchange to go out the window.

PS . Can anyone think of a plausible mechanism for psychic powers that can be tested. Saying it's beyond our realm of understanding and is metaphysical is the equivalent of saying "God did it".


----------



## Aden (Apr 19, 2011)

Trichloromethane said:


> It would only take one psychic to cause the entire stock exchange to go out the window.


 
In the interest of hypothetical discussion, what if that's the reason why no psychics have come forward? Perhaps if there were a few, they could have agreed that economic stability for millions of people should come before ludicrous personal financial gain


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Trichloromethane said:


> PS . Can anyone think of a plausible mechanism for psychic powers that can be tested. Saying it's beyond our realm of understanding and is metaphysical is the equivalent of saying "God did it".


 
... some theorize that empathy (as in, sensing emotions) is the subconscious and what's known as "mirror neurons" working in tandem...
... some theorize that sensing another being without sight or hearing is akin to an oversensitive sense of touch compounded with the bioelectric field that people give off...
... some theorize that precognition is the subconscious observing and calculating chains of events based off of logic, cause and effect and all that... 

saying something "doesn't exist" because it hasn't been proven doesn't mean it just doesn't exist, it just means that it hasn't been proven yet. 

but, were you expecting some woo-woo answer?


----------



## Trichloromethane (Apr 19, 2011)

Aden said:


> In the interest of hypothetical discussion, what if that's the reason why no psychics have come forward? Perhaps if there were a few, they could have agreed that economic stability for millions of people should come before ludicrous personal financial gain



That's an awesome idea for a short story. *Makes mental note*




Redregon said:


> ... some theorize that empathy (as in, sensing emotions) is the subconscious and what's known as "mirror neurons" working in tandem...
> ... some theorize that sensing another being without sight or hearing is akin to an oversensitive sense of touch compounded with the bioelectric field that people give off...
> ... some theorize that precognition is the subconscious observing and calculating chains of events based off of logic, cause and effect and all that...



1. Plausible
2. That could be possible over a short range I suppose but I'm not familiar enough with the human body to comment on the strength of a bioelectric field or the mechanism for detection by another person.
3. So being precog is intuition and hence is dependent on external information and can be flawed? How is that any different from conscious planning in reliability and accuracy? 

I think a definition of "psychic" is in order.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Trichloromethane said:


> 1. Plausible
> 2. That could be possible over a short range I suppose but I'm not familiar enough with the human body to comment on the strength of a bioelectric field or the mechanism for detection by another person.
> 3. So being precog is intuition and hence is dependent on external information and can be flawed? How is that any different from conscious planning in reliability and accuracy?
> 
> I think a definition of "psychic" is in order.


 
well, to answer 3, i did say subconscious. so, i guess given that definition,. it could be considered basically the same aside from the fact that one is consciously determined and the other isn't. *shrugs* 

as for point 2, well, you are right in that it doesn't take into account things like long distance. but then again, i'll never say that we know everything there is to know about ourselves and our universe so, maybe there's a better explanation as to why "psychics" are able to do the things they (claim) to be able to do yet we haven't yet discovered it?

though, there's one "ability" that i have yet to find a rational and mundane/scientific explanation for... remote viewing (under proper controls.)


----------



## FoxPhantom (Apr 19, 2011)

Yes and No.

Yes: I don't really believe in coincidences, since there is a time and place for everything, but that is just my point of view. I know someone who knows what someone else is doing from a very far distance. (She just knows and I have no clue why). 

No:  Because trying to prove someone you are a psychic will either fool people and yourself or do it for a quick buck.

For example: I can see auras. (Now would you believe that?) First off, I can't see auras with just my naked eye, it's impossible for me while look ridicules to stare at someone saying any random colors. I can see a few colors with a flash of light at a point for a second or two, but I can't see a variety of the rainbow.  (Just one or three colors at a time) It only proves I can unfocus my eyes long enough to see it, but after the time limit it vanishes.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

FoxPhantom said:


> Yes and No.
> 
> Yes: I don't really believe in coincidences, since there is a time and place for everything, but that is just my point of view. I know someone who knows what someone else is doing from a very far distance. (She just knows and I have no clue why).
> 
> ...


 
hate to sound like a hardened skeptic, but are you sure that you're actually seeing auras or just experiencing retinal fatigue?


----------



## FoxPhantom (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> hate to sound like a hardened skeptic, but are you sure that you're actually seeing auras or just experiencing retinal fatigue?


 
I don't think I am. (I am not a psychic) The eyes sees everything that is here to be real, but does not prove if auras are real or not. ( let me clear what I said: It's all in your head if you believe). 
No, my eyes are just picking up possible colors from the back ground, or from the persons skin. also it can hurt if having the eyes unfocused for a longer period of time, since it can put a strain. ( I am failing at trying to put what I know into words, since this is just a part of it).


----------



## Azure (Apr 19, 2011)

Honestly, I don't believe a word of any of it, and until somebody passes that dude's test, it's all bullshit to me, every last "theory" aside. We aren't special, we can't move things with our mind or predict the future. Prove me wrong.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Azure said:


> Honestly, I don't believe a word of any of it, and until somebody passes that dude's test, it's all bullshit to me, every last "theory" aside. We aren't special, we can't move things with our mind or predict the future. Prove me wrong.


 
that's the problem though... though people can't prove you wrong, you can't be proven right either. yeah, there's an absense of evidence but an absense of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist at all.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> that's the problem though... though people can't prove you wrong, you can't be proven right either. yeah, there's an absense of evidence but an absense of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist at all.


 They can't be proven right because it's a sham or they're deceiving themselves...


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> They can't be proven right because it's a sham or they're deceiving themselves...


 
really? okay... prove it. studies would be nice as opposed to blogs and other anecdotal evidence (since anecdotal evidence isn't even worth the electricity it takes to transmit the data over the wires.)

to be fair, however, i'd ask the same of someone claiming that psychic phenomena exists.


----------



## Azure (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> that's the problem though... though people can't prove you wrong, you can't be proven right either. yeah, there's an absense of evidence but an absense of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist at all.


 Ockhams Razor, etc, etc. I don't have to prove negatives. You have to prove that it exists in ANY testable way shape or form. It's a quaint idea, but I toss it right in with all the other crap without evidence, like, Religion, or Thor, or Islam :V. Every last TV show that has anything to do with psychic phenomena are bust. Show me non-anecdotal evidence of psychic activity.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> that's the problem though... though people can't prove you wrong



Actually, it would be incredibly easy to prove him wrong; just do either of the two things he stated, in a controlled environment, proven beyond all doubt. Done. Having someone prove they can move things with their mind would be trivial. As yet though, no one has.



Redregon said:


> yeah, there's an absense of evidence but an absense of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist at all.



Indeed, and I doubt most would disagree with you there. If someone magically "discovers" how to do it, or is born with some great gift or whatever, then great, but don't expect much faith in anything that has no plausible explanation.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 19, 2011)

Redregon said:


> really? okay... prove it. studies would be nice as opposed to blogs and other anecdotal evidence


 You mean...studies that psychic activity DOESN'T exist and anecdotal evidence of psychic ability not existing? 

I don't think you understand how things work. It's impossible to prove that there's no chance of anyone being psychic ever, just like there's no way to prove that unicorns/leprechauns/etc don't exist. However, the fact that there's has been no one that has been _scientifically proven_ to have psychic power, then we can be pretty damn sure that it's not real.


----------



## Tycho (Apr 19, 2011)

Azure said:


> It's a quaint idea, but I toss it right in with all the other crap without evidence, like, Religion, or *Thor*, or Islam :V.


 
Pretty sure that scary motherfucker exists.  :V

The name of the Norse religion you're looking for = Asatru.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 19, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> You mean...studies that psychic activity DOESN'T exist and anecdotal evidence of psychic ability not existing?
> 
> I don't think you understand how things work. It's impossible to prove that there's no chance of anyone being psychic ever, just like there's no way to prove that unicorns/leprechauns/etc don't exist. However, the fact that there's has been no one that has been _scientifically proven_ to have psychic power, then we can be pretty damn sure that it's not real.



well, you asserted it as the gods honest truth... so, back up your statements.

now, if you were to say something like "I don't believe... " or "i think that..." then i wouldn't be able to poke holes in your argument. remember, there's a big difference between a system of beliefs and a system of truths (basically, philosophy vs science.)


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 20, 2011)

Redregon said:
			
		

> that's the problem though... though people can't prove you wrong,  you can't be proven right either. yeah, there's an absense of evidence  but an absense of something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist at all.



An absence of evidence means that it's generally irresponsible to believe it. And it's not that no one has ever tried to prove psychich phenomena, they have many times. Every time it's been tested there has been no evidential support for it.

Even a 9-year-old can show you that psychic powers have no support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Rosa


----------



## Redregon (Apr 20, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> An absence of evidence means that it's generally irresponsible to believe it. And it's not that no one has ever tried to prove psychich phenomena, they have many times. Every time it's been tested there has been no evidential support for it.
> 
> Even a 9-year-old can show you that psychic powers have no support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Rosa


 
debunking one aspect of some woo-woo like "ability" doesn't debunk ALL aspects of woo-woo "abilities"

to put it in a furry-lingo related discussion... just because one or two people in the fandom are into raping animals, does that mean that ALL people in the fandom are into raping animals? similar logic applies.


----------



## ArgonTheFox (Apr 20, 2011)

I do belive it is possible to predict the future but I think all that crystal ball shit people put on to make a bit of cash isnt real.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 20, 2011)

Redregon said:
			
		

> debunking one aspect of some woo-woo like "ability" doesn't debunk ALL aspects of woo-woo "abilities"



I was just using it as a representation of all the studies that don't find any support for any psychic powers.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 20, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> I was just using it as a representation of all the studies that don't find any support for any psychic powers.


 
no, it is hardly representative. if you want to have proper representation, you have to show BOTH sides and as many studies as you can. showing one case where a (rather dumb) power is debunked isn't indicative of anything other than that one power being debunked.

granted, yeah, logical and scientific study can and often does disprove most claims of psychic abilities but there are some that show some rather interesting concepts and "spooky results."

-primary perception (plants feeling pain) though "busted" by the popular show Mythbusters, they did find some "spooky results" in some of the aspects of that experiment (watch the entire episode, not just clips.)
-random number generation and "intention" changing the results to skew to one side or the other (the Institute of Noetic Sciences has been undergoing this one for years to collate statistical results for scientific study.)
-the split-second precognitive responses to shocking images studies (both the military and the Institute of Noetic Sciences have studied this one.)

EDIT:: interestingly enough, the whole "therapeutic touch" thing i have to wonder about... is this about just ptuting one's hands near the patient or actually touching them? if actually touching them, this does have scientific and psychological validity to it as to why it would offer some level of relief to the patient. i mean, think about it... why do babies like to be cuddled? why do animals like to be petted? it's akin to a sign of affection and the number of neuro chemicals that are released when one feels "loved" or is being given affectionate touch has already been proven.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 20, 2011)

Redregon said:


> no, it is hardly representative. if you want to have proper representation, you have to show BOTH sides and as many studies as you can. showing one case where a (rather dumb) power is debunked isn't indicative of anything other than that one power being debunked. debunking one aspect of some woo-woo like "ability" doesn't debunk ALL aspects of woo-woo "abilities"
> 
> to put it in a furry-lingo related discussion... just because one or two people in the fandom are into raping animals, does that mean that ALL people in the fandom are into raping animals? similar logic applies.


 
You have to keep in mind, this isn't just one or two nutjobs from the fringe of a sensible field here. The people debunked tend to be relatively well respected in their particular field of woo until said debunking, like Uri Geller or the guys on the "Other Side" shows. After so many psychics and mediums turn out to be frauds, people with basic pattern recognition tend to catch on, and rightfully say "Yeah, they're probably all charlatans.".

And then there's the earlier point people were trying to beat you over the head with- Until a particular claim is validated, (Which is to say it's not shown to work or shown not to work), it's only reasonable to say it's not true. Psychics fall under that.

Edit-
http://lh6.ggpht.com/bspcn.com/SMgCW-YK0sI/AAAAAAAAC90/yO8bgvZj7ok/s800/2843905157_3abe047f44.jpg
:V


----------



## Conker (Apr 20, 2011)

This thread reminds me of this one autistic girl in a class of mine; she claimed that she could see auras and could tell what people were feeling by their "energy." 

Clearly bullshit, because she thinks I'm some awesome friend of hers when in reality she's annoying as all hell, and I don't like spending time with her.

Anecdotal evidence, but isn't all psychic evidence anecdotal bullshit?

I don't buy any of it. It's like those "edgy" emo twats who think they are psychic vampires or some bullshit. It's all just as stupid.


----------



## Aden (Apr 20, 2011)

Conker said:


> Clearly bullshit, because she thinks I'm some awesome friend of hers when in reality she's annoying as all hell, and I don't like spending time with her.


 
maybe it's true but she just thinks it's funny to annoy you~


----------



## lupinealchemist (Apr 20, 2011)

I've had my share of strange occurrences and deja vu, but I agree that psychics who sell their services are full of crap.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Apr 21, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ... do you believe? why? why not?
> 
> personally, i do.
> 
> ...



You say you believe in it, yet you go on to say that you basically can't say it either exists or it doesn't. You're confusing.


----------



## Redregon (Apr 21, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> You say you believe in it, yet you go on to say that you basically can't say it either exists or it doesn't. You're confusing.


 
all i can really say that makes me believe is anecdotal but i know that's not worth anything but the anecdote. if you want statistics and figures, people could go back and forth for ages and what will be proven? i don't know (that's why i like analyzing this kinda thing.) 

... though i will say that people like Sylvia Browne give me the willies.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 24, 2011)

There was a respectable paper a while ago that suggested precognition might be real but when people tried to do it again it didn't work. Seems like that's another psychic power we can cross off the list.
http://www.badscience.net/2011/04/i-foresee-that-nobody-will-do-anything-about-this-problem/


----------



## Redregon (Apr 24, 2011)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> There was a respectable paper a while ago that suggested precognition might be real but when people tried to do it again it didn't work. Seems like that's another psychic power we can cross off the list.
> http://www.badscience.net/2011/04/i-foresee-that-nobody-will-do-anything-about-this-problem/


 
umm, that thread isn't more about debunking a bad precognition than it is about whining about the current models of how publishing of papers occours. but, you'd know that if you read it and didn't go "hmm, gotta find something to prove my point"

for instance, what are the controls of said experiment? how many times was it replicated? is this an accurate test to determine wether precognition does or does not exist in any absolute sense of the term?

p.s. what did your teachers say about quoting blogs as sources of information?

this is why you should not debate, rakuen... you're not good at it and you really ought to stop.


----------



## Duality Jack (Apr 24, 2011)

I know how to do what they do. It involves reading people and using general concepts, and narrowing down and staying general enough to seem right and being skilled at evading the wrongs. 

Shit I got money out of it for a while too.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Apr 24, 2011)

Redregon said:
			
		

> umm, that thread isn't more about debunking a bad precognition  than it is about whining about the current models of how publishing of  papers occours. but, you'd know that if you read it and didn't go "hmm,  gotta find something to prove my point"



I know exactly what it's about but I was pointing out the example that they used. Why do you completely miss the point? It's not there for the publishing (or though that is important), it's there because the only credible support for a psychic phenomena not standing up to being retested. The publishing point is also important because if you hear about something supporting psychics it gets a big reception but no one cares when it is later refuted. Lastly this has nothing to do with finding something to prove a point, just finding something and then using it to prove a point. I wasn't looking for it.



			
				Redregon said:
			
		

> for instance, what are the controls of said experiment? how many times  was it replicated? is this an accurate test to determine wether  precognition does or does not exist in any absolute sense of the term?



No idea. I downloaded the paper when it was released but it's around 60 pages so I never actually read it. I can tell you that it was done acceptably because there was a lot written about it when it was released and everyone seemed happy with the way it was conducted.



			
				Redregon said:
			
		

> p.s. what did your teachers say about quoting blogs as sources of information?



Nothing. In any case it's not just the blog of some anonymous nobody. Goldacre is a well-known science writer and doctor from Oxford University. It's a pretty reliable blog.


----------



## GoldenJackal (Apr 25, 2011)

I'm a skeptical psychic. I ask myself if I am just crazy every day, but I can't disprove the things that I pick up on and experience. :/


----------



## Kyle Necronomicon (Apr 25, 2011)

Yes I do, I dun think most people can actually control it though.


----------



## BlueSnail (Apr 25, 2011)

I don't believe. 
http://www.skepdic.com/psychic.html


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

Our senses are limited, but not because of an unseen psychic dimension we can't comprehense.
There are sounds that I can't hear and sights that I can't see(If they're small or translucent). My sixth sense is basically everything my nerves can't feel. 
Some people hear voices because they have good hearing, some because their mind can't translate matter into reality.

I'm not any sort of magician, psychic, wizard or soccerer. I don't have any special abilities that some of you claim to have. My hearing and eyesight are unrefined. It is hard for me to notice details or pattern. It doesn't prevent my brain from recieving various pieces of information from many kinds of nerves. You'll feel when somebody is near, because of depleted body heat, breath, or maybe even oxygen precentage in the air, I don't know.

Currently, the posters, scientists, and me, throw statements into the air. Unless proven otherwise, or found without supporting evidence, they're generally true. 
There is no reason to say that psychic powers don't exist - but I say that "psychic powers" are just a name we give to natural abilities we developed, and maybe forgot.

Uri Geller is really horrible. I hate how he says in hebrew "××—×ª... ×©×ª×™×.. ×©×œ×•×©!!!" - basically, "One, two, Three..!!!!". That's lame, and obviously his spoons are unrefined.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

if psychic isnt real then how do we explain 2012 and 9/11? there was a guy who said he knew 9/11 would happan


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> if psychic isnt real then how do we explain 2012 and 9/11? there was a guy who said he knew 9/11 would happan


 
Every person can throw a date into the hair and claim that he knew about 9/11.
The incidents that people believe would happen on 2012 did not happen, or did not happen yet, or happened years ago - Let's say, 2056, on the 16th of march, I'll die inside a bus stop by a plastic charge that has been placed in Jerusalem by an opposing group. See, that's realistic, that can happen, but there is no evidence behind it.
Whoever claimed 2012 to happen, ever had any evidence behind him? I'm sure the person has other translucent thoughts and beliefs, that would not seem okay to you, not even once.

You can't see the furture, but there's a probability that our words can become true. My country is on bad relations with Lebanon, for example - I can forecast that there will be expanded aggression in the next ten years. Let's say it does happen, am I a psychic for stating that it will happen? That's just using the brain, or using it incorrectly.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

mayans predicted th e2012 one it wasnt just a guy somewere and the mayans were very advanced people so i think they couldave been right on it


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> mayans predicted th e2012 one it wasnt just a guy somewere and the mayans were very advanced people so i think they couldave been right on it


Being advanced does not essentially mean they can see the furture.
They only made predictions up to their belief, I think. 

Almost like saying that being smart means you're right - not really.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

in my experence people who know a lot can make good predictions at future events so if your as smart as the mayans were then youd be able to make predictions for long times in the future


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> in my experence people who know a lot can make good predictions at future events so if your as smart as the mayans were then youd be able to make predictions for long times in the future


 
Predictions need evidence. The mayans did not have any true evidence, as far as I know.
My prediction, in the upper post, was biased on a viable idea.


> My country is on bad relations with Lebanon, for example - I can forecast that there will be expanded aggression in the next ten years.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

theyr evidence was at the calender ends in 2012 because they predict it was to end at 2012


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> theyr evidence was at the calender ends in 2012 because they predict it was to end at 2012


 
I think you forgot the logic

World ends in 2012 because I said it ends on 2012! Even the calender I made stops at the 2012! - The view of a mayan.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

Satellite One said:


> I think you forgot the logic
> 
> World ends in 2012 because I said it ends on 2012! Even the calender I made stops at the 2012! - The view of a mayan.


 
I  guess but still ... theyd have to have some evidence on the reason why the calendar endes in 2012 its be weird that it does so theyd have to know why they end it ther so going on that i think that theyd know that there was a reason they had so that they knew when they end it and i trust in those


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> I  guess but still ... theyd have to have some evidence on the reason why the calendar endes in 2012 its be weird that it does so theyd have to know why they end it ther so going on that i think that theyd know that there was a reason they had so that they knew when they end it and i trust in those


 
Well, as much as people predicted things that happened, in the past, cases where people predict things that never happened were much more common. I have no reason to believe such predictions. We both have the time until then. Also, aren't the 2012 incidents taking place in 2011?


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

if they're then i guess the mayans wouldave been wrong on their times or we ddnt teranslate the calender right for the prdictions to be on time for what they though so maybe the world ends 2011?


----------



## Mayfurr (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> I  guess but still ... theyd have to have some evidence on the reason why the calendar endes in 2012 its be weird that it does so theyd have to know why they end it ther so going on that i think that theyd know that there was a reason they had so that they knew when they end it and i trust in those


 
Have you ever considered that the Mayans simply couldn't be arsed defining a calendar beyond 2012 at the time, figuring that they'd have plenty of time to update the calendar later?
Just because I haven't planned my holidays twenty years in advance doesn't mean the world's going to end next year...


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

that 2nd bit deosnt make any sence what did it have too do with it?


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 25, 2011)

litso i love you have my babies

they will have awesome hair


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

and _wicked rad_ shoulder parrots


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> and _wicked rad_ shoulder parrots


 those aren't hereditary.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

Jashwa said:


> those aren't hereditary.


 
There go my dreams
What now


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

Litso, the Mayan's didn't predict the world would end on 2012. It was just the end of their calendar cycle, much like New Years is the end of our annual cycle of days, weeks, and months. Much like people do with desk calendars, they just got a new one and moved on.

For more information, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj7pHXlTdWc&feature=related this should be all you need. :V


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

but th diffrence is on our calender it repeats for year on year but the mayan one ends on 2012 and deosnt repeat again it just stops but years dont


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 25, 2011)

> Besides, if the Mayans knew of the future, how come they couldn't survive their demise before the Spanish arrived?



whoa man like what an insightful comment

penn & teller certainly know where the geniuses are


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> but th diffrence is on our calender it repeats for year on year but the mayan one ends on 2012 and deosnt repeat again it just stops but years dont


 
That's like saying the week ends after sunday because there aren't any new days after that. Just so you're aware, the longest (yes, they actually used this) unit of measurement in the mayan calendar is about 61 million years. The 2012 figure is just the last day of a particular given shorter cycle, called a baktun. It's about 400 years long.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

so i guess the batkun has to end somewere and i think that A majoer event could happan on the ending of each of those and the batkun would be defiened by the periadical predicted events


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> so i guess the batkun has to end somewere and i think that A majoer event could happan on the ending of each of those and the batkun would be defiened by the periadical predicted events


 
No? It's just a larger unit of measure, like decade or century or millennium.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

but big things happen on the large units of measure every time if you look back .... so it wondnt be hard to think on that 2012 might have an big event


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> but big things happen on the large units of measure every time if you look back .... so it wondnt be hard to think on that 2012 might have an big event


 
Oh, like what was supposed to happen in the year 2000? Or that nothing really huge happened on the year 1000 ad? Even if you're a christian, Jesus wasn't even supposedly born until after year 0, (between 6-50 AD depending on interpretation).

In fact, they didn't even switch from bc to ad in year 0, that happened later.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

but i gess if the events dont happan on the perfect periodic date then it could happan somewere on around the date like how jesus was said be born not on 0 like you say but mayans were cleverer on date matching with events so they had it right on 2012 but with normal dat times then the event for 2000 could be 12 years off and be on 2012


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> but i gess if the events dont happan on the perfect periodic date then it could happan somewere on around the date like how jesus was said be born not on 0 like you say but mayans were cleverer on date matching with events so they had it right on 2012 but with normal dat times then the event for 2000 could be 12 years off and be on 2012


 
In which case the events aren't really correlated with specific dates to begin with. Either way, it's just people either predicting crap based off the arbitrary calendar systems people have used over the ages, or making excuses after the fact why they failed.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

its the drametic ironey that i like .... ppl everywere are losing confidance on theyr ideas at 2012 ending th world wen allalong its gonna happan anyways...all the sceptics are gon be underprepaered wen it coems but wen it does it dsnt matter how prepared you're because eitherway its all gonna burn .... the onlyw ay that theyl ever lern....


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> its the drametic ironey that i like .... ppl everywere are losing confidance on theyr ideas at 2012 ending th world wen allalong its gonna happan anyways...all the sceptics are gon be underprepaered wen it coems but wen it does it dsnt matter how prepared you're because eitherway its all gonna burn .... the onlyw ay that theyl ever lern....


 
[Citation Needed]


----------



## Aden (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> *its* the *drametic* *ironey* that *i* like .... *ppl* *everywere* are losing *confidance* on *theyr* ideas at 2012 ending *th* world *wen* *allalong* its gonna *happan* anyways...all the *sceptics* are *gon* be *underprepaered* *wen* it *coems* but *wen* it does it *dsnt* matter how prepared you're because *eitherway* *its* all gonna burn .... the *onlyw* *ay* that *theyl* ever *lern*....


 
what the hell, man


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 25, 2011)

Aden said:


> what the hell, man


 
even sylvia browne could tell you..... .
_
you done been trolleded_


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> [Citation Needed]


 
I am Poseidon, god of the sea. And when I am through with this planet, all will know and fear my power.


----------



## Smart_Cookie (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> I am Poseidon, god of the sea. And when I am through with this planet, all will know and fear my power.



Fish, and plankton, and sea greens, and protein from the sea. It's all here. Ready! Fresh as harvest day


----------



## Aden (Apr 25, 2011)

Senzuri Champion said:


> even sylvia browne could tell you..... .
> _
> you done been trolleded_


 
but he didn't have to make it hurt so much :c


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

Mojotech said:


> Fish, and plankton, and sea greens, and protein from the sea. It's all here. Ready! Fresh as harvest day


 
Don't mock meeeeee
I'll shoot you 
I'll shoot you with water pistols

Man I am a shitty god


----------



## Grey Wolverine (Apr 25, 2011)

litso said:


> but th diffrence is on our calender it repeats for year on year but the mayan one ends on 2012 and deosnt repeat again it just stops but years dont


 
Its a circle. It is going to end.


----------



## Teto (Apr 25, 2011)

Grey Wolverine said:


> Its a circle. It is going to end.


 
What's a circle? Stop trolling.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Apr 26, 2011)

litso said:


> What's a circle? Stop trolling.


 
A circle is shape, doesn't resemble an octagon.

What's propulsion? What is nullity? What is infinity? Those are better questions for extracting thought out of people, I believe.
go back to /jp/


----------



## Redregon (Apr 26, 2011)

how does the mayan calendar fall under psychic phenomena?

EDIT:: really, if you look throughout history, if all the doomsayers were right, the world would have ended a thousand times over by now. there's one thing that i have noticed and it's that the people that fully believe in this 2012 ideology is that they tend to be either despondant at the current state of the world or they are depressed in their feelings of helplessness... as such, they latch on to a promise that "things will change" even if it is true or not so that they can feel good about not having the stones to actually go out and do something to change the world that they live in. it's like they all have a quiet desperation and wish for better times but don't have the resources to make it happen or the skills to prepare themselves if their wish actually does come true. that's why a lot of the whole doom and gloom phenomenon usually has people that are of little value to society at large. they are hoping that people will snap out of the "bad ideals" and somehow pull enough weight for the people waiting and wishing to sit back in luxury.

the people that want revolution? most times they don't fully understand what it is that they wish for. they don't understand that the troubles they will have to face during the transition towards the things they want would likely make them wish for death ten times over and when that doesn't happen, regret will eat away any last remaining hope they have.

so, as such, this whole doom and gloom BS that keeps getting tossed around? well, if it happens, it'll happen. it's not like i can stop the planetary allignment or the pole from shifting or the aliens from coming down or smashing another planet into ours... so, why should i worry? why not just accept what will be as what will be and try to live my own life instead of trying to make others change their way of living just to satisfy my own ideals?

sorry... rant over.


----------



## GoldenJackal (Apr 27, 2011)

Satellite One said:


> Our senses are limited, but not because of an unseen psychic dimension we can't comprehense.
> There are sounds that I can't hear and sights that I can't see(If they're small or translucent). My sixth sense is basically everything my nerves can't feel.
> Some people hear voices because they have good hearing, some because their mind can't translate matter into reality.
> 
> ...



This is well thought out and likely closer to the truth than most people would care to postulate. The word "psychic" brings to mind gypsies with crystal balls and comic book characters reading people's minds and force choking each other. What comes to mind for most people when they hear the word psychic isn't all together realistic. However, what would we call these abilities if not psychic abilities? Some psychics use the word "sensitive" to describe their abilities, but most people will just think that they are emotionally skittish.


----------

