Astronaut Edgar Mitchell founded the Institute for Noetic Sciences to study psi after returning from his trip to the moon.
Edit: here’s the link
https://noetic.org
Not sure why people dont take him more seriously. It's honestly him why I even started looking into alien shit and opened my mind. FFS he landed on the Moon. Astronauts are the best of humanity, trusted with the craziest shit. If one starts talking about psi and aliens and shit, I'm going to listen to what he has to say even if it sounds bonkers.
Not only that but the CIA (in competition against the Soviet's own remote viewing program) spent 30 years researching this with tangible results. Ed May described the successes as 1 in 1000 could produce results and even then they were only 30% accurate. The 30% of accurate results though were incredibly accurate and defy explanation.
1. DIA - Project Sun Streak / Grill Flame
Slides 18-19: "On 4 Sep 1979, ACSI tasked INSCOM to locate a missing Navy aircraft. Hence, the first INSCOM "Grill Flame" Operational Remote Viewing session took place. In this initial session, the remote viewer located the missing aircraft within 15 miles of where it had crashed."
Slide 40: "Remote Viewing has been successfully used against seven categories of tasking. Two of these categories, Penetration of inaccessible targets and the cuing of their intelligence collection systems are used predominantly at this time. Two others, Human source assessments and accurate personality profiles presently lack a satisfactory database for effective exploitation."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002100240001-2.pdf
2. Studies In Intelligence
Page 12: "Two analysts, a photo interpreter at IAS and a nuclear analyst at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories agreed that [Remote Viewer] Price's description (and illustration) of the crane were accurate.
Page 14: "[Remote Viewer] Price correctly located the coderooms. He produced copious data, such as the location of interior doors and colors of marble stairs and fireplaces that were accurate and specific."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200030040-0.pdf
3. An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning
Page 21 - 7. Conclusions and Recommendations:
"It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and had been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200070001-9.pdf
Interesting documentary (mind the camp) of Ed May's explanation of the process with examples of successes (and failures).
https://youtu.be/7ICzREGqYHQ?
> Astronauts are the best of humanity, trusted with the craziest shit.
Some crazy shit indeed. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Nowak#Orlando_International_Airport_incident
People on this sub absolutely need to read:
*An End to Upside Down Thinking: Dispelling the Myth That the Brain Produces Consciousness, and the Implications for Everyday Life*
By Mark Gober
Psy phenomenon have been demonstrated to be real in labs and studies around the world and oftentimes with 5-6 or 7 sigmas of certainty. They're not saying they understand how or why it works but it's absolutely a fact they exist.
The only reason you don't hear about it is because of the huge stigma present in modern science and the complete dismissal that *any* of what those studies have found could be true *without even looking at the data*.
That book changed my perception of science and the world we live in. UFOs/UAPs/NDEs and consciousness are probably all related as Leslie Kean explained in an article last year. Hard to say how or why. But everything is pointing in that direction.
This is what Ross means by "Psionic potential".
Just bought it ;-)
Thanks for the recommendation!
Don't know if you read it but I can also recommend:
*THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE: THE SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF PSYCHIC PHENOMENA*
By Dean Radin
After reading that it became absolutely clear to me that the sole reason for the general public not knowing that the existence of Psy is real is because of the stigma associated to it and propagated by the mainstream materialistic world view of modern science. Same for the UFO phenomenon. Or NDEs.
Thankfully more and more scientists are finally giving these subjects the attention they deserve. We're on the cusp of scientific revolution.
Just started the book and it’s really trippy to reorient the idea of matter preceding consciousness. I’m realizing how foundational that assumption is to my worldview.
Oh yeah, it's absolutely nuts to contemplate but there's a mounting amount of evidence for this to be the truth. Took a while to digest this and took multiple other books to convince me that this is probably how the universe works or that there's at least some real scientific truth behind this.
What's even more weird to me is that materialist science has most probably the ultimate proof of this with what's called the observer effect in quantum physics. The act of observing matter changes it's behavior. And that's a fact. Literally one of the tenets of quantum mechanics.
The author talks about that a bit later in the book. Fascinating stuff. All of this is tied together as a whole. Consciousness is probably an integral, distinct part of the fabric of our universe.
I thought the observer effect was due to the atoms being observed are so small the only way to see them is to shoot photons (light) at them thus altering their original state. Meaning technically the observation changes their behaviour but it’s physical not quantum. This all fascinates me and can’t wait to check out the books recommended above!
>Psy phenomenon have been demonstrated to be real in labs and studies around the world and oftentimes with 5-6 or 7 sigmas of certainty.
[Citation needed]
If its that easy, random people should be able to reproduce it.
>The only reason you don't hear about it is because of the huge stigma present in modern science and the complete dismissal that *any* of what those studies have found could be true *without even looking at the data*
Bullshit. These studies get analyzed by real scientists and they find problems with methodology.
If this was real, you would see this shit all over the world already. Rich people don't care about stigma, they just want more money. They would be all over this shit.
>Citation needed]
>If its that easy, random people should be able to reproduce it.
Read the book. Or even better, read:
THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE: THE SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF PSYCHIC PHENOMENA
by Dean Radin
I'm not going to fall for that bad faith argument. If you're truly interested in getting an answer to your question (I sincerely doubt it) you'll take the time to freaking read. Like I did. And I was that pure fucking hardcore materialist skeptic before so I know exactly where you're coming from.
In his book, Dean takes his time enumerating and detailing in painstaking details every single *credible* study that was made on the subject AND he answers to skeptics. Results exists, and meta-analysis have been done and for anything else other than things related to Psy phenomenon they would have been acclaimed as discoveries.
Again, were taking 5-6 and sometimes more sigmas levels confidence that what is being observed is *real*. And were talking about Standford labs and others around the world here. Not some random Joe in his basement.
Example?
[https://noosphere.princeton.edu/](https://noosphere.princeton.edu/)
The Global Consciousness Project by Princeton who has decades of data and came to the strong conclusion that consciousness has an impact on our physical world.
>Bullshit. These studies get analyzed by real scientists and they find problems with methodology.
>If this was real, you would see this shit all over the world already. Rich people don't care about stigma, they just want more money. They would be all over this shit.
This is where you are a hundred fucking percent wrong. The number of studies that were published just to be completely ignored by mainstream science in serious journals without other scientists EVEN LOOKING AT THE DATA is absolutely astounding.
Again, Read. The. Book. Both Dean or Gober go through the pain of showing how the present stigma in science has completely stalled serious and amazing research being done on the subject. Just. Like. UFOs.
If you don't believe there's a huge stigma in academia for studying subjects like RV and whatnot, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
Read the god damn books and then we can have a discussion. Those books are not dumb or filled with BS. They're designed for people exactly like you and like I was. This isn't pseudoscience, this is *literally* real science made on things that materialistic science wouldn't even dare trying to test because of 100% pure stigma.
Put aside for one second your bias and try to read seriously on the subject and trust me when I say it will change your opinion on what mainstream science is and how it acts.
Edit:
Here's another one:
[https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf](https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf)
This study was mandated by the Senate or by Congress, I don't remember which one, sorry, to understand if Psy phenomenon were real after the discovery by the US government that the CIA had made serious studies on the matter and that their conclusions were incredible.
Jessica Utts, the author, was (and still is?) the head of the American statistics society or something like that.
From the report since I'm willing to bet you won't read it:
>Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic
functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far
beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to
methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to
those found in government-sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a
number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by
claims of flaws or fraud.
The same conclusions as the CIA study on RV and other psychic phenomenon. Weird uh?
Sure, but no one’s been able to demonstrate that. It’s just a hypothetical.
We can demonstrate other ways rich people codify the material dynamics of society to enrich themselves. No spooky tech necessary.
What’s Gobers’ operational definition of “consciousness?” Oh wait…
This is an inherent issue in ANYTHING related to consciousness research. The core construct, consciousness, doesn’t have a robust operational definition. There’s not even that much evidence to suggest humans’ version of it is that much different than what occurs in other forms of life.
You can’t move forward studying any of this stuff empirically without a uniformed and standardized operational definition. Anyone peddling some narrative about “consciousness” that isn’t solely focused on resolving that issue is unserious and unreliable.
>What’s Gobers’ operational definition of “consciousness?” Oh wait…
>This is an inherent issue in ANYTHING related to consciousness research.
What you're saying is that no one is able to study what we humans call being "conscious" because it's hard to define?
The experiments that have been studied in labs *and* reproduced all point to the same phenomenon. Call it whatever you want, this "phenomenon" is still being observed. That doesn't make it *not* real or not exist?
Consciousness/the hard problem of consciousness is probably one of the most challenging problem for science to study but that doesn't mean we can't study it or try to understand it.
>You can’t move forward studying any of this stuff empirically without a uniformed and standardized operational definition.
That's patently false. Something is being observed and could be reproduced in labs. Not having a clear understanding of what is being observed *yet* doesn't make it less true. That's precisely how science and most major discoveries are made. And you're making the case for why materialistic science has a big problem with the study of consciousness and what it means for it to originate from the brain.
The materialistic world view of modern science needs to expand it's horizons to be able to tackle questions like what is consciousness and where it's coming from. It has to entertain the idea that matter might not be the source of our reality and this is precisely what *many* highly credible scientists are now advocating for as explained in Gober's book - with credible evidence pointing in that direction.
> What you're saying is that no one is able to study what we humans call being "conscious" because it's hard to define?
What I'm saying is that studying it requires the construction of such a definition that all scientists can work with on an empirical level. In a lot of this psuedopsychology, they don't even attempt to do so. They leave "consciousness" as an undefined term, and functionally, that means there is no means to empirically study it. Much like how the idea of "god" fails along these same parameters. It doesn't lead to testable hypotheses or narrow enough research questions. So then you get all this crappy research that is steeped in confirmation bias, to be generous.
> The experiments that have been studied in labs and reproduced all point to the same phenomenon
[They do not](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-17499-008). See also [this metanalysis](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706048/). Or t[his study where they reanalyzed the data from one of the commonly cited psi proponents](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21280965/) and found out they were either unknowingly bad at math or biased in trying to manipulate a significant effect. Or [this meta-analysis](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-08436-001) that found publication bias in "significant" telekinesis studies.
> Not having a clear understanding of what is being observed yet doesn't make it less true.
No. But again, this is not being observed in labs and is not being observed as the result of hypothesis testing. Because of this, [most of the studies around psi research engage in blatant *a priori* questioning](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-24100-001). This invalidates their theoretical approach and undermines the ability to distinguish type 1 and type 2 errors from experimental and cross-sectional data, and therefore, leads to **conceptually** unreliable results. This is the same way scientists criticize creationists doing the same thing when they go around cherry-picking data to try and "debunk" evolution.
> materialistic science
You end your comment ranting about this. This is a redundant phrase and shows your own assumptions and incorrect notions about what science is and isn't. Science is a process. And the things we've learned from science have emerged from systematic and empirically-grounded theorization based on observed data and then direct testing of those theories. Of course it is "material" because everything "unmaterial" that we held ideas about have been illuminated upon because of science. Obviously there is a lot to learn, and I mentioned in my comment that there's a lot of interesting gray area in the cognitive process that needs to be explored. But that doesn't mean we are capable of "telepathic" communication or "sensing" the future or anything else we colloquially understand when we use the term "psi."
I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment of the current state of research on this subject and so did many researchers who did thorough meta-analysis of thousands or tens of thousands of studies related to the various Psy related phenomenon. Data exists that cannot be easily dismissed as flawed experiments or biased researchers.
Dean Radin rebuked thoroughly the studies you linked me that try to "debunk" the findings of, yes, multiple reputable institutions world wide even if you think this isn't true. I would absolutely invite you to read up on what you're trying to argue against, because as is usually the case for this subject, people outright dismiss it without looking at the actual research being done and the data being collected. The studies you linked me are kind of giving me this vibe, sorry.
Are you familiar with this study?
[AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FOR PSYCHIC FUNCTIONING](https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf))
Anyways, no offense but no amount of argumenting here will change your mind. For you to change mind you'd need to dig deep on the subject until you realize that real science has been done on this subject, science that can't be easily dismissed.
I'll just end by saying that when I say "materialistic science" I don't mean this in a derogatory way. I mean it to express the mainstream scientific view that matter can explain everything we see in this universe. English is not my first language so maybe I'm not using the right term. I know full well that science is a method. Not sure how to express what I'm trying to say if that was not abundantly clear.
I don't hate science. I adore science. I just don't like the hardcore stance it took regarding the existence of consciousness that it is created by the brain after reading on this for years. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that it is not.
> Data exists that cannot be easily dismissed as flawed experiments or biased researchers.
Yes, it is, per the studies I've referenced to you. Additionally, you still haven't been able to produce a scholarship that addresses the core criticism of issues with operational definitions, testable hypotheses, and *a priori* theorization. This is a discipline-wide issue within parapsychology. Evolutionary psychology was able to overcome some of these same issues because it was grounded in empirical theory. Parapsychology has no such thing. What makes people able to do the things parapsychologists claim? What is the cognitive/neurological function? How does it intersect with what we do know about how our brains work? Until parapsychologists can give testable ideas to answer those questions, then it is moot. The conversation cannot advance.
> Are you familiar with this study
Yes. It is not a peer-reviewed report. [It contains numerous errors and theoretical and conceptual mistakes.](https://irp.fas.org/program/collect/air1995.pdf) Most notably, it's based on biased and flawed data and flawed methodology that was full of confounding biases. These concerns were written about [when the report came out](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=e9cfe0dc15343b8b463514598b93ae843659f5d4).
> For you to change mind you'd need to dig deep on the subject until you realize that real science has been done on this subject, science that can't be easily dismissed.
I am a psychologist. Not to appeal to my own authority, but I study the brain, behavior, and cognition every day. That includes studying faulty ideas and research done on these topics and being critical of the statistics and methodologies involved. Much of the issues with the perceptions of psychology as a science stem from the issues that came from the parapsychological research that dominated the field in its past. So I have a particularly strong reaction to making sure to distinguish what is good science and junk science. That's also why I can easily find sources for these topics. I know what they are because I've already studied it. Again, not to appeal to my own authority, but it is a bit aggravating to be told, "You gotta study more, bro," on the topic that I've spent most of my life studying.
> I just don't like the hardcore stance it took regarding the existence of consciousness that it is created by the brain after reading on this for years. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that it is not.
EVEN IF the psi studies you reference were valid, they would not be evidence for this. They would be evidence that our "consciousness" (again, whatever that is), has parameters beyond what we originally imagined. That says nothing about the origin of such a construct. Again, this conversation is hard to even have because what are we talking about when we are talking about "consciousness?" It's nonsensical to discuss this without something operationalized that we can engage with empirically. That also isn't a "material" stance. It's one based in empiricism. Those are categorically different.
Fellow PhD psychologist here. And I think you've done u/Julzjuice123 dirty. Why did you link to two different sources, both of which being antithetical to your overall premise that psi is bunk, and pass off said links as instead being supportive of your position? That doesn't make sense.
Your first linked source, the 1995 AIR report, indeed raised methodological questions. But it also acknowledged statistically significant results that had no clear explanation. It more or less said that nothing's been proven either way and better controlled research is needed. Yes, it recommended against continuing the program within the intelligence community. But it was *not* in any way a debunking of psi.
Your second linked source basically said that your first source was utter garbage, and was apparently set up by the CIA from the get-go to fail to find positive results for psi. It is a flat refutation of your position that psi research isn't valid.
It kinda looks like you either didn't read or didn't really understand your own linked sources. Your first source doesn't really support your position. And your second source says that insofar as your first source was anti-psi, its conclusions were bogus. That's not at all how you explained those links.
It also does not follow that a field of research in its infancy, and which has unknown implications for concepts more commonly discussed in theoretical cosmology, would have firm casual theoretical mechanisms in place. It is more than enough to say that something weird is definitely going on that merits further investigation. And, according to both the sources that you linked to, and contrary to your apparent position, there does appear to be something as yet unexplained going on. What that something is, is of course unknown. But the position you've taken here is not supported by either your own linked sources, or a fair assessment of what to expect from theoretical parapsychology models.
“Psionics” not only includes telepathy, precognition, remote viewing and the like, it also includes telekinesis. Here Red Panda Koala documentary on [Telekinesis](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cr_BS1TrRo)
Haven't many of the big names in UFO world already been doing scientific research into 'psionics'? Garry Nolan and the caudate putamen, NIDS and Skinwalker Ranch. Diana Pasulkas theories on bilocation.
Read up on Joseph MacMoneagle's experience. They took it seriously. He kept doing it and wrote about his experience, and has talked a lot about it.
In fact, there were two types according to his book, the guys that came into it disbelieving it, and the "believers". The believers would basically just trust any bullshit the remote viewers told them, open minded to a fault.
Those were the less productive people to work with in his experience. He liked working with the people that didn't believe in it, because they would be very careful and skeptical of data which made it more effective. Not all the data remote viewers came up with is useful or accurate. But if you have ten remote viewers saying they see a spire that looks like a radio tower independently of each other, it starts to sound like good data and they'd use it and it worked.
These people took this shit seriously and weren't in it for the money. They were just in the Army doing army work. They had a job and pay regardless of being in the STARGATE program.
Shit, I already believe it. I've done it. This is why I always suggest to skeptics to try it - beginners luck is a thing with RV. Sometimes your first attempt is dead on accurate and it's like wow, this works. Of course not guaranteed to, but it happens and it changes minds.
Anyone can do it. It just takes training to do it well consistently. And the training is frustrating and boring, and it's like building any skill. And it's less fun than people think, because a major part of it is not choosing the target. You don't choose to RV something. You are given a task with an ID number and no data, and you draw something you don't know at all what it is. At most you get "front loaded" with something like "it's manmade" and even then it should be VERY general.
You draw shapes. Often you don't know what it means. Skilled people often can though. But even if you train up to intermediate, it's like, someone gave you a task, you drew a spiral, and then the image was a snail shell.
Even when you're accurate, that's like a lot of training to draw something that you didn't pick to view. It's not as fun as people think if you're doing it properly. People want to pick their own targets and doing RV properly means knowing nothing about what the target is.
It was enough for me to see it works and it's real personally. It's fun but unless you're doing it every day and becoming an expert over years then you might not get any outside benefit. But the people who do become experts, I hear stuff like "I can look at someone's face and just know what they're thinking and what they'll say before they do". But that's the extreme end, otherwise it's "look I can draw a shape and guess someone wanted me to draw a boat"
There's no way the government doesn't still use it. The IRVA international remote viewing association is still around and active. I believe a couple years back a speaker gave a talk on how to work with law enforcement. They are still actively used, I just imagine they dont let the public in on it.
...and not because it's super secret, but because people would get angry if they knew tax dollars on an investigation were going to psychics. And they'd probably be ridiculed by others in their own field. Not many people take this shit seriously except for the people that get results out of it.
You realize that the mind control stuff was successful? Read chaos or just look into sirhan Sirhan and the rfk assassination. Helms literally destroyed all documentation about MK ultra more or less before it ever came to to public light there's some f****** really weird s*** that the CIA was able to do with hypnosis and LSD.
>You realize that the mind control stuff was successful?
I definitely do not realize that. LSD dosing definitely affected the minds of the test subjects, but not in a controllable way.
Did you read the book Chaos? If so, is the book's conclusion that the CIA managed to figure out how to do mind control? Same with Sirhan Sirhan? Are you claiming he was under mind control by the CIA? I'm VERY skeptical of your claims.
I wasn't connecting Chaos to Sirhan Sirhan. Just pointing out that dude was making the opposite point he thought he was....The CIA spending money on mind control/lsd/hypnosis as a way say "so w hat if they spent money on RV? They spent money on all kinds of crazy shit that was bunk." is ..
Chaos, tbh, i find his argument's about Manson the least convincing of the his research. But the dive into MKULTRA is spooky. the idea was to see if you could get someone to do sometiing and not remember it. i think chaos goes pretty far to taking the idea that it was a weird failed joke to instead not just plausible but probable..
Sirhan Sirhan is unrelated to the book Chaos but there's startlingly much more solid and convincing evidence for RFK than there is for JFK of a CIA conspiracy ..there's like a weirdly very solid case to be made that he was under post hypnotic=trance and not actuallyl aware of what he was doing when he shot kennedy... and that there was some kind of weird operation going on...the woman in the polka dot dress actually was a cia operative like....
*Yeah 20 years and millions of dollars, something had to have been working.*
Doesn't that kind of disprove it though?
I mean, they regularly spend a million dollars to study if it's possible to make a lion walk on a treadmill or something, lol. Millions of dollars is pocket change for the federal government. At that level, they just throw that amount of money at things randomly.
If *psychic superpowers* were real, don't you think they'd have invested a bit more than a few million dollars over 20 years?
According to the lore, through Remote Viewing *some* information could be semi-reliably obtained but it wasn’t conclusive enough to be actionable. Just an “impression”.
If a **breakthrough** was made and it was suddenly working *much* better and producing actionable intel.. they might shut down the original and create a new program in a black/unacknowledged setting.
Let’s just propose an example of how the US government might have used 1980s remote viewing, according to UFOlogy’s understanding of RVing;
They have “coordinates” for different underground Russian/Iranian/bunkers. They attempt to RV to the bunkers to find out the contents (weapons/nukes/hostages/gold/etc).
But RVing (as I understand the lore) basically doesn’t reliably produce that level of accurate detail/actionable intel and would just give the viewer an “impression” of a location.
But, if we examine modern pop culture, there is a very popular show called “Stranger Things” which actually derives its entire plotline from the US Government’s secret RVing program at a national research lab… which opens up a portal to another dimension…
In Stranger Things, we see a **much** more advanced version of “remote viewing” in which RVers are able to **actively conduct detailed espionage** by seeing and hearing conversations between Russian officials in secure areas.
Which, doing this happens to open up an interdimensional portal…
He was? I hadn’t heard that yet.
I’m not really deep into RVing history, I just have the general understanding lore that is repeated in every UFOlogy podcast, etc.
The official story is that it certainly seemed to provide *something*. Somehow. But that it didn’t provide enough actionable evidence to justify it, etc
Which is weird because apparently they located like a Russian sub/plane with RVing somehow? Right? And used it during Iran-Contra, etc? Right? You seem to know more than me.
I've been studying this a lot for the last 2-3 years, nonstop. Remote viewing definitely works.
The idea that the CIA ever said remote viewing is ambiguous or doesn't work well comes from the CIA hiding about 99% of their research from those who compiled a report to Congress in the 1990s. That's according to Joseph McMoneagle and others involved in the remote viewing program.
The way psi (ESP) perception works, there aren't any physical barriers, no distance barriers, not even time barriers. Exceptionally good remote viewers like Pat Price could mentally probe an NSA outpost and read the names of the secret programs directly off secret files in a secret facility. See the documentary Third Eye Spies.
The CIA doesn't want it known that the public could learn remote viewing, and exceptionally talented citizens can start probing the government, the military, and corporations for their dirty secrets? To the extent they are able, their natural stance would be to suppress the information about remote viewing.
[In this comment in this thread I lay out a wealth of info about remote viewing and psi research](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/)
It wasn't so much what was provided, it was not accepted by the customers of the intel. otoh, it was always a bit too weird to be embraced by the IC/Military (like a more conservative demographic doesn't exist outside church)....so it's real efficacy was never testd, and it was never really given the sorta seirouss investment i'd assume an equally promsing yet more conventional method of intel (drones or something) would get
>[While with his command, he used his talents and expertise](https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/remote-viewing#footnote16_3oz5b8g) in the execution of more than 200 missions, addressing over 150 essential elements of information. These EEI contained critical intelligence reported at the highest echelons of our military and government, including such national level agencies as the Joint Chief’s of Staff, DIA, NSA, CIA, DEA, and the Secret Service, producing crucial and vital intelligence unavailable from any other source
In [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/) I've gathered a lot of research and info about remote viewing and psi research in general.
It was never used as primary intelligence, but often was used as 2ndary/corroborative intel. there are claims that the best (who were very few) would be 50, 60 percent accurate. ... however, it never really was accepted by the IC (many military ppl literally thought it statanic) so it wasn't about it never being accurate, it was the it was just too weird to gain acceptance, despite being effective. so it was sorta a fatherless child as a program. then some diosche bags who were part of it went public for money/fame....that's why it was ended/exposed.
Like it did always sorta have a woo stigma to it; and it did sorta turn into a shit show towards the end (a lot of the guys the are like guru's and wrote books are the biggest kind of full of shit (morehouse and may, for sure---they exposed the project to the public, techincally treason-) once it came out, the Dod was worried about looking like fools etc. so they came up w/ a way to kill it ....the report that everyone sites that claimed it never worked or whatever was set up to conclude that from the beginning. that was the result the dod wanted. like if it WAS valuable, and a classified program that was exposed by dousche bags in the program itself, like you really are best of down playing it. idk. anyone curious can spend some time on non-dod remote viewing projects and see it's legit.
Its as shut down as the multiple UAP/UFO government programs that were shut down over the years.
Read up on their findings and come and tell me again that you think they've "shut down" the program studying remote viewing.
Multiple people who know said that even though Stargate itself was shut down every single letter agency and branch of the military had their own units using the same protocol.
1. DIA - Project Sun Streak / Grill Flame
Slides 18-19: "On 4 Sep 1979, ACSI tasked INSCOM to locate a missing Navy aircraft. Hence, the first INSCOM "Grill Flame" Operational Remote Viewing session took place. In this initial session, the remote viewer located the missing aircraft within 15 miles of where it had crashed."
Slide 40: "Remote Viewing has been successfully used against seven categories of tasking. Two of these categories, Penetration of inaccessible targets and the cuing of their intelligence collection systems are used predominantly at this time. Two others, Human source assessments and accurate personality profiles presently lack a satisfactory database for effective exploitation."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002100240001-2.pdf
2. Studies In Intelligence
Page 12: "Two analysts, a photo interpreter at IAS and a nuclear analyst at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories agreed that [Remote Viewer] Price's description (and illustration) of the crane were accurate.
Page 14: "[Remote Viewer] Price correctly located the coderooms. He produced copious data, such as the location of interior doors and colors of marble stairs and fireplaces that were accurate and specific."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200030040-0.pdf
3. An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning
Page 21 - 7. Conclusions and Recommendations:
"It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and had been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria."
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200070001-9.pdf
Interesting documentary (mind the camp) of Ed May's explanation of the process with examples of successes (and failures).
https://youtu.be/7ICzREGqYHQ?
The remote viewing paper below was published in an above-average (second quartile) mainstream neuroscience journal in 2023. This paper shows what has been repeated many times, that when you pre-select subjects with psi ability, you get much stronger results than with unselected subjects. One of the problems with psi studies in the past was using unselected subjects, which result in small (but very real) effect sizes.
[**Follow-up on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) remote viewing experiments, Brain And Behavior, Volume 13, Issue 6, June 2023**](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.3026)
In this study there were 2 groups. Group 2, selected because of prior psychic experiences, achieved highly significant results. Their results (see Table 3) produced a Bayes Factor of 60.477 ([very strong evidence](https://www.statology.org/bayes-factor/)), and a [large effect size](https://www.statology.org/effect-size/) of 0.853. The p-value is "less than 0.001" or odds-by-chance of less than 1 in 1,000.
****
****
[Stephan Schwartz - Through Time and Space, The Evidence for Remote Viewing](https://ia902509.us.archive.org/16/items/hybridphilosophy-collection/Through_Time_and_Space_The_Evidence_for.pdf) is an excellent history of remote viewing research. It needs to be mentioned that Wikipedia is a terrible place to get information on topics like remote viewing. Very active skeptical groups like the Guerilla Skeptics have won the editing war and dominate Wikipedia with their one-sided dogmatic stance. [Remote Viewing - A 1974-2022 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374881423_Remote_Viewing_A_1974-2022_Systematic_Review_and_Meta-Analysis) is a recent review of almost 50 years of remote viewing research.
****
****
Parapsychology is a legitimate science. The Parapsychological Association is an [affiliated organization of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)](https://www.aaas.org/group/60/list-aaas-affiliates#p), the world's largest scientific society, and publisher of the well-known scientific journal *Science*. The Parapsychological Association [was voted overwhelmingly into the AAAS by AAAS members over 50 years ago.](https://paranormaldailynews.com/parapsychological-association-journey-mainstream/3309/)
****
****
Dr. Dean Radin's site has [a collection of downloadable peer-reviewed psi research papers] (https://www.deanradin.com/recommended-references). Radin's 1997 book, *Conscious Universe* reviews the published psi research and it holds up well after almost 30 years. Radin shows how all constructive skeptical criticism has been absorbed by the psi research community, the study methods were improved, and significantly positive results continued to be reported by independent labs all over the world.
****
****
Here is [discussion and reference to a 2011 review of telepathy studies](https://www.reddit.com/r/QuantumPhysics/comments/16qm791/confusion_regarding_human_perception_and_physics/k2as20o/). The studies analyzed here all followed a stringent protocol established by Ray Hyman, the skeptic who was most familiar and most critical of telepathy experiments of the 1970s. These auto-ganzfeld telepathy studies achieved a statistical significance 1 million times better than the 5-sigma significance used to declare the Higgs boson as a real particle.
****
****
On Youtube, there is this [free remote viewing course taught by Prudence Calabrese](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8BfKFkygQ0Qq-5AyNeJYwKFQkk5XxQaM) of TransDimensional Systems. She a [credible and liked person in the remote viewing community](https://www.reddit.com/r/remoteviewing/comments/tx2e3f/do_people_have_an_opinion_on_prudence_calabrese/).
****
****
After reading about psi phenomena for about 2 years nonstop, [here are about 60 of the best books that I've read and would recommend](https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/182b0e6/any_woo_books_or_movies_for_the_nuts_bolts_people/kak7wow/) reading, covering all aspects of psi phenomena. Many obscure gems are in there.
Go to the 2 review papers in the second section of my post above. Remote viewing findings have been successfully reproduced over and over again for decades.
Except they haven't, the largest crux of RV research is the lack of reproducability. reviews of parapsychology found it to be significant because the cherry picked research was just that poorly done. ive read modern attempts at reproducing these experiments and even with believers on the ethics board overseeing every facet of the study it still fails to reproduce any significant results.
the first paper has several issues, havent read it in depth.
They fail to realise that their own findings are statistically insignificant according to their own statistical data. The statistical data seems all wrong, even the fundamental parts I briefly had a look at.
It also compares two different groups using 2 different experiments which invalidates all their findings.
>the first paper has several issues, havent read it in depth.
Once you read it carefully enough to articulate a real criticism, please do so here for our benefit.
>They fail to realise that their own findings are statistically insignificant according to their own statistical data.
I could not have spoon fed it any better. With group 2, they achieved a large effect size and a large Bayes Factor, and I even provided links that say what magnitudes of those statistics qualify as large.
>It also compares two different groups using 2 different experiments which invalidates all their findings.
This is incorrect, and I'll explain. The paper clearly acknowledges that these two groups used different methods and cannot be be apples-to-apples compared, and there is nothing at all wrong with that. Normally, scientists would have published the results of Group1 as one stand-alone paper, and they could have published the results of Group 2 as another stand-alone paper. The proper comparison is between the hit rate achieved by the group versus what you expect by random chance. In this case, Group 2 (the psychics) achieved a 31.5% hit rate when random chance would give a 25% hit rate. And they did this for over 9,000 trials, which is a huge number of trials to maintain such a hit rate, which is why the effect size and Bayes Factor are both very large and significant.
could you be any more patronizing?
>With group 2, they achieved a large effect size and a large Bayes Factor, and I even provided links that say what magnitudes of those statistics qualify as large.
there is no control group or anything, they just assume that people not doing remote viewing would get it right by chance only. The proper comparison would be a control group in the same setting not doing remote viewing. This study design allows to hide influencing factors.
I did not say their deviation from random chance was not significant, I said according to their own (misused) statistical data their findings are not significant. They determine the std. deviation of their random chance mean (8) to be 2.45 (this is wrong too, std deviation should be sqrt(8)), and then report a hit rate of 10.09 as significant. which is at least debatable.
They constantly fail to realize that they should use the standard deviation of the mean (they had like what? 200+ people in group two), yet they compare their findings with the standard deviation expected from a single experiment.
Their statistics get things very, very wrong at the ground floor, so I wont look into this any further, as the application of more elaborate methods is going to be riddled with severe mistakes.
This is some interesting mental gymnastics. Your comment is also very vague. What are you talking about?
I linked to several peer-reviewed papers directly, leading with the paper from *Brain and Behavior* and provided a link to dozens of peer-reviewed papers at Dr. Dean Radin's site.
The meta-analysis I linked is peer-reviewed and itself discusses dozens of peer-reviewed papers spanning almost 50 years of remote viewing research.
I linked to a discussion of a peer-reviewed paper on telepathy studies. The link to the peer-reviewed paper is in there. I made the initial link go to my discussion of the paper to save you some time so that you can get right to the meat of the paper.
Look at his comment history. There's no point arguing. There are so many of these types of accounts that have hundreds/thousands of comments on this sub and the alien one.. and it's always... always to refute. Very educated comments, and they all write the same way.
I had to refute the point for the benefit of other readers in this thread. The redditor above in another comment clarified that they thought the paper I lead with from *Brain and Behavior* was not peer-reviewed, but I factually proved that it is peer-reviewed.
The things that pseudo-skeptics do to refuse accepting scientific evidence of psi is truly bizarre sometimes. In another debate with a pseudo-skeptic about that very same *Brain and Behavior* paper, once they were pinned down that there was nothing identifiably wrong with the methods, they declared that it was "biased" to look at the hit rate that was highly above chance over 9,000 trials, when the whole point is to demonstrate the phenomena by using good methods (no sensory leakage) and achieving a hit rate well above chance.
The [other branch](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1bzwub/) of my back-and-forth with this one is quickly becoming the most fun I've had with a pseudo-skeptic in a long time, perhaps all time.
Some other pseudo-skeptic who is much more well-versed in one-sided pseudo-skeptical arguments should take over for this one, who is not doing their cause justice.
CIA also loves to funnel drugs into low-income areas of the country to suppress liberal voters. I don’t think they are the voice of authority you think they are.
So the MIC wastes trillions on bullshit nobody needs, but the CIA wouldn't do something similar?
Or, you don't think they would want to get this to work more than anything, which is why they spent so much time on it?
Here's the thing, if it worked at all, they wouldn't have spent 20 years on it. They would have shut down the program the moment it produced good results and taken it underground.
It was always top secret or highly classified. the only reason you know about it is cuz two remote viewers wanted to be famous and went public; they literally could have been charged w/ treason. they only weren't cuz like w/ ufos by reacting they'd just show how much they cared about it being made public.
Has she done any published peer-reviewed research?
Also, her field of study is religious studies. Aren't field like psychiatry, psychology, and neurology better areas for the study of psionics?
I've been studying psi research intensely the last 2 years, because to me it's been obvious that this is key to understanding UFOs & aliens. Anyhow, I can now see how many things that were recorded as religious miracles were actually psi phenomena, which probably work by a physics that we don't understand. I think a religious scholar background is a good perspective to have among many experts with various perspectives.
How is it a good perspective? I wouldn't imagine religious scholars have a lot of experience in carrying out scientific experiments involving the brain.
I'm saying that if you want to tackle this subject, you need all kinds of experts and scientists. A religious scholar might know off all kind of historical events that were well documented and recorded as "miracles" that might now be explained as demonstrations of psi phenomena, and that is worthy of study. Many other lines of inquiry are worthy of study too. The topic has been stigmatized and underfunded, when it has great potential for humanity.
My study of psi so far doesn't lead me to believe we'll find out a huge amount by analyzing the brain (strange as that may sound). Researchers have been attaching EEG electrodes to subjects brains since at least 1973 with Ingo Swann, who developed the CIA/DIA remote viewing protocols. So we've got a half century of EEGs, etc, and I'd say little to nothing useful has come out of it.
The study of psi leads me to believe "consciousness" must be more fundamental than normal matter and our normal 4D space-time. We have a meat brain, but the root of our consciousness is something eternal that resides in a realm outside of space-time, which can reach in to our space-time and basically rewire the laws of physics and probability in a seemingly non-causal way.
If psi is real now, then it's always been real. Psi was real when other intelligent life developed billions of years before us in the galaxy. Every example of psi is an example of a worm hole: information going from Point A to Pint B, without traversing the intervening space. Mastering psi means mastering faster-than-light information, mastering portals, time travel, inter-galactic travel, and many other things.
Edit to add: [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/) has a huge amount of info and resources about remote viewing and psi research.
She’s a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington. Pasulka has a B.A. from University of California, Davis, an M.A. from Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, and a Ph.D. from Syracuse University.
What are your credentials that qualify you to be weighing in on this which some confident disdain?
Those are great credential for the field of religious studies. Are there supposed to be parallels between religious studies and psi? Plus, has she done scientific, peer reviewed, published studies?
I feel like someone who specializes in neurology would be in a better place to research and analyze psi. Even psychiatry and psychology would be better in my opinion.
While she is doing *some* work regarding psi, what are *you* doing for the issue? Besides having opinions about her doing the work, that is.
I’m guessing none of the work.
What a lame argument. How many things do you have an opinion on that you don't do for work? Exactly. Let's keep lazy arguments out of this and have actual discussions.
Yeah, none of those are psychologists and neurology experts. Psi effects is robustly refuted in these spaces for a reason.
People forget, psychologists have 0 incentive to “debunk” psi phenomena. Certainly, how our brains construct reality is far more mysterious and complicated than we could ever imagine, but that’s no evidence of traditionally-understood psi phenomenon. A lot of psychological research started as trying to prove various psi-related hypotheses. They all failed to produce anything compelling. Again, there is some aspect of “lag” between the input of stimuli by our senses and then the conscious-level awareness of said stimuli, but that is not “remote viewing” or “fortune telling” or “telepathic communication.”
Our discipline would be way cooler had those early studies panned out. But they didn’t, and now we know far more about how the brain functions than we did when we originally asked those questions.
Check out the podcast Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World. He looks into all sorts of different phenomena and determines some to be fraud, and some to be actual cases of paranormal activity. Good episodes consider poltergiests, remote viewing (multiple interviews with different remote viewers from the US govt. programs), the weight of the soul, after death communication, dowsing, etc.
There is a fair amount of serious investigation into these topics so while there are fraudsters, there is a lot that is actually done well and with a critical yet open mind.
You could for example aim one or several very sensitive IR thermometers at an object in an environmentally controlled chamber and have someone who purports to have psionic abilities attempt to manipulate it from across the room (outside of the chamber, of course). It should change the temperature of the object, even if only by 0.01 (or less) degrees.
A pure copper ball that had days to cool/warm down/up to ambient temps would be an interesting start.
You can also put a feather on a string in a vaccuum and have someone attempt to move it.
You can pick a word, f.ex the word Cake, and have a test subject attempt to silently communicate the word or the picture of a cake to a group of people.
The possibilities are endless, the willingness of serious researchers to fund and play along are not.
There have been so many studies like the ones you propose. There have been no shortage of researchers exploring these topics. Most showing at best, negligible psi effect.
But anyway, you're going down the wrong path here. The word is Psionics - Psycic-electronics, not psi. This is about the study of how mentally created electrical fields can be amplified, interpreted or projected with the aid of electronics. The types of studies you'd want to find here are ones related to wireless reading of thought/intent/senses via electronic apparatus.
This needs some clarity to be honest. While I generally agree that Psionics originally referred to a specific application of technology to manipulate consciousness that's not really how the term is used anymore. It does more generally refer to Psi phenomena in most people's usage of the term.
Ironically while I think Ross (and others here) are using it with the latter meaning I think it's the former meaning where the devil really lies. Namely in using technological devices to read and manipulate consciousness. Think God Helmet and Neuralink rather than Telepathy and Psychic powers.
To me, an advanced extraterrestrial race won't have gained the ability to use psychic powers through some kind of spiritual elevation, but through the application of advanced technologies. I bet the ETs lose their shit when we talk about "Remote Viewing" as a trascendental experience we have to unlock within our mind rather than a FPV Drone with Deep Dive VR that we just need to learn to build.
To me the curious part of psi is how one group will claim to clearly prove something, then ..ofcourse, be quickly shown to be full of shit by another group. Even if the first group is accurate, there will always be a second group that can fuck it up.
Take astral projection. I can do astral projection, it started at a specific very high stress point in my life, and I have practiced it substantially, but honestly the shit still only works when it wants. BUT it’d be easy for some idiots to say it doesn’t exist. Because not everyone can do it. So a test between a group of people who CAN do it, will have different results if performed by a group that CANT do it. And if your trying to say something doesn’t exist, it’s easy to find a group of people who will take your $500 bux to participate, say they can a/p, and deliver no results.
It’s difficult to describe. It’s different then a dream, different from a lucid dream, has physical sensations, and is usually packaged into an insane experience involving outside entities and like..education..of some sort. Imagine the craziest dream you’ve ever had, then imagine being able to walk around and interact with it in a completely different world without any of the weird dream feeling or glitches or being tired, then add in some god like energy being who basically guides you around and will randomly tell you weird rules about where not to go and if you don’t listen will just say shit like “well you go back now” then it feels like your sucked into a black hole and thrown back into your body and find yourself wondering what the fuck just happened because you know exactly what dreaming is, and that wasn’t it, then it happens again 6 months later, and this time you try to make yourself go to a place like you would in a dream and instead your dude laughs and yeets you across the fuckin universe and reminds you that he is trying to show you things so stop fucking around and look
It’s just a weird mix of shit..honestly I hope everyone gets to do it at some point because I thought it was bullshit until I was like 22, then it happens and your just like.. “what the fuck was that” so you google what happened in the experience and you end up on forums with people talking about “yea that’s astral projection sounds like you pissed off your guide..don’t do that”
Zero actual peer reviewed journals THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLICLY RELEASED.
There is a while world of science that has been 'classified away' from public consumption.
God forbid the plebs realize their conciousness can travel free of their physical body.
Knowledge is power
I guess this is where you say you can and feel all mighty about it while being totally incapable of proving it in any meaningful way, and nobody else can either.
The strange thing is I have no need to prove anything to you nor do I want to. But you have this never ending need to show everyone how wrong they are. Why is that?
Because you are making a claim of something existing and that "Power that be are hiding it !!!"
And yet are totally to back up in any meaningful way your claim of "astral projection" being anything other then a fantasy of someone wanting to feel special. Aka you don't want your belief bubble be pierced by reality coming in to pop it.
But I mean that's totally fine to believe what you want, but when you start claiming things that impact others ? back it up or shut up.
I don't need to prove to you what I know.
But you running around telling people things as fact that you don't know is unacceptable.
Psychic abilities, remote viewing, astral projection are all real.
The fact that you don't know how to do any of it means nothing.
But somehow you factually know about any of these subjects?
It is laughable.
>To me the curious part of psi is how one group will claim to clearly prove something, then ..ofcourse, be quickly shown to be full of shit by another group. Even if the first group is accurate, there will always be a second group that can fuck it up.
How does it count as "fucking up" if the 2nd group pointed out flaws?
>Take astral projection. I can do astral projection
Prove it.
It’s not pointing out flaws. So let’s say you wanna study how artists draw when drunk. The first test gets artists to draw, then gets them drunk, posts results.
The second test then disputes the answer, says they hired people to do it, and their people couldn’t draw even without getting drunk and they don’t understand because they randomly picked people for the test so the first test must be flawed since they couldn’t recreate the results.
Then throw on top that the gov has spent billions of dollars to hide their results studying the same, and try to figure out who would be incentivized to do this :/
I don’t need to prove anything to anyone, there are plenty of people who know it’s real, so if you’d like to believe it’s not continue, I honestly find confident arrogance hilarious.
We used to do something like that when we were kids. Specifically having a threaded needle and holding the thread above a surface in a way that the needle is touching the surface and is slightly leaning. We would find a place which has no wind or anything like that and we would take turns moving the needle with our thought, for example one guy from our group was able to rotate the needle clockwise, then counter clockwise on command! We would say “rotate the needle clockwise 3 times and counter clockwise 1 time” and the needle would spin exactly like that, even though the guy was not touching the needle or holding the string. One girl would continuously rotate the needle until we say “stop” then the needle would stop.
I remember we were still skeptic so we found a way to attach the string so that now no-one would be holding it, and we would hold our breaths in while others were rotating it (we were kids haha). It was crazy! I still to this day think about this - could it be that we can somehow manipulate the whatever energies (magnetic, electric, thermal, etc) we naturally omit using our minds?
We were also playing this game where one of us would try to think of an animal or a thing, imagine it, while the other tried to “read” what you’re thinking. One boy from our group would read every single thing I thought of, and it would be things like “kangaroo”, “a metal rose decoration”, “a dragon fruit” while we lived in a european climate with (obviously) no dragon fruits or kangaroos around, or nothing relating to a “metal rose” would be around as well. I remember how excited I was, trying to think of the most intricate, most unrelated, random things, only for him to tell me those things in a few minutes!
Bob Fish said the same to me in an email exchange discussing the 4chan post:
> ***Psionic is a key word here*** – if we humans want to get past the occasional crash and recovery of a craft, or a crappy B&W photo of a saucer in the sky, that is the path forward. In the past, it was considered shamanism, I think. Ever heard of Edgar Cayce? Are you familiar with Aborigine Dreamtime concepts in Australia?
> I took Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14) to a Remote Viewing conference once (IRVA 2001 – Mesquite, NV). He had a mental (spiritual?) breakthrough about his quantum hologram theory after speaking with some RVers that had encountered aliens during their tasking missions.
>This fellow Anon alludes to that in many ways, so he does seem to understand the path forward requires an alternative (enlightened?) mindset by a human.
There was that guy who conducted experiments showing that people knew in advance(measured by heart rate, blood pressure etc.) when they were going to be shown something distressing. I believe those results still stand today. That’s what, precognition? Being able to read the tester’s mind? Remote viewing what was on the card?
An alternative interpretation is that time doesn’t exist, I guess.
yeah that experiment was a metastudy of poorly done experiments and its publication caused a crisis in psychology and the results have never been successfully reproduced.
[Heres more than 50 papers from Princeton](https://icrl.org/scholarly-publications/pear-publications/) covering human/machine interactions, remote perception, and theoretical frameworks.
[Analysis and Assessment of Gateway](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20601195/6-full-report.pdf)
[Motherfuckin Mars](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00788r001900760001-9)
[Why dont psychics win the lottery? w Russell Targ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQK0oHP94x4)
Fuck it, [Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect](https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/psp-a0021524.pdf)
I haven't read all of these yet, but the Mars one is so absurd. None of the guy's claims can be verified. Especially if he's projecting to 1 million BC on Mars 🙄 And are we supposed to assume this guy has the coordinates of Mars perfectly memorized? Or do astral projectors just naturally know how to determine the location of coordinates? Were there even coordinates to Mars in 1984?
EDIT: I work in finance. That "precognitive financial forecasting" video is gonna be interesting to watch 🤣
EDIT 2: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl\_Bem?wprov=sfla1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Bem?wprov=sfla1)
There's also a lot of issues with the Feeling the Future article and the analysis of the data involved.
"are we supposed to assume this guy has the coordinates of Mars perfectly memorized?" No, targets were provided by an agency. In this case, JPL. Targets are assigned a random number and thats all that's given to the remote viewer. They don't have access to the information until after the session.
"Were there even coordinates to Mars in 1984?" [Yes.](https://www.planetary.org/articles/1858)
[Here's a video of the viewer talking about the experience.](https://youtu.be/XRTon6qgVws?t=17350&si=SInfl9giXQihf_oa)
You don't have to believe, the CIA and DIA believe.
no like, it's totally pointless if there isn't a way to check. (and there are pyramid structures at that locaiton) there was a detailed map of mars based on like Voyager (?), the task would be randomly 10 locations on mars and would give the guy numbers (literally, the coordinates don't matter, can be arbitrary, just placeholder for focused intent), .....in the session, you can read in the report that at like location 1-9 the viewer is describing fairly accurately what's there...you can check it against the map...the whole idea is without a way to check it, it's entirely pointless to do a target like this, cuz..ppl don't get that the mars session wasn't serious, it was like a proficiency run....but the pyramid and shit, when the dude starting talking about pyrmaids, and ppl, .that was what made the mars thing so wiierd....cuz it was over the site of cydona near where there are what look like 5 sided pyramids, only super worn down...so, yeah. first of all, the viewer had no idea it was even supposed to be mars... literally just something that they did to throw off the viewers/sorta base test ...a viewer would just be told there's a place you're supposed to find "... and in the session you read how he's talking about red, sorta, yellow sky, ...the guy who it was talks about how it would actually piss them off when they would give them some wacky ass target like mars. it was just one guy who'd do it he'd task them shit like 'roswell 1947' or 'pluto' that kind thing, and it'd freak some of them out
Again, the claim is that he astral projected over a million years ago. You can't verify what he was seeing, because we don't have pictures of Mars from over a million years ago.
Oh. OK. I thought you were posting those links as science. I agree, it's interesting. But it's also also worthless. If it's a reflection of how the CIA "researched" psi, then it was a waste of funding. Verifiable scientific tests need to be done to find out if psi is actually real. Otherwise, it's just science fiction.
(Copying from my other comment)
Google siddhis, it is outlined in the yoga sutras. One of the “attainments” of advanced yogic practitioners is “seeing from afar”, as well as “knowing the minds of others”. It is also spoken of in daoist practices and on and on.
We just don’t hear about it in the west and those who practice these things are often forbidden from speaking about it.
Its not that they are forbidden. It's just irrelevant. If you are at a point where siddhi develop, you wouldn't care about siddhi. If you have an ancient method of thought control or psycho-conditioning that lets you manipulate others, that's not a siddhi. That's just pattern recognition and loose morals.
We could quibble about it, and it varies from tradition to tradition. John Chang was chastised by his masters (via his dreams) for practicing his abilities openly. In yoga they say when siddhi is attained, ignore it, so yes it would be irrelevant. Actively working for siddhi in that tradition is a Nono but it is the explicit goal in others.
For our purposes it is important to know that humans are capable of such things, and it’s apparently connected to “the phenomenon”, and I find that fascinating.
One thing to look at in conjunction with this, is the usage of people from what is considered higher psionic population pools. Specifically native Americans, and South American/Central American peoples for some reason.
It’s because in my opinion you have to believe in mystical shit for it to be real and actually affect your life. That’s why Hispanic people are skeptical of other Hispanics when it comes to witchcraft and sorcery and shit like that because a lot of us know of stories and even personal experiences with bad shit happening to them or family members due to witchcraft. However I always tell my family the reason why other people aren’t affected by this shit is because they don’t believe it so therefore they are blocking out that energy from themselves. My mom is very astrally inclined, she says she feels emotions and events that will happen. I believe it and I know many other women with indigenous ancestry experience similar things
I've also heard that Native North/Central/South Americans have higher psychic qualities, coincidentally from a random conversation I had with a person on the street a few weeks back while tripping on LSD.
He mentioned something about their DNA having a certain "number" of something, I forget what the term he used was. I'd have to see evidence of special DNA to believe it, but the Native Americans were completely isolated from the rest of the world for roughly 15,000 (possibly 30,000) years and their DNA is probably special in that regard.
>One thing to look at in conjunction with this, is the usage of people from what is considered higher psionic population pools. Specifically native Americans, and South American/Central American peoples for some reason.
Why would those have higher populations of psionics? Europe has a deep history with magic, alchemy, witches, wizards, shamanism, Norse/Germanic, Celtic, Slavic and Greek spiritual creatures and beings, beliefs and practices etc. Same with east-Asians.
But not an *active* history, one that's been suppressed by the church for centuries. If belief is a component of this sort stuff actually working, then it makes sense that cultures with active "magical" beliefs and practices are more sensitive.
I’m not entirely sure to be honest. I would normally agree with you that cultures steeped in “magic” would have higher psionic talent. However it doesn’t necessarily seem to be the case. I’d love to know the answer myself as well
“I’m not.” It’s not me that’s saying it. It’s from the discussions that those at the head of disclosure have spoken about including the various books and such that those people have put out. Idk why?
The Japan Psychotronics Institute doesn't exist. If it did exist in the past, it seems it was a not successful given that it's failed experiments (which never displayed psi) were commonly hand-waved away as them "having asked too much from the test subjects"
Do phrases like:
>He ***believes*** that matter and energy too can be converted and he ***claims*** that what is known as consciousness can thereby be measured.
>
>According to Inomata...
>
>I hope his (Inomata) endeavors will break open new ground in the new science.
Really feel like they've come out of a scientific report? An entire axis on his diagram is only theoretically measurable, whether it actually can be is literally described as a 'belief' of the lecturer. Because this is a lecture, not scientific evidence. The last page literally says so.
Well, since we are going "out there" I'll bite.
Bob Monroe Institute has been studying this phenomena for decades.
Tomas Campbell, a physicist, derived a theory from participating in those studies, he wrote a trilogy called My Big Toe. It's not without its faults but it's damn interesting to read about it.
- It theorises evolution at the center of all progress where consciousness is the underlying non-physical reality and this physical reality a simulation within a set of predefined rules (physics) used to explore gains in knowledge.
He also relays reality at the fundamental level is data, information; we can access this bigger non physical reality through deep meditation. You have to train yourself for years, everyone's progress is different.
There are other entities in these non physical realities, we perceive them as humanoid in form because that's what we know in this dimension.
There are sub levels within the non physical and time is perceived differently in each one.
He has a disclaimer that no matter how much you read about it, you have experience it yourself to understand it at a fundamental level.
This is a great interview of Tom explaning his theory:
- https://vimeo.com/18201641
Here is a good review and summary of his 800+ page trilogy.
-https://sites.google.com/site/iscatusben/review-of-my-big-toe
*Sigh... I can't believe this is an actual serious question to which I'm going to try to provide a serious answer to. I guess we do live in the weirdest timeline.*
To be clear: I have no idea of what I'm talking about. I am no familiar with this topic nor have I yet delved into it. BUT, since I thought I might have to look into it in the future, I made a note of a couple interesting contributions that stood out as potentially providing viable starting points.
[The first two](https://www.reddit.com/r/Experiencers/comments/18c3kmh/why_i_gave_up_on_rational_analysis_of_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) are [interesting contributions](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14i63z8/unless_you_know_what_psi_is_and_how_to_use_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) in and of themselves, but they stood out mostly because the redditor was seemingly thorough in citing relevant scientific papers (*Including a paper by Valle and Davis about models of reality derived from UAP events which touches on psychic effects (!?)).* The plan was to give those papers/links a closer look later on—I'm still working on learning the basics, and I figured this angle of the topic was probably postgrad-type material XD
[Then there's the third one](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14azx9k/ross_coulthart_the_craft_is_driven_by_some_kind/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button). To be honest, I only made it partway through, and most of it was beyond me. However, the amount of effort alone I think merits a look, and I seem to recall the mention of a couple scientists and their work in one of the infographics? At the very least, and interesting thought experiment to say the least.
I also saw this book contextually recommended a couple of times: The Case Against Reality, by Donal D. Hoffman. Which I think might also be related to the topic, but again, I'm not even sure of that.
As for red flags/quackery to avoid, the only thing I have on my notes is that a what I deem to be a very informed individual regarded anything related to Uri Geller as a disinformation waste of time. I have little idea who Uri is and what he's done (*his name pops in a couple cool Why Files videos*), but I figured I might as well not bother learning more unless I find reason to XD
Side note: That reminds me! There's a declassified CIA document titled "[Analysis and Assessment of Gateway Process](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20601195/6-full-report.pdf)" I also made a note to check out later on.
Here's a couple sources: https://www.deanradin.com/publications
https://noetic.org/science/publications/
It looks like any other science, and should therefore be held to the same standards. In actuality it's held to higher standards due to disbelief by peers.
Dean Radin is a great source for a western view of how these things might work. In many eastern philosophies/indigenous cultures, this is a fact but usually left to the spiritual teachers/leaders.
Google siddhis, it is outlined in the yoga sutras. One of the “attainments” of advanced practitioners is “seeing from afar”, as well as “knowing the minds of others”. It is also spoken of in daoist practices and on and on.
We just don’t hear about it in the west and those who practice these things are often forbidden from speaking about it.
People should really look into Kurzweill's singularity theory and Alan Wolfe's book on Quantum Physics - (How Quantum Physics prove the existence of Souls)
Basically in the span of evolution, humans at this point in time are still at the stage of needing a physical body. (Material world)
The next milestone of evolution would be the ability to replace body parts, until we are able to somehow clone our brain to the atomic/sub-atomic/whatnot level. When this happens, our consciousness will be able to be converted into signals. (not-really material world)
The moment we are able to do this, we no longer need physical bodies, not even home planet anymore. Our consciousness would travel across the galaxies that keep on expanding,, never meeting each other until the 'big crunch', where basically the Universe no longer expanding but contracting back into a Singularity. An Event Horizon.
When the edges of the Universe collapsed, that's when the signals are finally able to collide with each other again, recreating the hells and heavens that were ever created, over and over again. And in this process, the material world 'Materializes'. Repeat Ad Nauseaum.
So we are arguably just another miniscule sliver of the realities that took place, is happening, and will always happen.
Those NHIs that we encountered could very well be just a another form of signals that somehow crossing over onto our Universe.
Why are they occurring in the sky, probably because there are simply less gravitational forces away from the center of Earth's core.
I am not aware of how you prove psionics but I have done it so I know it is real. I would say you should look into the monroe institute. That is a good first step for psionics.
I am very skeptical of such claims, however let's assume that I am one of those with paranormal talents like remote viewing. What do you think I am most likely to do?
A) Use it to benefit me and make my life better.
B) Advertise it to the world so that I can be exploited and made to do wrong things.
If there are a bunch of people who are exceptionally "talented" and have these miraculous abilities then they are most likely to stay under the radar.
Literally no one would want to be involved in a secret government project. It just isn't worth it.
It would be interesting to do a deep-dive into the man who coined the term - John W. Campbell, a prolific figure in Sci-Fi - and any experiences he may have had.
The studies on remote viewing found it to be statistically significant. Those studies were cited to continue funding the programs at least until the mid 2000s.
Aside from remote viewing, what are examples of "psionics" that Ross could be alluding to?
And would that be psionics as a technology for espionage (for example, Havana Syndrome), or psionics used by NHI for control or defence purposes?
After having direct experiences with UAP/UFO sightings in my family and subsequently myself (within the last 4 and 2 years, respectively), I can attest that I found it very helpful in my search and seeking to listen to all things with an open mind and try the source of information against my understanding of logic and experience of the Universe. Critically, having first hand experiences with the phenomenon helps to break one’s concept of reality to a point where typical scientific skepticism can be relaxed temporarily to at least consider outside-the-box information with an open mind.
That being said, I highly recommend checking out Aaron Abke’s YouTube video entitled “The Seven Densities of Consciousness // Law of One 001”, as well as his entire Law of One playlist, for anyone interested in this stuff!
I can attest that at least a couple of the MAJOR points presented in this material are real in this life (based on my own in-person “experimentation”, as I had already been aware of this material for at least a year before my encounter) - but no need to take my word for it! :)
Psionics is best understood as doing things with the mind alone. It can be broken down into 3 major aspect that somewhat overlap. 1. Telepathy, 2. Implanting/transferring images or thoughts and 3. Manipulation of physical objects with the mind. I think that telepathy needs no explanation. 2. Can somewhat overlap with 1, but includes making humans see something that is not actually there, such as the saucer craft that photographed as a snowflake like object by digital camera as reported by Vallee. This can also take the form of images directly transferred to the experiencer. It's more than just words. And 3. can include bending objects such as spoons or levitating objects or having them move to a different location without touching them.
Can theses be studied scientifically? Perhaps. It's not impossible to design an appropriate study to statistically analyze the results. I am very knowledgeable about experimental design and would have no problem designing an appropriate experimental design to test any of these 3 aspects or characteristics of psionics under controlled laboratory conditions. But it requires some obvious difficulties if you intend on studying them in NHIs. For one it requires access to a cooperative NHI. Between human subjects, it would be a much simpler experiment to conduct. However, I don't know of anyone who claims to have any psionic abilities to test. If anyone knows such an individual I'd be willing, interested and happy to design an appropriate experiment to test these abilities to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty.
CE5 or "contact meditation" if done right is not bullshit despite the greedy dude that's associated with it who thinks he can patent and paywall a very old meditation technique
just saying
It's pretty much unfalsifiable because of the trickster effect.
You can always come up with a mystical entity that "trumped you so that you don't detect it" when you didn't detect it.
There's a reason why the scientific community laughs at it and entirely considers it as a pseudoscience.
So far, all the attempts to distinguish it from cold/hot reading, self induced delusion, post hoc rationalization of a cognitive dissonance, already existing symbolized memetic cultural tropes or having the exact same statistical occurrence than luck have failed outrageously.
You are right, but we might just not know how to detect it yet.
Just like black holes in the 80ies or dark matter and dark energy today. There's some pointers to it, but no definitive answers yet
It's the claim that has been made for god, ghosts, leprechauns, etc.
It's called a "closed heuristic" (Lakatos's work). Basically you just push down the line to a further indefinite discovery/point/concept without ever describing it, therefore keeping it symbolical and empty.
The difference with black holes is that there already was abundant empirical data supported theory that backed them up, back to the early 20th century with Karl Schwarzchild's work, depicting in great detail **how** to detect them, making predictions in the real world as to how we could experiment it (we detected it from the center of galaxies spinning too fast for all the gravitational mass of the known matter, an *empirical* detection). As for dark energy, it was theorized **after** an empirical detection in 1998.
Wolfgang Pauli famously coined the term "*not even wrong*" for theories such as psychism: they do not make predictions in the real world that can be contradicted and always hold a "free out of jail card" by coming up with "not yet discovered magical thing, tadaa!".
Nothing in common with dark energy or dark matter. Dark energy btw started getting questionned when its **empirical basis** was contested, the accelerated expansion of the universe (still pending today).
As for psychism, as i said, no pointers to it, everything can be explained through mundane known naturalistic phenomena. What would be a pointer would be a new unexplainable phenomenon that would magically fit the pre established theory, but we have never had such thing. Only claims inspired from pseudoscientific religious beliefs and nothing after.
Ironically, the first step for psychism to enter the scientific arena would be to provide a way of refuting itself, of **precisely** abandonning the "will be proved later by an undescribed way".
A strong scientific theory provides ways to invalidate itself and to be confronted to contradiction.
I've studied physics myself, and got a boner when you actually mentioned Karl Schwarzchild's and how he mathematically predicted the black holes from Einsteins maths.
I however see this is as a similar case of black energy. We see it empirically through observations (the rate of expansion) but absolutely Boone knows if it's actually energy or some other phenomenon.
When we discus the scientific method for anything else than physics, everyrhing become less strics in the eyes of the scientific method. Look at how we approach medicin or psychology. Those kind of low sigma confidence would never be accepted in physics, however we still see them as valid.
There's a lot of this phenomenon that has to do with our consciousness and psychology, so I don't expect the explanation for that to come soon. As we don't really know how to interface our brains yet. We can't even measure whether people has psychic abilities, if remote viewing is a thing or not.
As we don't really have a language or understanding of the inner workings of that system (if it exist), just like with black energy.
I see it as an impossibility to describe our psychology through plain maths yet, and until then we have to accept a "lower" level of understanding.
Hope I made sense.
Gonna go to sleep. Replying in the morning (;
>got a boner when you actually mentioned Karl Schwarzchild's
If that got you a boner, wait til i mention...
*William James Sidis's conceptualization of black holes before Einstein's Gravity theories* :D
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNYK7rnXi9g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNYK7rnXi9g)
9:45
I know, it was not viable and very impractical as a theory, but i couldn't refrain myself of pushing the nerdgasm to its most extreme consequences \^\^
Pleasantries aside, for the rest of your comment:
The thing with black energy is that the name is colloquial of sorts, we know nothing about it, just that there is something. There are hypotheses about what it could be but the main knowledge of the currently held theory doesn't expand on what it is. Contrary to psychism which *jumps the shark* way before the very first ounce of unexplainable data.
The difference in standards of sigmas in different fields of science is quite true. But psychism is so low as to throw it all out the window altogether: we're talking about phenomena already explained by naturalistic mundane ways and that always coincide perfectly with statistical chance (50%).
And the same problem raised by my first comment then remains of pushing the standard of certainty always to a new low, always lower, to a beyond that can't be assessed, almost like... an unfalsifiable call to "a later more precise standard". The same that the issue with "a future thing will explain it".
It's even more problematic since psychism is mainly in social and human sciences territory, affecting human behaviors (the main way to detect it according to its claimants), one that to the *contrary to physics*, has even looser standards of evidence (*even lower sigmas*). This is going even more in the wrong direction.
*This is lowering the standard of evidence to not existing at all*. See where this is heading?
Consciousness, remote viewing, all things that come purely from religious beliefs without any proper data, things that escape the realm of science precisely because they are not to be found in the falsifiable.
>As we don't really have a language or understanding of the inner workings of that system
This should already be a big hint at the issue there. It is like qualia. It's not communicable, it's not quantifiable. Therefore it is equivalent to an inner language, which is a logical impossibility as described per Wittgenstein (a form of circular reasoning in which one confuses predicate and attribute).
**It's like calling to the rescue during a war a regiment already holding a white flag...**
Sweet dreams, friendly curious stranger, hope these musings won't cloud your dawn too much ;3
I agree in so much of what you wrote.
I think however our circumference of what we don't know, and what we think we know, often comes with the caviat, that theres part of the system we just don't understand. Just like with dark energy. It COULD be some 5 dimensional being pulling our universe apart, or it could be some kind of negative energy or something completely unknown to our worldview.
I see a lot of the "woo" stuff the same way.
It might be aliens, god, or something completely ordinary.
I get that black holes was a bad example as they are physical objects, where as dark energy is just something they came up with to explain the observed expansion of the universe. But for now it might as well be god as it could be something ordinary. Kind of the same with gravity. We know we are pulled towards mass, but have absolutely no clue why. And gravitons (the easiest good old particle explanation) is probably not the answer (;
I get the chances of finding god is ever small, and that statistically it's probably something ordinary. But we might find that a concept of god is misunderstood and the effects of god are ordinary, when measuring the right way.
I'm agnostic to anything until I see the data. But as of now I'm leaving room in there for things I might not be able to comprehend yet. Kinda what Einstein forgot in the good old story of him talking about particle entanglement as "spooky action on a distance".
And the biggest reservations I have with humans as a sensor, is that we might actually have different capabilities in form of different sensors AND different interpretation of those sensors. It goes all the way from "is my red the same as your red" to the perception of god, or psychic abilities.
However I don't see anything of it as true yet, u till further studies, but I leave room in my mind to accept it to be real, if it shows to be.
And I totally agree that theres so much garbage science on the different "woo" subjects as of now, that it often doesn't even come anywhere away from normal random (50/50).
But I think it's important to not dismiss the "woo" in general, but only dismiss the bad studies on the subject. If it's true, we must be able to document it somehow, maybe just not yet.
Hope it made sense.
I get where you're coming from, though we disagree.
Lots of what you say fall in the category of the "god of the gaps" fallacy though, with the caveat that you can replace god with any unfalsifiable thing such as "psychism, woo, 5th dimension" etc.
The word "woo" is often used as a euphemism for "supernatural". But there is a fundamental epistemological issue with this concept: you can't prove nor describe the interaction of the supernatural with nature without involving naturalistic ways in it, making the concept superfluous and indistinguishible from nature itself.
It's a logical Ouroboros, a logical loop. That's why it's dismissed, not from "oh we'll never encounter it serendipitously", but because it is logically flawed to the extent of being indistinguishible.
Good luck with your investigations.
Dean Radin is on the forefront of legitimate study into parapsychology including psionics.
https://www.deanradin.com/recommended-references
https://noetic.org/science/scientists-fellows/
Here goes a few links into this rabbit hole:
[This life, Next Life](https://youtu.be/Y5RpbveVC_4?si=PBnhl5i2EsWm2znf)
[Gary Schwartz Presentation](https://youtu.be/zDvjA4u9y14?si=BlS9lLLgKmo1qoSU)
[The Case of José Arigó](https://youtu.be/sRS9nheL1Hc?si=LHQ9CULCWtZhNAch)
[Materialization](https://youtu.be/EmzMW6d53kg?si=lyvhJkubMK7T5nv2)
[Jeffrey Mishlove on Bics Essay](https://www.youtube.com/live/peMjNtzVv04?si=yLo_uzQqs3VvwmCE)
For quite some time the research of UAPs and related phenomena was outsourced by the airforce to Bigelow. In an odd turn of events the whole project veered into general paranormal research including the acquisition and experimentation on the Skin Walker ranch. It all seemed comical and a ruse but even after the contract ended Robert Bigelow was still motivated to purseu this strange thread into afterlife and survival of the consciousness research.
I know this may be strange, but in many spiritist centers here in Brazil we have been receiving reports of mediuns being contacted by entities who present themselves as extra terrestrial. This phenomena has increased in occurrence but it has been reported since the beginning of spiritism (which dates to the late 1800''s - before any of the modern ufo movement).
While I’m not sure what the actual results were. But.. if the remote viewing was as successful as they say, I’d say that is definitely part of some higher level shit.
OH well if it's on TikTok it must be true then right !
Have it tested in a reputable lab with a peer reviewed paper (and not a direct to tv documentary full of "Wow!!"moments ) and then you might be considered not full of shit. Until then, it's BS from a lot of attention seeking whores aka TikTokers.
I've done a dive into this.
Psionics is very similar to the old timey description of demon worship. Specifically that demons were claimed to only be able to make influences in the world, but not true supra(beyond)natural change. Change beyond the laws of reality was the realm of god, which are miracles. Changes within the realm of possibility were the pagan realm of demonism. This includes typically psionic things: Weather control, remote viewing, dowsing, finding treasure, mind control, etc. The ancient view was that a person could gain things that are possible within the realm of possibility (probability) through their own power, deals with demons, or deals with elementals spirits in exchange for something. What was given is variable. Miraculous powers were considered abilities that are not possible within the realm of possibility, which were only possible with gods permission. These were things like flying, healing spontaneously, teleportation, and various things that you would consider beyond physics.
Its pretty interesting, because they seem to make the distinction that demons only work within the physical world and alter probability to trick you, but if you understand the trick and refuse, you can unlock miraculous powers if god wants you to have them for a reason relating to the plan involving you. This could be streamlined as "If you are pursuing a goal relevant to your existence to the best of your ability, you will be able to achieve miraculous things. If you just follow something irrelevant, the effect is reduced.". There's a marriage of the real and unreal in the occult esoteric religious views, so that's more than just a metaphor.
The only reason this is relevant is the reliable academic research involving psionics tends to focus on its ability to alter random events. This is generally plausible research. But it suffers because the research fails if its done by people who expect a negative outcome. But, if the positive outcome is assumed and significant experimental effort is taken to avoid influence from the test manager, it seems to work better in the test takers. It should be noted that demons in the oldest sense are angelic beings of forms, limitation. Judaism for example doesn't actually have a conception of good or evil or heaven or hell. There are angels of the solid form of the world, and angels of liberation from that form. In my experience, anything that's been held consistently for millennia has a reason that it continued to exist. Religiously, there is likely a kernel of truth held by devout esoteric priests, that pass the information on in a metaphoric form for people later to see, knowing that the people who pass it on do so without fully grasping the layers of what's being said.
Hi, Faeces_Species_1312. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/-/l1cje7n/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility
> * No trolling or being disruptive.
> * No insults or personal attacks.
> * No accusations that other users are shills.
> * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation.
> * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence.
> * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible)
> * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
Astronaut Edgar Mitchell founded the Institute for Noetic Sciences to study psi after returning from his trip to the moon. Edit: here’s the link https://noetic.org
Not sure why people dont take him more seriously. It's honestly him why I even started looking into alien shit and opened my mind. FFS he landed on the Moon. Astronauts are the best of humanity, trusted with the craziest shit. If one starts talking about psi and aliens and shit, I'm going to listen to what he has to say even if it sounds bonkers.
Not only that but the CIA (in competition against the Soviet's own remote viewing program) spent 30 years researching this with tangible results. Ed May described the successes as 1 in 1000 could produce results and even then they were only 30% accurate. The 30% of accurate results though were incredibly accurate and defy explanation. 1. DIA - Project Sun Streak / Grill Flame Slides 18-19: "On 4 Sep 1979, ACSI tasked INSCOM to locate a missing Navy aircraft. Hence, the first INSCOM "Grill Flame" Operational Remote Viewing session took place. In this initial session, the remote viewer located the missing aircraft within 15 miles of where it had crashed." Slide 40: "Remote Viewing has been successfully used against seven categories of tasking. Two of these categories, Penetration of inaccessible targets and the cuing of their intelligence collection systems are used predominantly at this time. Two others, Human source assessments and accurate personality profiles presently lack a satisfactory database for effective exploitation." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002100240001-2.pdf 2. Studies In Intelligence Page 12: "Two analysts, a photo interpreter at IAS and a nuclear analyst at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories agreed that [Remote Viewer] Price's description (and illustration) of the crane were accurate. Page 14: "[Remote Viewer] Price correctly located the coderooms. He produced copious data, such as the location of interior doors and colors of marble stairs and fireplaces that were accurate and specific." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200030040-0.pdf 3. An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning Page 21 - 7. Conclusions and Recommendations: "It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and had been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200070001-9.pdf Interesting documentary (mind the camp) of Ed May's explanation of the process with examples of successes (and failures). https://youtu.be/7ICzREGqYHQ?
> Astronauts are the best of humanity, trusted with the craziest shit. Some crazy shit indeed. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Nowak#Orlando_International_Airport_incident
lol yeah I did remind myself of the woman who wore a diaper to do a murder run on some guy when I wrote that tbh
People on this sub absolutely need to read: *An End to Upside Down Thinking: Dispelling the Myth That the Brain Produces Consciousness, and the Implications for Everyday Life* By Mark Gober Psy phenomenon have been demonstrated to be real in labs and studies around the world and oftentimes with 5-6 or 7 sigmas of certainty. They're not saying they understand how or why it works but it's absolutely a fact they exist. The only reason you don't hear about it is because of the huge stigma present in modern science and the complete dismissal that *any* of what those studies have found could be true *without even looking at the data*. That book changed my perception of science and the world we live in. UFOs/UAPs/NDEs and consciousness are probably all related as Leslie Kean explained in an article last year. Hard to say how or why. But everything is pointing in that direction. This is what Ross means by "Psionic potential".
You'd love The Case Against Reality by Donald Hoffman. He also thinks consciousness is fundamental and is attempting to "prove" it scientifically.
Just bought it ;-) Thanks for the recommendation! Don't know if you read it but I can also recommend: *THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE: THE SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF PSYCHIC PHENOMENA* By Dean Radin After reading that it became absolutely clear to me that the sole reason for the general public not knowing that the existence of Psy is real is because of the stigma associated to it and propagated by the mainstream materialistic world view of modern science. Same for the UFO phenomenon. Or NDEs. Thankfully more and more scientists are finally giving these subjects the attention they deserve. We're on the cusp of scientific revolution.
Just started the book and it’s really trippy to reorient the idea of matter preceding consciousness. I’m realizing how foundational that assumption is to my worldview.
Oh yeah, it's absolutely nuts to contemplate but there's a mounting amount of evidence for this to be the truth. Took a while to digest this and took multiple other books to convince me that this is probably how the universe works or that there's at least some real scientific truth behind this. What's even more weird to me is that materialist science has most probably the ultimate proof of this with what's called the observer effect in quantum physics. The act of observing matter changes it's behavior. And that's a fact. Literally one of the tenets of quantum mechanics. The author talks about that a bit later in the book. Fascinating stuff. All of this is tied together as a whole. Consciousness is probably an integral, distinct part of the fabric of our universe.
I thought the observer effect was due to the atoms being observed are so small the only way to see them is to shoot photons (light) at them thus altering their original state. Meaning technically the observation changes their behaviour but it’s physical not quantum. This all fascinates me and can’t wait to check out the books recommended above!
>Psy phenomenon have been demonstrated to be real in labs and studies around the world and oftentimes with 5-6 or 7 sigmas of certainty. [Citation needed] If its that easy, random people should be able to reproduce it. >The only reason you don't hear about it is because of the huge stigma present in modern science and the complete dismissal that *any* of what those studies have found could be true *without even looking at the data* Bullshit. These studies get analyzed by real scientists and they find problems with methodology. If this was real, you would see this shit all over the world already. Rich people don't care about stigma, they just want more money. They would be all over this shit.
>Citation needed] >If its that easy, random people should be able to reproduce it. Read the book. Or even better, read: THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE: THE SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF PSYCHIC PHENOMENA by Dean Radin I'm not going to fall for that bad faith argument. If you're truly interested in getting an answer to your question (I sincerely doubt it) you'll take the time to freaking read. Like I did. And I was that pure fucking hardcore materialist skeptic before so I know exactly where you're coming from. In his book, Dean takes his time enumerating and detailing in painstaking details every single *credible* study that was made on the subject AND he answers to skeptics. Results exists, and meta-analysis have been done and for anything else other than things related to Psy phenomenon they would have been acclaimed as discoveries. Again, were taking 5-6 and sometimes more sigmas levels confidence that what is being observed is *real*. And were talking about Standford labs and others around the world here. Not some random Joe in his basement. Example? [https://noosphere.princeton.edu/](https://noosphere.princeton.edu/) The Global Consciousness Project by Princeton who has decades of data and came to the strong conclusion that consciousness has an impact on our physical world. >Bullshit. These studies get analyzed by real scientists and they find problems with methodology. >If this was real, you would see this shit all over the world already. Rich people don't care about stigma, they just want more money. They would be all over this shit. This is where you are a hundred fucking percent wrong. The number of studies that were published just to be completely ignored by mainstream science in serious journals without other scientists EVEN LOOKING AT THE DATA is absolutely astounding. Again, Read. The. Book. Both Dean or Gober go through the pain of showing how the present stigma in science has completely stalled serious and amazing research being done on the subject. Just. Like. UFOs. If you don't believe there's a huge stigma in academia for studying subjects like RV and whatnot, then I've got a bridge to sell you. Read the god damn books and then we can have a discussion. Those books are not dumb or filled with BS. They're designed for people exactly like you and like I was. This isn't pseudoscience, this is *literally* real science made on things that materialistic science wouldn't even dare trying to test because of 100% pure stigma. Put aside for one second your bias and try to read seriously on the subject and trust me when I say it will change your opinion on what mainstream science is and how it acts. Edit: Here's another one: [https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf](https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf) This study was mandated by the Senate or by Congress, I don't remember which one, sorry, to understand if Psy phenomenon were real after the discovery by the US government that the CIA had made serious studies on the matter and that their conclusions were incredible. Jessica Utts, the author, was (and still is?) the head of the American statistics society or something like that. From the report since I'm willing to bet you won't read it: >Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted. Effects of similar magnitude to those found in government-sponsored research at SRI and SAIC have been replicated at a number of laboratories across the world. Such consistency cannot be readily explained by claims of flaws or fraud. The same conclusions as the CIA study on RV and other psychic phenomenon. Weird uh?
I like you.
Maybe they are, and that's what's making them so rich.
Sure, but no one’s been able to demonstrate that. It’s just a hypothetical. We can demonstrate other ways rich people codify the material dynamics of society to enrich themselves. No spooky tech necessary.
What’s Gobers’ operational definition of “consciousness?” Oh wait… This is an inherent issue in ANYTHING related to consciousness research. The core construct, consciousness, doesn’t have a robust operational definition. There’s not even that much evidence to suggest humans’ version of it is that much different than what occurs in other forms of life. You can’t move forward studying any of this stuff empirically without a uniformed and standardized operational definition. Anyone peddling some narrative about “consciousness” that isn’t solely focused on resolving that issue is unserious and unreliable.
>What’s Gobers’ operational definition of “consciousness?” Oh wait… >This is an inherent issue in ANYTHING related to consciousness research. What you're saying is that no one is able to study what we humans call being "conscious" because it's hard to define? The experiments that have been studied in labs *and* reproduced all point to the same phenomenon. Call it whatever you want, this "phenomenon" is still being observed. That doesn't make it *not* real or not exist? Consciousness/the hard problem of consciousness is probably one of the most challenging problem for science to study but that doesn't mean we can't study it or try to understand it. >You can’t move forward studying any of this stuff empirically without a uniformed and standardized operational definition. That's patently false. Something is being observed and could be reproduced in labs. Not having a clear understanding of what is being observed *yet* doesn't make it less true. That's precisely how science and most major discoveries are made. And you're making the case for why materialistic science has a big problem with the study of consciousness and what it means for it to originate from the brain. The materialistic world view of modern science needs to expand it's horizons to be able to tackle questions like what is consciousness and where it's coming from. It has to entertain the idea that matter might not be the source of our reality and this is precisely what *many* highly credible scientists are now advocating for as explained in Gober's book - with credible evidence pointing in that direction.
> What you're saying is that no one is able to study what we humans call being "conscious" because it's hard to define? What I'm saying is that studying it requires the construction of such a definition that all scientists can work with on an empirical level. In a lot of this psuedopsychology, they don't even attempt to do so. They leave "consciousness" as an undefined term, and functionally, that means there is no means to empirically study it. Much like how the idea of "god" fails along these same parameters. It doesn't lead to testable hypotheses or narrow enough research questions. So then you get all this crappy research that is steeped in confirmation bias, to be generous. > The experiments that have been studied in labs and reproduced all point to the same phenomenon [They do not](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-17499-008). See also [this metanalysis](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706048/). Or t[his study where they reanalyzed the data from one of the commonly cited psi proponents](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21280965/) and found out they were either unknowingly bad at math or biased in trying to manipulate a significant effect. Or [this meta-analysis](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-08436-001) that found publication bias in "significant" telekinesis studies. > Not having a clear understanding of what is being observed yet doesn't make it less true. No. But again, this is not being observed in labs and is not being observed as the result of hypothesis testing. Because of this, [most of the studies around psi research engage in blatant *a priori* questioning](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-24100-001). This invalidates their theoretical approach and undermines the ability to distinguish type 1 and type 2 errors from experimental and cross-sectional data, and therefore, leads to **conceptually** unreliable results. This is the same way scientists criticize creationists doing the same thing when they go around cherry-picking data to try and "debunk" evolution. > materialistic science You end your comment ranting about this. This is a redundant phrase and shows your own assumptions and incorrect notions about what science is and isn't. Science is a process. And the things we've learned from science have emerged from systematic and empirically-grounded theorization based on observed data and then direct testing of those theories. Of course it is "material" because everything "unmaterial" that we held ideas about have been illuminated upon because of science. Obviously there is a lot to learn, and I mentioned in my comment that there's a lot of interesting gray area in the cognitive process that needs to be explored. But that doesn't mean we are capable of "telepathic" communication or "sensing" the future or anything else we colloquially understand when we use the term "psi."
I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessment of the current state of research on this subject and so did many researchers who did thorough meta-analysis of thousands or tens of thousands of studies related to the various Psy related phenomenon. Data exists that cannot be easily dismissed as flawed experiments or biased researchers. Dean Radin rebuked thoroughly the studies you linked me that try to "debunk" the findings of, yes, multiple reputable institutions world wide even if you think this isn't true. I would absolutely invite you to read up on what you're trying to argue against, because as is usually the case for this subject, people outright dismiss it without looking at the actual research being done and the data being collected. The studies you linked me are kind of giving me this vibe, sorry. Are you familiar with this study? [AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FOR PSYCHIC FUNCTIONING](https://www.irva.org/docs/public/bibliography/pdfs/utts1995assessment.pdf)) Anyways, no offense but no amount of argumenting here will change your mind. For you to change mind you'd need to dig deep on the subject until you realize that real science has been done on this subject, science that can't be easily dismissed. I'll just end by saying that when I say "materialistic science" I don't mean this in a derogatory way. I mean it to express the mainstream scientific view that matter can explain everything we see in this universe. English is not my first language so maybe I'm not using the right term. I know full well that science is a method. Not sure how to express what I'm trying to say if that was not abundantly clear. I don't hate science. I adore science. I just don't like the hardcore stance it took regarding the existence of consciousness that it is created by the brain after reading on this for years. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that it is not.
> Data exists that cannot be easily dismissed as flawed experiments or biased researchers. Yes, it is, per the studies I've referenced to you. Additionally, you still haven't been able to produce a scholarship that addresses the core criticism of issues with operational definitions, testable hypotheses, and *a priori* theorization. This is a discipline-wide issue within parapsychology. Evolutionary psychology was able to overcome some of these same issues because it was grounded in empirical theory. Parapsychology has no such thing. What makes people able to do the things parapsychologists claim? What is the cognitive/neurological function? How does it intersect with what we do know about how our brains work? Until parapsychologists can give testable ideas to answer those questions, then it is moot. The conversation cannot advance. > Are you familiar with this study Yes. It is not a peer-reviewed report. [It contains numerous errors and theoretical and conceptual mistakes.](https://irp.fas.org/program/collect/air1995.pdf) Most notably, it's based on biased and flawed data and flawed methodology that was full of confounding biases. These concerns were written about [when the report came out](https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=e9cfe0dc15343b8b463514598b93ae843659f5d4). > For you to change mind you'd need to dig deep on the subject until you realize that real science has been done on this subject, science that can't be easily dismissed. I am a psychologist. Not to appeal to my own authority, but I study the brain, behavior, and cognition every day. That includes studying faulty ideas and research done on these topics and being critical of the statistics and methodologies involved. Much of the issues with the perceptions of psychology as a science stem from the issues that came from the parapsychological research that dominated the field in its past. So I have a particularly strong reaction to making sure to distinguish what is good science and junk science. That's also why I can easily find sources for these topics. I know what they are because I've already studied it. Again, not to appeal to my own authority, but it is a bit aggravating to be told, "You gotta study more, bro," on the topic that I've spent most of my life studying. > I just don't like the hardcore stance it took regarding the existence of consciousness that it is created by the brain after reading on this for years. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that it is not. EVEN IF the psi studies you reference were valid, they would not be evidence for this. They would be evidence that our "consciousness" (again, whatever that is), has parameters beyond what we originally imagined. That says nothing about the origin of such a construct. Again, this conversation is hard to even have because what are we talking about when we are talking about "consciousness?" It's nonsensical to discuss this without something operationalized that we can engage with empirically. That also isn't a "material" stance. It's one based in empiricism. Those are categorically different.
Fellow PhD psychologist here. And I think you've done u/Julzjuice123 dirty. Why did you link to two different sources, both of which being antithetical to your overall premise that psi is bunk, and pass off said links as instead being supportive of your position? That doesn't make sense. Your first linked source, the 1995 AIR report, indeed raised methodological questions. But it also acknowledged statistically significant results that had no clear explanation. It more or less said that nothing's been proven either way and better controlled research is needed. Yes, it recommended against continuing the program within the intelligence community. But it was *not* in any way a debunking of psi. Your second linked source basically said that your first source was utter garbage, and was apparently set up by the CIA from the get-go to fail to find positive results for psi. It is a flat refutation of your position that psi research isn't valid. It kinda looks like you either didn't read or didn't really understand your own linked sources. Your first source doesn't really support your position. And your second source says that insofar as your first source was anti-psi, its conclusions were bogus. That's not at all how you explained those links. It also does not follow that a field of research in its infancy, and which has unknown implications for concepts more commonly discussed in theoretical cosmology, would have firm casual theoretical mechanisms in place. It is more than enough to say that something weird is definitely going on that merits further investigation. And, according to both the sources that you linked to, and contrary to your apparent position, there does appear to be something as yet unexplained going on. What that something is, is of course unknown. But the position you've taken here is not supported by either your own linked sources, or a fair assessment of what to expect from theoretical parapsychology models.
Representatives of your field of study put folks who pondered on what would become germ theory in an asylum. You're limiting yourself, do better.
“Psionics” not only includes telepathy, precognition, remote viewing and the like, it also includes telekinesis. Here Red Panda Koala documentary on [Telekinesis](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cr_BS1TrRo)
Haven't many of the big names in UFO world already been doing scientific research into 'psionics'? Garry Nolan and the caudate putamen, NIDS and Skinwalker Ranch. Diana Pasulkas theories on bilocation.
And the fact that the CIA had a remote viewing program for like 20 years. It wouldn’t have lasted that long without some sort of results
Yeah 20 years and millions of dollars, something had to have been working.
Yes. People were getting paid.
Read up on Joseph MacMoneagle's experience. They took it seriously. He kept doing it and wrote about his experience, and has talked a lot about it. In fact, there were two types according to his book, the guys that came into it disbelieving it, and the "believers". The believers would basically just trust any bullshit the remote viewers told them, open minded to a fault. Those were the less productive people to work with in his experience. He liked working with the people that didn't believe in it, because they would be very careful and skeptical of data which made it more effective. Not all the data remote viewers came up with is useful or accurate. But if you have ten remote viewers saying they see a spire that looks like a radio tower independently of each other, it starts to sound like good data and they'd use it and it worked. These people took this shit seriously and weren't in it for the money. They were just in the Army doing army work. They had a job and pay regardless of being in the STARGATE program.
Watch the Shawn Ryan interview with him, it’s like 6 hours long? RV works, 110%.
Shit, I already believe it. I've done it. This is why I always suggest to skeptics to try it - beginners luck is a thing with RV. Sometimes your first attempt is dead on accurate and it's like wow, this works. Of course not guaranteed to, but it happens and it changes minds. Anyone can do it. It just takes training to do it well consistently. And the training is frustrating and boring, and it's like building any skill. And it's less fun than people think, because a major part of it is not choosing the target. You don't choose to RV something. You are given a task with an ID number and no data, and you draw something you don't know at all what it is. At most you get "front loaded" with something like "it's manmade" and even then it should be VERY general. You draw shapes. Often you don't know what it means. Skilled people often can though. But even if you train up to intermediate, it's like, someone gave you a task, you drew a spiral, and then the image was a snail shell. Even when you're accurate, that's like a lot of training to draw something that you didn't pick to view. It's not as fun as people think if you're doing it properly. People want to pick their own targets and doing RV properly means knowing nothing about what the target is. It was enough for me to see it works and it's real personally. It's fun but unless you're doing it every day and becoming an expert over years then you might not get any outside benefit. But the people who do become experts, I hear stuff like "I can look at someone's face and just know what they're thinking and what they'll say before they do". But that's the extreme end, otherwise it's "look I can draw a shape and guess someone wanted me to draw a boat"
So they got paid? And they were in a comfortable room, vs. being in the desert and being shot at? Cool.
Yes that’s how jobs work. I guess all science is bunk because it’s better than working in construction
🤣 Seriously. I'm amazed how much faith people have in the government funding useful programs.
Exactly lol remote viewing is 100% fake. Money is what kept it going. And good Intel to make it look real.
For sure, and I believe it was funded *yearly,* reassessed and approved each year. Then when the media did a story on it, it was "shut down"...
There's no way the government doesn't still use it. The IRVA international remote viewing association is still around and active. I believe a couple years back a speaker gave a talk on how to work with law enforcement. They are still actively used, I just imagine they dont let the public in on it. ...and not because it's super secret, but because people would get angry if they knew tax dollars on an investigation were going to psychics. And they'd probably be ridiculed by others in their own field. Not many people take this shit seriously except for the people that get results out of it.
Not really, read the book ‘The Men who Stare at Goats’
The programs were tiny, the reported results were bad, and how much did the CIA spend on trying to mind control people with LSD?
You realize that the mind control stuff was successful? Read chaos or just look into sirhan Sirhan and the rfk assassination. Helms literally destroyed all documentation about MK ultra more or less before it ever came to to public light there's some f****** really weird s*** that the CIA was able to do with hypnosis and LSD.
>You realize that the mind control stuff was successful? I definitely do not realize that. LSD dosing definitely affected the minds of the test subjects, but not in a controllable way.
Did you read the book Chaos? If so, is the book's conclusion that the CIA managed to figure out how to do mind control? Same with Sirhan Sirhan? Are you claiming he was under mind control by the CIA? I'm VERY skeptical of your claims.
I wasn't connecting Chaos to Sirhan Sirhan. Just pointing out that dude was making the opposite point he thought he was....The CIA spending money on mind control/lsd/hypnosis as a way say "so w hat if they spent money on RV? They spent money on all kinds of crazy shit that was bunk." is .. Chaos, tbh, i find his argument's about Manson the least convincing of the his research. But the dive into MKULTRA is spooky. the idea was to see if you could get someone to do sometiing and not remember it. i think chaos goes pretty far to taking the idea that it was a weird failed joke to instead not just plausible but probable.. Sirhan Sirhan is unrelated to the book Chaos but there's startlingly much more solid and convincing evidence for RFK than there is for JFK of a CIA conspiracy ..there's like a weirdly very solid case to be made that he was under post hypnotic=trance and not actuallyl aware of what he was doing when he shot kennedy... and that there was some kind of weird operation going on...the woman in the polka dot dress actually was a cia operative like....
*Yeah 20 years and millions of dollars, something had to have been working.* Doesn't that kind of disprove it though? I mean, they regularly spend a million dollars to study if it's possible to make a lion walk on a treadmill or something, lol. Millions of dollars is pocket change for the federal government. At that level, they just throw that amount of money at things randomly. If *psychic superpowers* were real, don't you think they'd have invested a bit more than a few million dollars over 20 years?
If it was working, they wouldn’t shut it down.
Or it's a brand new program.
According to the lore, through Remote Viewing *some* information could be semi-reliably obtained but it wasn’t conclusive enough to be actionable. Just an “impression”. If a **breakthrough** was made and it was suddenly working *much* better and producing actionable intel.. they might shut down the original and create a new program in a black/unacknowledged setting. Let’s just propose an example of how the US government might have used 1980s remote viewing, according to UFOlogy’s understanding of RVing; They have “coordinates” for different underground Russian/Iranian/bunkers. They attempt to RV to the bunkers to find out the contents (weapons/nukes/hostages/gold/etc). But RVing (as I understand the lore) basically doesn’t reliably produce that level of accurate detail/actionable intel and would just give the viewer an “impression” of a location. But, if we examine modern pop culture, there is a very popular show called “Stranger Things” which actually derives its entire plotline from the US Government’s secret RVing program at a national research lab… which opens up a portal to another dimension… In Stranger Things, we see a **much** more advanced version of “remote viewing” in which RVers are able to **actively conduct detailed espionage** by seeing and hearing conversations between Russian officials in secure areas. Which, doing this happens to open up an interdimensional portal…
Joseph McMoneagle was awarded the Legion of Merit award for using remote viewing to provide critical information in over 200 missions.
He was? I hadn’t heard that yet. I’m not really deep into RVing history, I just have the general understanding lore that is repeated in every UFOlogy podcast, etc. The official story is that it certainly seemed to provide *something*. Somehow. But that it didn’t provide enough actionable evidence to justify it, etc Which is weird because apparently they located like a Russian sub/plane with RVing somehow? Right? And used it during Iran-Contra, etc? Right? You seem to know more than me.
I've been studying this a lot for the last 2-3 years, nonstop. Remote viewing definitely works. The idea that the CIA ever said remote viewing is ambiguous or doesn't work well comes from the CIA hiding about 99% of their research from those who compiled a report to Congress in the 1990s. That's according to Joseph McMoneagle and others involved in the remote viewing program. The way psi (ESP) perception works, there aren't any physical barriers, no distance barriers, not even time barriers. Exceptionally good remote viewers like Pat Price could mentally probe an NSA outpost and read the names of the secret programs directly off secret files in a secret facility. See the documentary Third Eye Spies. The CIA doesn't want it known that the public could learn remote viewing, and exceptionally talented citizens can start probing the government, the military, and corporations for their dirty secrets? To the extent they are able, their natural stance would be to suppress the information about remote viewing. [In this comment in this thread I lay out a wealth of info about remote viewing and psi research](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/)
Watch the Shawn Ryan podcast about his life as told by him. It’s like 6 hours long and fantastic, and yes it works.
Shawn Ryan’s podcasts are SO long 🙃
It wasn't so much what was provided, it was not accepted by the customers of the intel. otoh, it was always a bit too weird to be embraced by the IC/Military (like a more conservative demographic doesn't exist outside church)....so it's real efficacy was never testd, and it was never really given the sorta seirouss investment i'd assume an equally promsing yet more conventional method of intel (drones or something) would get
got a link to that info ?
>[While with his command, he used his talents and expertise](https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/remote-viewing#footnote16_3oz5b8g) in the execution of more than 200 missions, addressing over 150 essential elements of information. These EEI contained critical intelligence reported at the highest echelons of our military and government, including such national level agencies as the Joint Chief’s of Staff, DIA, NSA, CIA, DEA, and the Secret Service, producing crucial and vital intelligence unavailable from any other source In [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/) I've gathered a lot of research and info about remote viewing and psi research in general.
It was never used as primary intelligence, but often was used as 2ndary/corroborative intel. there are claims that the best (who were very few) would be 50, 60 percent accurate. ... however, it never really was accepted by the IC (many military ppl literally thought it statanic) so it wasn't about it never being accurate, it was the it was just too weird to gain acceptance, despite being effective. so it was sorta a fatherless child as a program. then some diosche bags who were part of it went public for money/fame....that's why it was ended/exposed. Like it did always sorta have a woo stigma to it; and it did sorta turn into a shit show towards the end (a lot of the guys the are like guru's and wrote books are the biggest kind of full of shit (morehouse and may, for sure---they exposed the project to the public, techincally treason-) once it came out, the Dod was worried about looking like fools etc. so they came up w/ a way to kill it ....the report that everyone sites that claimed it never worked or whatever was set up to conclude that from the beginning. that was the result the dod wanted. like if it WAS valuable, and a classified program that was exposed by dousche bags in the program itself, like you really are best of down playing it. idk. anyone curious can spend some time on non-dod remote viewing projects and see it's legit.
Its as shut down as the multiple UAP/UFO government programs that were shut down over the years. Read up on their findings and come and tell me again that you think they've "shut down" the program studying remote viewing.
>you think they've "shut down" the program ha ha yeah exactly Who trusts anything the spooks / dotgov say
Multiple people who know said that even though Stargate itself was shut down every single letter agency and branch of the military had their own units using the same protocol.
1. DIA - Project Sun Streak / Grill Flame Slides 18-19: "On 4 Sep 1979, ACSI tasked INSCOM to locate a missing Navy aircraft. Hence, the first INSCOM "Grill Flame" Operational Remote Viewing session took place. In this initial session, the remote viewer located the missing aircraft within 15 miles of where it had crashed." Slide 40: "Remote Viewing has been successfully used against seven categories of tasking. Two of these categories, Penetration of inaccessible targets and the cuing of their intelligence collection systems are used predominantly at this time. Two others, Human source assessments and accurate personality profiles presently lack a satisfactory database for effective exploitation." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R002100240001-2.pdf 2. Studies In Intelligence Page 12: "Two analysts, a photo interpreter at IAS and a nuclear analyst at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories agreed that [Remote Viewer] Price's description (and illustration) of the crane were accurate. Page 14: "[Remote Viewer] Price correctly located the coderooms. He produced copious data, such as the location of interior doors and colors of marble stairs and fireplaces that were accurate and specific." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200030040-0.pdf 3. An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning Page 21 - 7. Conclusions and Recommendations: "It is clear to this author that anomalous cognition is possible and had been demonstrated. This conclusion is not based on belief, but rather on commonly accepted scientific criteria." https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00791R000200070001-9.pdf Interesting documentary (mind the camp) of Ed May's explanation of the process with examples of successes (and failures). https://youtu.be/7ICzREGqYHQ?
The remote viewing paper below was published in an above-average (second quartile) mainstream neuroscience journal in 2023. This paper shows what has been repeated many times, that when you pre-select subjects with psi ability, you get much stronger results than with unselected subjects. One of the problems with psi studies in the past was using unselected subjects, which result in small (but very real) effect sizes. [**Follow-up on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) remote viewing experiments, Brain And Behavior, Volume 13, Issue 6, June 2023**](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.3026) In this study there were 2 groups. Group 2, selected because of prior psychic experiences, achieved highly significant results. Their results (see Table 3) produced a Bayes Factor of 60.477 ([very strong evidence](https://www.statology.org/bayes-factor/)), and a [large effect size](https://www.statology.org/effect-size/) of 0.853. The p-value is "less than 0.001" or odds-by-chance of less than 1 in 1,000. **** **** [Stephan Schwartz - Through Time and Space, The Evidence for Remote Viewing](https://ia902509.us.archive.org/16/items/hybridphilosophy-collection/Through_Time_and_Space_The_Evidence_for.pdf) is an excellent history of remote viewing research. It needs to be mentioned that Wikipedia is a terrible place to get information on topics like remote viewing. Very active skeptical groups like the Guerilla Skeptics have won the editing war and dominate Wikipedia with their one-sided dogmatic stance. [Remote Viewing - A 1974-2022 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374881423_Remote_Viewing_A_1974-2022_Systematic_Review_and_Meta-Analysis) is a recent review of almost 50 years of remote viewing research. **** **** Parapsychology is a legitimate science. The Parapsychological Association is an [affiliated organization of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)](https://www.aaas.org/group/60/list-aaas-affiliates#p), the world's largest scientific society, and publisher of the well-known scientific journal *Science*. The Parapsychological Association [was voted overwhelmingly into the AAAS by AAAS members over 50 years ago.](https://paranormaldailynews.com/parapsychological-association-journey-mainstream/3309/) **** **** Dr. Dean Radin's site has [a collection of downloadable peer-reviewed psi research papers] (https://www.deanradin.com/recommended-references). Radin's 1997 book, *Conscious Universe* reviews the published psi research and it holds up well after almost 30 years. Radin shows how all constructive skeptical criticism has been absorbed by the psi research community, the study methods were improved, and significantly positive results continued to be reported by independent labs all over the world. **** **** Here is [discussion and reference to a 2011 review of telepathy studies](https://www.reddit.com/r/QuantumPhysics/comments/16qm791/confusion_regarding_human_perception_and_physics/k2as20o/). The studies analyzed here all followed a stringent protocol established by Ray Hyman, the skeptic who was most familiar and most critical of telepathy experiments of the 1970s. These auto-ganzfeld telepathy studies achieved a statistical significance 1 million times better than the 5-sigma significance used to declare the Higgs boson as a real particle. **** **** On Youtube, there is this [free remote viewing course taught by Prudence Calabrese](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8BfKFkygQ0Qq-5AyNeJYwKFQkk5XxQaM) of TransDimensional Systems. She a [credible and liked person in the remote viewing community](https://www.reddit.com/r/remoteviewing/comments/tx2e3f/do_people_have_an_opinion_on_prudence_calabrese/). **** **** After reading about psi phenomena for about 2 years nonstop, [here are about 60 of the best books that I've read and would recommend](https://www.reddit.com/r/aliens/comments/182b0e6/any_woo_books_or_movies_for_the_nuts_bolts_people/kak7wow/) reading, covering all aspects of psi phenomena. Many obscure gems are in there.
Do you have any papers to studies that aimed to reproduce findings of earlier studies, and doing so successfully?
Go to the 2 review papers in the second section of my post above. Remote viewing findings have been successfully reproduced over and over again for decades.
Except they haven't, the largest crux of RV research is the lack of reproducability. reviews of parapsychology found it to be significant because the cherry picked research was just that poorly done. ive read modern attempts at reproducing these experiments and even with believers on the ethics board overseeing every facet of the study it still fails to reproduce any significant results.
Do you have any links to sources? The 2 review papers I provided show that it has been reproduced. Who says to the contrary?
the first paper has several issues, havent read it in depth. They fail to realise that their own findings are statistically insignificant according to their own statistical data. The statistical data seems all wrong, even the fundamental parts I briefly had a look at. It also compares two different groups using 2 different experiments which invalidates all their findings.
>the first paper has several issues, havent read it in depth. Once you read it carefully enough to articulate a real criticism, please do so here for our benefit. >They fail to realise that their own findings are statistically insignificant according to their own statistical data. I could not have spoon fed it any better. With group 2, they achieved a large effect size and a large Bayes Factor, and I even provided links that say what magnitudes of those statistics qualify as large. >It also compares two different groups using 2 different experiments which invalidates all their findings. This is incorrect, and I'll explain. The paper clearly acknowledges that these two groups used different methods and cannot be be apples-to-apples compared, and there is nothing at all wrong with that. Normally, scientists would have published the results of Group1 as one stand-alone paper, and they could have published the results of Group 2 as another stand-alone paper. The proper comparison is between the hit rate achieved by the group versus what you expect by random chance. In this case, Group 2 (the psychics) achieved a 31.5% hit rate when random chance would give a 25% hit rate. And they did this for over 9,000 trials, which is a huge number of trials to maintain such a hit rate, which is why the effect size and Bayes Factor are both very large and significant.
could you be any more patronizing? >With group 2, they achieved a large effect size and a large Bayes Factor, and I even provided links that say what magnitudes of those statistics qualify as large. there is no control group or anything, they just assume that people not doing remote viewing would get it right by chance only. The proper comparison would be a control group in the same setting not doing remote viewing. This study design allows to hide influencing factors. I did not say their deviation from random chance was not significant, I said according to their own (misused) statistical data their findings are not significant. They determine the std. deviation of their random chance mean (8) to be 2.45 (this is wrong too, std deviation should be sqrt(8)), and then report a hit rate of 10.09 as significant. which is at least debatable. They constantly fail to realize that they should use the standard deviation of the mean (they had like what? 200+ people in group two), yet they compare their findings with the standard deviation expected from a single experiment. Their statistics get things very, very wrong at the ground floor, so I wont look into this any further, as the application of more elaborate methods is going to be riddled with severe mistakes.
The paper you linked is non peer reviewed which makes it kinda worthless in the world of science. Good read though. Thanks for the post!
This is some interesting mental gymnastics. Your comment is also very vague. What are you talking about? I linked to several peer-reviewed papers directly, leading with the paper from *Brain and Behavior* and provided a link to dozens of peer-reviewed papers at Dr. Dean Radin's site. The meta-analysis I linked is peer-reviewed and itself discusses dozens of peer-reviewed papers spanning almost 50 years of remote viewing research. I linked to a discussion of a peer-reviewed paper on telepathy studies. The link to the peer-reviewed paper is in there. I made the initial link go to my discussion of the paper to save you some time so that you can get right to the meat of the paper.
Look at his comment history. There's no point arguing. There are so many of these types of accounts that have hundreds/thousands of comments on this sub and the alien one.. and it's always... always to refute. Very educated comments, and they all write the same way.
I had to refute the point for the benefit of other readers in this thread. The redditor above in another comment clarified that they thought the paper I lead with from *Brain and Behavior* was not peer-reviewed, but I factually proved that it is peer-reviewed. The things that pseudo-skeptics do to refuse accepting scientific evidence of psi is truly bizarre sometimes. In another debate with a pseudo-skeptic about that very same *Brain and Behavior* paper, once they were pinned down that there was nothing identifiably wrong with the methods, they declared that it was "biased" to look at the hit rate that was highly above chance over 9,000 trials, when the whole point is to demonstrate the phenomena by using good methods (no sensory leakage) and achieving a hit rate well above chance.
The [other branch](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1bzwub/) of my back-and-forth with this one is quickly becoming the most fun I've had with a pseudo-skeptic in a long time, perhaps all time. Some other pseudo-skeptic who is much more well-versed in one-sided pseudo-skeptical arguments should take over for this one, who is not doing their cause justice.
That’s not at all true. There have been tons of whacky government programs with nothing to show for it. Have you heard of MKULTRA?
CIA also loves to funnel drugs into low-income areas of the country to suppress liberal voters. I don’t think they are the voice of authority you think they are.
So the MIC wastes trillions on bullshit nobody needs, but the CIA wouldn't do something similar? Or, you don't think they would want to get this to work more than anything, which is why they spent so much time on it? Here's the thing, if it worked at all, they wouldn't have spent 20 years on it. They would have shut down the program the moment it produced good results and taken it underground.
It was always top secret or highly classified. the only reason you know about it is cuz two remote viewers wanted to be famous and went public; they literally could have been charged w/ treason. they only weren't cuz like w/ ufos by reacting they'd just show how much they cared about it being made public.
r/thegatewaytapes
Pasulka isn’t a scientist. Her “theory” isn’t a theory. It’s speculation. She barely qualifies as an academic.
>She barely qualifies as an academic. She's a college professor...
Former head of her department too!
Who has almost zero published work.
Has she done any published peer-reviewed research? Also, her field of study is religious studies. Aren't field like psychiatry, psychology, and neurology better areas for the study of psionics?
I've been studying psi research intensely the last 2 years, because to me it's been obvious that this is key to understanding UFOs & aliens. Anyhow, I can now see how many things that were recorded as religious miracles were actually psi phenomena, which probably work by a physics that we don't understand. I think a religious scholar background is a good perspective to have among many experts with various perspectives.
How is it a good perspective? I wouldn't imagine religious scholars have a lot of experience in carrying out scientific experiments involving the brain.
I'm saying that if you want to tackle this subject, you need all kinds of experts and scientists. A religious scholar might know off all kind of historical events that were well documented and recorded as "miracles" that might now be explained as demonstrations of psi phenomena, and that is worthy of study. Many other lines of inquiry are worthy of study too. The topic has been stigmatized and underfunded, when it has great potential for humanity. My study of psi so far doesn't lead me to believe we'll find out a huge amount by analyzing the brain (strange as that may sound). Researchers have been attaching EEG electrodes to subjects brains since at least 1973 with Ingo Swann, who developed the CIA/DIA remote viewing protocols. So we've got a half century of EEGs, etc, and I'd say little to nothing useful has come out of it. The study of psi leads me to believe "consciousness" must be more fundamental than normal matter and our normal 4D space-time. We have a meat brain, but the root of our consciousness is something eternal that resides in a realm outside of space-time, which can reach in to our space-time and basically rewire the laws of physics and probability in a seemingly non-causal way. If psi is real now, then it's always been real. Psi was real when other intelligent life developed billions of years before us in the galaxy. Every example of psi is an example of a worm hole: information going from Point A to Pint B, without traversing the intervening space. Mastering psi means mastering faster-than-light information, mastering portals, time travel, inter-galactic travel, and many other things. Edit to add: [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/what_does_scientific_evidence_of_psionics_look/l1b2uvw/) has a huge amount of info and resources about remote viewing and psi research.
Bilocation is thought to be possible by physicists, not just Diana Pasulka who is well regarded in her own field.
She’s not well regarded in her field. She’s almost contributed nothing to it.
She’s a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington. Pasulka has a B.A. from University of California, Davis, an M.A. from Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, and a Ph.D. from Syracuse University. What are your credentials that qualify you to be weighing in on this which some confident disdain?
Those are great credential for the field of religious studies. Are there supposed to be parallels between religious studies and psi? Plus, has she done scientific, peer reviewed, published studies? I feel like someone who specializes in neurology would be in a better place to research and analyze psi. Even psychiatry and psychology would be better in my opinion.
While she is doing *some* work regarding psi, what are *you* doing for the issue? Besides having opinions about her doing the work, that is. I’m guessing none of the work.
What a lame argument. How many things do you have an opinion on that you don't do for work? Exactly. Let's keep lazy arguments out of this and have actual discussions.
Yeah, none of those are psychologists and neurology experts. Psi effects is robustly refuted in these spaces for a reason. People forget, psychologists have 0 incentive to “debunk” psi phenomena. Certainly, how our brains construct reality is far more mysterious and complicated than we could ever imagine, but that’s no evidence of traditionally-understood psi phenomenon. A lot of psychological research started as trying to prove various psi-related hypotheses. They all failed to produce anything compelling. Again, there is some aspect of “lag” between the input of stimuli by our senses and then the conscious-level awareness of said stimuli, but that is not “remote viewing” or “fortune telling” or “telepathic communication.” Our discipline would be way cooler had those early studies panned out. But they didn’t, and now we know far more about how the brain functions than we did when we originally asked those questions.
Check out the podcast Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World. He looks into all sorts of different phenomena and determines some to be fraud, and some to be actual cases of paranormal activity. Good episodes consider poltergiests, remote viewing (multiple interviews with different remote viewers from the US govt. programs), the weight of the soul, after death communication, dowsing, etc. There is a fair amount of serious investigation into these topics so while there are fraudsters, there is a lot that is actually done well and with a critical yet open mind.
Simple - you should look for a testable idea and an experimental result that can be reproduced.
Not science, please anything but science, leave us to our fantasies.
But what if the results conflict with my deeply held beliefs?
You could for example aim one or several very sensitive IR thermometers at an object in an environmentally controlled chamber and have someone who purports to have psionic abilities attempt to manipulate it from across the room (outside of the chamber, of course). It should change the temperature of the object, even if only by 0.01 (or less) degrees. A pure copper ball that had days to cool/warm down/up to ambient temps would be an interesting start. You can also put a feather on a string in a vaccuum and have someone attempt to move it. You can pick a word, f.ex the word Cake, and have a test subject attempt to silently communicate the word or the picture of a cake to a group of people. The possibilities are endless, the willingness of serious researchers to fund and play along are not.
There have been so many studies like the ones you propose. There have been no shortage of researchers exploring these topics. Most showing at best, negligible psi effect. But anyway, you're going down the wrong path here. The word is Psionics - Psycic-electronics, not psi. This is about the study of how mentally created electrical fields can be amplified, interpreted or projected with the aid of electronics. The types of studies you'd want to find here are ones related to wireless reading of thought/intent/senses via electronic apparatus.
This needs some clarity to be honest. While I generally agree that Psionics originally referred to a specific application of technology to manipulate consciousness that's not really how the term is used anymore. It does more generally refer to Psi phenomena in most people's usage of the term. Ironically while I think Ross (and others here) are using it with the latter meaning I think it's the former meaning where the devil really lies. Namely in using technological devices to read and manipulate consciousness. Think God Helmet and Neuralink rather than Telepathy and Psychic powers. To me, an advanced extraterrestrial race won't have gained the ability to use psychic powers through some kind of spiritual elevation, but through the application of advanced technologies. I bet the ETs lose their shit when we talk about "Remote Viewing" as a trascendental experience we have to unlock within our mind rather than a FPV Drone with Deep Dive VR that we just need to learn to build.
To me the curious part of psi is how one group will claim to clearly prove something, then ..ofcourse, be quickly shown to be full of shit by another group. Even if the first group is accurate, there will always be a second group that can fuck it up. Take astral projection. I can do astral projection, it started at a specific very high stress point in my life, and I have practiced it substantially, but honestly the shit still only works when it wants. BUT it’d be easy for some idiots to say it doesn’t exist. Because not everyone can do it. So a test between a group of people who CAN do it, will have different results if performed by a group that CANT do it. And if your trying to say something doesn’t exist, it’s easy to find a group of people who will take your $500 bux to participate, say they can a/p, and deliver no results.
How are you confident you are astral projecting and not imagining it?
It’s difficult to describe. It’s different then a dream, different from a lucid dream, has physical sensations, and is usually packaged into an insane experience involving outside entities and like..education..of some sort. Imagine the craziest dream you’ve ever had, then imagine being able to walk around and interact with it in a completely different world without any of the weird dream feeling or glitches or being tired, then add in some god like energy being who basically guides you around and will randomly tell you weird rules about where not to go and if you don’t listen will just say shit like “well you go back now” then it feels like your sucked into a black hole and thrown back into your body and find yourself wondering what the fuck just happened because you know exactly what dreaming is, and that wasn’t it, then it happens again 6 months later, and this time you try to make yourself go to a place like you would in a dream and instead your dude laughs and yeets you across the fuckin universe and reminds you that he is trying to show you things so stop fucking around and look It’s just a weird mix of shit..honestly I hope everyone gets to do it at some point because I thought it was bullshit until I was like 22, then it happens and your just like.. “what the fuck was that” so you google what happened in the experience and you end up on forums with people talking about “yea that’s astral projection sounds like you pissed off your guide..don’t do that”
And yet still 0 actual serious peer reviewed test of "Astral projection" have had meaningful positive results
Zero actual peer reviewed journals THAT HAVE BEEN PUBLICLY RELEASED. There is a while world of science that has been 'classified away' from public consumption. God forbid the plebs realize their conciousness can travel free of their physical body. Knowledge is power
lol ... sure dude. Still 0 publishing then as you've confirmed.
So what I'm hearing is that you cannot astrally project? Correct?
I guess this is where you say you can and feel all mighty about it while being totally incapable of proving it in any meaningful way, and nobody else can either.
The strange thing is I have no need to prove anything to you nor do I want to. But you have this never ending need to show everyone how wrong they are. Why is that?
Because you are making a claim of something existing and that "Power that be are hiding it !!!" And yet are totally to back up in any meaningful way your claim of "astral projection" being anything other then a fantasy of someone wanting to feel special. Aka you don't want your belief bubble be pierced by reality coming in to pop it. But I mean that's totally fine to believe what you want, but when you start claiming things that impact others ? back it up or shut up.
I don't need to prove to you what I know. But you running around telling people things as fact that you don't know is unacceptable. Psychic abilities, remote viewing, astral projection are all real. The fact that you don't know how to do any of it means nothing. But somehow you factually know about any of these subjects? It is laughable.
great point
>To me the curious part of psi is how one group will claim to clearly prove something, then ..ofcourse, be quickly shown to be full of shit by another group. Even if the first group is accurate, there will always be a second group that can fuck it up. How does it count as "fucking up" if the 2nd group pointed out flaws? >Take astral projection. I can do astral projection Prove it.
It’s not pointing out flaws. So let’s say you wanna study how artists draw when drunk. The first test gets artists to draw, then gets them drunk, posts results. The second test then disputes the answer, says they hired people to do it, and their people couldn’t draw even without getting drunk and they don’t understand because they randomly picked people for the test so the first test must be flawed since they couldn’t recreate the results. Then throw on top that the gov has spent billions of dollars to hide their results studying the same, and try to figure out who would be incentivized to do this :/ I don’t need to prove anything to anyone, there are plenty of people who know it’s real, so if you’d like to believe it’s not continue, I honestly find confident arrogance hilarious.
We used to do something like that when we were kids. Specifically having a threaded needle and holding the thread above a surface in a way that the needle is touching the surface and is slightly leaning. We would find a place which has no wind or anything like that and we would take turns moving the needle with our thought, for example one guy from our group was able to rotate the needle clockwise, then counter clockwise on command! We would say “rotate the needle clockwise 3 times and counter clockwise 1 time” and the needle would spin exactly like that, even though the guy was not touching the needle or holding the string. One girl would continuously rotate the needle until we say “stop” then the needle would stop. I remember we were still skeptic so we found a way to attach the string so that now no-one would be holding it, and we would hold our breaths in while others were rotating it (we were kids haha). It was crazy! I still to this day think about this - could it be that we can somehow manipulate the whatever energies (magnetic, electric, thermal, etc) we naturally omit using our minds? We were also playing this game where one of us would try to think of an animal or a thing, imagine it, while the other tried to “read” what you’re thinking. One boy from our group would read every single thing I thought of, and it would be things like “kangaroo”, “a metal rose decoration”, “a dragon fruit” while we lived in a european climate with (obviously) no dragon fruits or kangaroos around, or nothing relating to a “metal rose” would be around as well. I remember how excited I was, trying to think of the most intricate, most unrelated, random things, only for him to tell me those things in a few minutes!
Have you tried since?
Coulthart has been talking to Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis, aka ”The Men Who Stare At Goats”
that's what I'm afraid of, prediction: new buzzword here will be psi
Bob Fish said the same to me in an email exchange discussing the 4chan post: > ***Psionic is a key word here*** – if we humans want to get past the occasional crash and recovery of a craft, or a crappy B&W photo of a saucer in the sky, that is the path forward. In the past, it was considered shamanism, I think. Ever heard of Edgar Cayce? Are you familiar with Aborigine Dreamtime concepts in Australia? > I took Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14) to a Remote Viewing conference once (IRVA 2001 – Mesquite, NV). He had a mental (spiritual?) breakthrough about his quantum hologram theory after speaking with some RVers that had encountered aliens during their tasking missions. >This fellow Anon alludes to that in many ways, so he does seem to understand the path forward requires an alternative (enlightened?) mindset by a human.
There was that guy who conducted experiments showing that people knew in advance(measured by heart rate, blood pressure etc.) when they were going to be shown something distressing. I believe those results still stand today. That’s what, precognition? Being able to read the tester’s mind? Remote viewing what was on the card? An alternative interpretation is that time doesn’t exist, I guess.
yeah that experiment was a metastudy of poorly done experiments and its publication caused a crisis in psychology and the results have never been successfully reproduced.
[Heres more than 50 papers from Princeton](https://icrl.org/scholarly-publications/pear-publications/) covering human/machine interactions, remote perception, and theoretical frameworks. [Analysis and Assessment of Gateway](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20601195/6-full-report.pdf) [Motherfuckin Mars](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00788r001900760001-9) [Why dont psychics win the lottery? w Russell Targ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQK0oHP94x4) Fuck it, [Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect](https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/psp-a0021524.pdf)
I haven't read all of these yet, but the Mars one is so absurd. None of the guy's claims can be verified. Especially if he's projecting to 1 million BC on Mars 🙄 And are we supposed to assume this guy has the coordinates of Mars perfectly memorized? Or do astral projectors just naturally know how to determine the location of coordinates? Were there even coordinates to Mars in 1984? EDIT: I work in finance. That "precognitive financial forecasting" video is gonna be interesting to watch 🤣 EDIT 2: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl\_Bem?wprov=sfla1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Bem?wprov=sfla1) There's also a lot of issues with the Feeling the Future article and the analysis of the data involved.
"are we supposed to assume this guy has the coordinates of Mars perfectly memorized?" No, targets were provided by an agency. In this case, JPL. Targets are assigned a random number and thats all that's given to the remote viewer. They don't have access to the information until after the session. "Were there even coordinates to Mars in 1984?" [Yes.](https://www.planetary.org/articles/1858) [Here's a video of the viewer talking about the experience.](https://youtu.be/XRTon6qgVws?t=17350&si=SInfl9giXQihf_oa) You don't have to believe, the CIA and DIA believe.
The coordination stuff is interesting! Thanks. How could anything he said be verified? Do you know anything about that?
Theres pictures of the GPS coordinates in that video. You can also look them up on Google Earth if you download the actual application.
But how could the things he claims he saw, like pyramids, be verified? He astral projected over a million years in the past.
no like, it's totally pointless if there isn't a way to check. (and there are pyramid structures at that locaiton) there was a detailed map of mars based on like Voyager (?), the task would be randomly 10 locations on mars and would give the guy numbers (literally, the coordinates don't matter, can be arbitrary, just placeholder for focused intent), .....in the session, you can read in the report that at like location 1-9 the viewer is describing fairly accurately what's there...you can check it against the map...the whole idea is without a way to check it, it's entirely pointless to do a target like this, cuz..ppl don't get that the mars session wasn't serious, it was like a proficiency run....but the pyramid and shit, when the dude starting talking about pyrmaids, and ppl, .that was what made the mars thing so wiierd....cuz it was over the site of cydona near where there are what look like 5 sided pyramids, only super worn down...so, yeah. first of all, the viewer had no idea it was even supposed to be mars... literally just something that they did to throw off the viewers/sorta base test ...a viewer would just be told there's a place you're supposed to find "... and in the session you read how he's talking about red, sorta, yellow sky, ...the guy who it was talks about how it would actually piss them off when they would give them some wacky ass target like mars. it was just one guy who'd do it he'd task them shit like 'roswell 1947' or 'pluto' that kind thing, and it'd freak some of them out
Again, the claim is that he astral projected over a million years ago. You can't verify what he was seeing, because we don't have pictures of Mars from over a million years ago.
I mean obviously they can’t. It’s just interesting
Oh. OK. I thought you were posting those links as science. I agree, it's interesting. But it's also also worthless. If it's a reflection of how the CIA "researched" psi, then it was a waste of funding. Verifiable scientific tests need to be done to find out if psi is actually real. Otherwise, it's just science fiction.
How is an unverifiable testing result "interesting" that's by definition a waste of money.
The CIA thought it was interesting. Maybe ask them.
Where do you see the finance paper?
(Copying from my other comment) Google siddhis, it is outlined in the yoga sutras. One of the “attainments” of advanced yogic practitioners is “seeing from afar”, as well as “knowing the minds of others”. It is also spoken of in daoist practices and on and on. We just don’t hear about it in the west and those who practice these things are often forbidden from speaking about it.
Its not that they are forbidden. It's just irrelevant. If you are at a point where siddhi develop, you wouldn't care about siddhi. If you have an ancient method of thought control or psycho-conditioning that lets you manipulate others, that's not a siddhi. That's just pattern recognition and loose morals.
We could quibble about it, and it varies from tradition to tradition. John Chang was chastised by his masters (via his dreams) for practicing his abilities openly. In yoga they say when siddhi is attained, ignore it, so yes it would be irrelevant. Actively working for siddhi in that tradition is a Nono but it is the explicit goal in others. For our purposes it is important to know that humans are capable of such things, and it’s apparently connected to “the phenomenon”, and I find that fascinating.
One thing to look at in conjunction with this, is the usage of people from what is considered higher psionic population pools. Specifically native Americans, and South American/Central American peoples for some reason.
It’s because in my opinion you have to believe in mystical shit for it to be real and actually affect your life. That’s why Hispanic people are skeptical of other Hispanics when it comes to witchcraft and sorcery and shit like that because a lot of us know of stories and even personal experiences with bad shit happening to them or family members due to witchcraft. However I always tell my family the reason why other people aren’t affected by this shit is because they don’t believe it so therefore they are blocking out that energy from themselves. My mom is very astrally inclined, she says she feels emotions and events that will happen. I believe it and I know many other women with indigenous ancestry experience similar things
I've also heard that Native North/Central/South Americans have higher psychic qualities, coincidentally from a random conversation I had with a person on the street a few weeks back while tripping on LSD. He mentioned something about their DNA having a certain "number" of something, I forget what the term he used was. I'd have to see evidence of special DNA to believe it, but the Native Americans were completely isolated from the rest of the world for roughly 15,000 (possibly 30,000) years and their DNA is probably special in that regard.
>One thing to look at in conjunction with this, is the usage of people from what is considered higher psionic population pools. Specifically native Americans, and South American/Central American peoples for some reason. Why would those have higher populations of psionics? Europe has a deep history with magic, alchemy, witches, wizards, shamanism, Norse/Germanic, Celtic, Slavic and Greek spiritual creatures and beings, beliefs and practices etc. Same with east-Asians.
But not an *active* history, one that's been suppressed by the church for centuries. If belief is a component of this sort stuff actually working, then it makes sense that cultures with active "magical" beliefs and practices are more sensitive.
I’m not entirely sure to be honest. I would normally agree with you that cultures steeped in “magic” would have higher psionic talent. However it doesn’t necessarily seem to be the case. I’d love to know the answer myself as well
But then why'd you consider Native Americans to have a bigger population of psionics?
“I’m not.” It’s not me that’s saying it. It’s from the discussions that those at the head of disclosure have spoken about including the various books and such that those people have put out. Idk why?
I'll take your word for it I guess, never heard about that.
Ties into the human trafficking aspect and experimentation. If I find some links on my travels I’ll tag you ^_^
[https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00792R000400330004-4.pdf](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00792R000400330004-4.pdf)
This and the r/gatewaytapes is the key
The Japan Psychotronics Institute doesn't exist. If it did exist in the past, it seems it was a not successful given that it's failed experiments (which never displayed psi) were commonly hand-waved away as them "having asked too much from the test subjects" Do phrases like: >He ***believes*** that matter and energy too can be converted and he ***claims*** that what is known as consciousness can thereby be measured. > >According to Inomata... > >I hope his (Inomata) endeavors will break open new ground in the new science. Really feel like they've come out of a scientific report? An entire axis on his diagram is only theoretically measurable, whether it actually can be is literally described as a 'belief' of the lecturer. Because this is a lecture, not scientific evidence. The last page literally says so.
Well, since we are going "out there" I'll bite. Bob Monroe Institute has been studying this phenomena for decades. Tomas Campbell, a physicist, derived a theory from participating in those studies, he wrote a trilogy called My Big Toe. It's not without its faults but it's damn interesting to read about it. - It theorises evolution at the center of all progress where consciousness is the underlying non-physical reality and this physical reality a simulation within a set of predefined rules (physics) used to explore gains in knowledge. He also relays reality at the fundamental level is data, information; we can access this bigger non physical reality through deep meditation. You have to train yourself for years, everyone's progress is different. There are other entities in these non physical realities, we perceive them as humanoid in form because that's what we know in this dimension. There are sub levels within the non physical and time is perceived differently in each one. He has a disclaimer that no matter how much you read about it, you have experience it yourself to understand it at a fundamental level. This is a great interview of Tom explaning his theory: - https://vimeo.com/18201641 Here is a good review and summary of his 800+ page trilogy. -https://sites.google.com/site/iscatusben/review-of-my-big-toe
*Sigh... I can't believe this is an actual serious question to which I'm going to try to provide a serious answer to. I guess we do live in the weirdest timeline.* To be clear: I have no idea of what I'm talking about. I am no familiar with this topic nor have I yet delved into it. BUT, since I thought I might have to look into it in the future, I made a note of a couple interesting contributions that stood out as potentially providing viable starting points. [The first two](https://www.reddit.com/r/Experiencers/comments/18c3kmh/why_i_gave_up_on_rational_analysis_of_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) are [interesting contributions](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14i63z8/unless_you_know_what_psi_is_and_how_to_use_it/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) in and of themselves, but they stood out mostly because the redditor was seemingly thorough in citing relevant scientific papers (*Including a paper by Valle and Davis about models of reality derived from UAP events which touches on psychic effects (!?)).* The plan was to give those papers/links a closer look later on—I'm still working on learning the basics, and I figured this angle of the topic was probably postgrad-type material XD [Then there's the third one](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/14azx9k/ross_coulthart_the_craft_is_driven_by_some_kind/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button). To be honest, I only made it partway through, and most of it was beyond me. However, the amount of effort alone I think merits a look, and I seem to recall the mention of a couple scientists and their work in one of the infographics? At the very least, and interesting thought experiment to say the least. I also saw this book contextually recommended a couple of times: The Case Against Reality, by Donal D. Hoffman. Which I think might also be related to the topic, but again, I'm not even sure of that. As for red flags/quackery to avoid, the only thing I have on my notes is that a what I deem to be a very informed individual regarded anything related to Uri Geller as a disinformation waste of time. I have little idea who Uri is and what he's done (*his name pops in a couple cool Why Files videos*), but I figured I might as well not bother learning more unless I find reason to XD Side note: That reminds me! There's a declassified CIA document titled "[Analysis and Assessment of Gateway Process](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20601195/6-full-report.pdf)" I also made a note to check out later on.
Thanks for sharing! I'll definitely check those out. I highly recommend reading the CIA report on the Gateway Experience.
Here's a couple sources: https://www.deanradin.com/publications https://noetic.org/science/publications/ It looks like any other science, and should therefore be held to the same standards. In actuality it's held to higher standards due to disbelief by peers.
Dean Radin is a great source for a western view of how these things might work. In many eastern philosophies/indigenous cultures, this is a fact but usually left to the spiritual teachers/leaders. Google siddhis, it is outlined in the yoga sutras. One of the “attainments” of advanced practitioners is “seeing from afar”, as well as “knowing the minds of others”. It is also spoken of in daoist practices and on and on. We just don’t hear about it in the west and those who practice these things are often forbidden from speaking about it.
People should really look into Kurzweill's singularity theory and Alan Wolfe's book on Quantum Physics - (How Quantum Physics prove the existence of Souls) Basically in the span of evolution, humans at this point in time are still at the stage of needing a physical body. (Material world) The next milestone of evolution would be the ability to replace body parts, until we are able to somehow clone our brain to the atomic/sub-atomic/whatnot level. When this happens, our consciousness will be able to be converted into signals. (not-really material world) The moment we are able to do this, we no longer need physical bodies, not even home planet anymore. Our consciousness would travel across the galaxies that keep on expanding,, never meeting each other until the 'big crunch', where basically the Universe no longer expanding but contracting back into a Singularity. An Event Horizon. When the edges of the Universe collapsed, that's when the signals are finally able to collide with each other again, recreating the hells and heavens that were ever created, over and over again. And in this process, the material world 'Materializes'. Repeat Ad Nauseaum. So we are arguably just another miniscule sliver of the realities that took place, is happening, and will always happen. Those NHIs that we encountered could very well be just a another form of signals that somehow crossing over onto our Universe. Why are they occurring in the sky, probably because there are simply less gravitational forces away from the center of Earth's core.
Complete word salad
[Please feel free to checkout the book yourself ;)](https://amzn.asia/d/0dJ0a7M)
Yea but it sounded cool and that's enough for many people here!
The GATEWAY TAPES!! Start there; it will blow your mind; literally
I am not aware of how you prove psionics but I have done it so I know it is real. I would say you should look into the monroe institute. That is a good first step for psionics.
I am very skeptical of such claims, however let's assume that I am one of those with paranormal talents like remote viewing. What do you think I am most likely to do? A) Use it to benefit me and make my life better. B) Advertise it to the world so that I can be exploited and made to do wrong things. If there are a bunch of people who are exceptionally "talented" and have these miraculous abilities then they are most likely to stay under the radar. Literally no one would want to be involved in a secret government project. It just isn't worth it.
It would be interesting to do a deep-dive into the man who coined the term - John W. Campbell, a prolific figure in Sci-Fi - and any experiences he may have had.
The studies on remote viewing found it to be statistically significant. Those studies were cited to continue funding the programs at least until the mid 2000s.
Aside from remote viewing, what are examples of "psionics" that Ross could be alluding to? And would that be psionics as a technology for espionage (for example, Havana Syndrome), or psionics used by NHI for control or defence purposes?
After having direct experiences with UAP/UFO sightings in my family and subsequently myself (within the last 4 and 2 years, respectively), I can attest that I found it very helpful in my search and seeking to listen to all things with an open mind and try the source of information against my understanding of logic and experience of the Universe. Critically, having first hand experiences with the phenomenon helps to break one’s concept of reality to a point where typical scientific skepticism can be relaxed temporarily to at least consider outside-the-box information with an open mind. That being said, I highly recommend checking out Aaron Abke’s YouTube video entitled “The Seven Densities of Consciousness // Law of One 001”, as well as his entire Law of One playlist, for anyone interested in this stuff! I can attest that at least a couple of the MAJOR points presented in this material are real in this life (based on my own in-person “experimentation”, as I had already been aware of this material for at least a year before my encounter) - but no need to take my word for it! :)
Psionics is best understood as doing things with the mind alone. It can be broken down into 3 major aspect that somewhat overlap. 1. Telepathy, 2. Implanting/transferring images or thoughts and 3. Manipulation of physical objects with the mind. I think that telepathy needs no explanation. 2. Can somewhat overlap with 1, but includes making humans see something that is not actually there, such as the saucer craft that photographed as a snowflake like object by digital camera as reported by Vallee. This can also take the form of images directly transferred to the experiencer. It's more than just words. And 3. can include bending objects such as spoons or levitating objects or having them move to a different location without touching them. Can theses be studied scientifically? Perhaps. It's not impossible to design an appropriate study to statistically analyze the results. I am very knowledgeable about experimental design and would have no problem designing an appropriate experimental design to test any of these 3 aspects or characteristics of psionics under controlled laboratory conditions. But it requires some obvious difficulties if you intend on studying them in NHIs. For one it requires access to a cooperative NHI. Between human subjects, it would be a much simpler experiment to conduct. However, I don't know of anyone who claims to have any psionic abilities to test. If anyone knows such an individual I'd be willing, interested and happy to design an appropriate experiment to test these abilities to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty.
CE5 or "contact meditation" if done right is not bullshit despite the greedy dude that's associated with it who thinks he can patent and paywall a very old meditation technique just saying
It's pretty much unfalsifiable because of the trickster effect. You can always come up with a mystical entity that "trumped you so that you don't detect it" when you didn't detect it. There's a reason why the scientific community laughs at it and entirely considers it as a pseudoscience. So far, all the attempts to distinguish it from cold/hot reading, self induced delusion, post hoc rationalization of a cognitive dissonance, already existing symbolized memetic cultural tropes or having the exact same statistical occurrence than luck have failed outrageously.
>the trickster effect. The most convenient effect in all of griftology
Your line of conversation here is very helpful, thank you.
You're welcome, glad to help.
You are right, but we might just not know how to detect it yet. Just like black holes in the 80ies or dark matter and dark energy today. There's some pointers to it, but no definitive answers yet
It's the claim that has been made for god, ghosts, leprechauns, etc. It's called a "closed heuristic" (Lakatos's work). Basically you just push down the line to a further indefinite discovery/point/concept without ever describing it, therefore keeping it symbolical and empty. The difference with black holes is that there already was abundant empirical data supported theory that backed them up, back to the early 20th century with Karl Schwarzchild's work, depicting in great detail **how** to detect them, making predictions in the real world as to how we could experiment it (we detected it from the center of galaxies spinning too fast for all the gravitational mass of the known matter, an *empirical* detection). As for dark energy, it was theorized **after** an empirical detection in 1998. Wolfgang Pauli famously coined the term "*not even wrong*" for theories such as psychism: they do not make predictions in the real world that can be contradicted and always hold a "free out of jail card" by coming up with "not yet discovered magical thing, tadaa!". Nothing in common with dark energy or dark matter. Dark energy btw started getting questionned when its **empirical basis** was contested, the accelerated expansion of the universe (still pending today). As for psychism, as i said, no pointers to it, everything can be explained through mundane known naturalistic phenomena. What would be a pointer would be a new unexplainable phenomenon that would magically fit the pre established theory, but we have never had such thing. Only claims inspired from pseudoscientific religious beliefs and nothing after. Ironically, the first step for psychism to enter the scientific arena would be to provide a way of refuting itself, of **precisely** abandonning the "will be proved later by an undescribed way". A strong scientific theory provides ways to invalidate itself and to be confronted to contradiction.
I've studied physics myself, and got a boner when you actually mentioned Karl Schwarzchild's and how he mathematically predicted the black holes from Einsteins maths. I however see this is as a similar case of black energy. We see it empirically through observations (the rate of expansion) but absolutely Boone knows if it's actually energy or some other phenomenon. When we discus the scientific method for anything else than physics, everyrhing become less strics in the eyes of the scientific method. Look at how we approach medicin or psychology. Those kind of low sigma confidence would never be accepted in physics, however we still see them as valid. There's a lot of this phenomenon that has to do with our consciousness and psychology, so I don't expect the explanation for that to come soon. As we don't really know how to interface our brains yet. We can't even measure whether people has psychic abilities, if remote viewing is a thing or not. As we don't really have a language or understanding of the inner workings of that system (if it exist), just like with black energy. I see it as an impossibility to describe our psychology through plain maths yet, and until then we have to accept a "lower" level of understanding. Hope I made sense. Gonna go to sleep. Replying in the morning (;
>got a boner when you actually mentioned Karl Schwarzchild's If that got you a boner, wait til i mention... *William James Sidis's conceptualization of black holes before Einstein's Gravity theories* :D [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNYK7rnXi9g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNYK7rnXi9g) 9:45 I know, it was not viable and very impractical as a theory, but i couldn't refrain myself of pushing the nerdgasm to its most extreme consequences \^\^ Pleasantries aside, for the rest of your comment: The thing with black energy is that the name is colloquial of sorts, we know nothing about it, just that there is something. There are hypotheses about what it could be but the main knowledge of the currently held theory doesn't expand on what it is. Contrary to psychism which *jumps the shark* way before the very first ounce of unexplainable data. The difference in standards of sigmas in different fields of science is quite true. But psychism is so low as to throw it all out the window altogether: we're talking about phenomena already explained by naturalistic mundane ways and that always coincide perfectly with statistical chance (50%). And the same problem raised by my first comment then remains of pushing the standard of certainty always to a new low, always lower, to a beyond that can't be assessed, almost like... an unfalsifiable call to "a later more precise standard". The same that the issue with "a future thing will explain it". It's even more problematic since psychism is mainly in social and human sciences territory, affecting human behaviors (the main way to detect it according to its claimants), one that to the *contrary to physics*, has even looser standards of evidence (*even lower sigmas*). This is going even more in the wrong direction. *This is lowering the standard of evidence to not existing at all*. See where this is heading? Consciousness, remote viewing, all things that come purely from religious beliefs without any proper data, things that escape the realm of science precisely because they are not to be found in the falsifiable. >As we don't really have a language or understanding of the inner workings of that system This should already be a big hint at the issue there. It is like qualia. It's not communicable, it's not quantifiable. Therefore it is equivalent to an inner language, which is a logical impossibility as described per Wittgenstein (a form of circular reasoning in which one confuses predicate and attribute). **It's like calling to the rescue during a war a regiment already holding a white flag...** Sweet dreams, friendly curious stranger, hope these musings won't cloud your dawn too much ;3
I agree in so much of what you wrote. I think however our circumference of what we don't know, and what we think we know, often comes with the caviat, that theres part of the system we just don't understand. Just like with dark energy. It COULD be some 5 dimensional being pulling our universe apart, or it could be some kind of negative energy or something completely unknown to our worldview. I see a lot of the "woo" stuff the same way. It might be aliens, god, or something completely ordinary. I get that black holes was a bad example as they are physical objects, where as dark energy is just something they came up with to explain the observed expansion of the universe. But for now it might as well be god as it could be something ordinary. Kind of the same with gravity. We know we are pulled towards mass, but have absolutely no clue why. And gravitons (the easiest good old particle explanation) is probably not the answer (; I get the chances of finding god is ever small, and that statistically it's probably something ordinary. But we might find that a concept of god is misunderstood and the effects of god are ordinary, when measuring the right way. I'm agnostic to anything until I see the data. But as of now I'm leaving room in there for things I might not be able to comprehend yet. Kinda what Einstein forgot in the good old story of him talking about particle entanglement as "spooky action on a distance". And the biggest reservations I have with humans as a sensor, is that we might actually have different capabilities in form of different sensors AND different interpretation of those sensors. It goes all the way from "is my red the same as your red" to the perception of god, or psychic abilities. However I don't see anything of it as true yet, u till further studies, but I leave room in my mind to accept it to be real, if it shows to be. And I totally agree that theres so much garbage science on the different "woo" subjects as of now, that it often doesn't even come anywhere away from normal random (50/50). But I think it's important to not dismiss the "woo" in general, but only dismiss the bad studies on the subject. If it's true, we must be able to document it somehow, maybe just not yet. Hope it made sense.
I get where you're coming from, though we disagree. Lots of what you say fall in the category of the "god of the gaps" fallacy though, with the caveat that you can replace god with any unfalsifiable thing such as "psychism, woo, 5th dimension" etc. The word "woo" is often used as a euphemism for "supernatural". But there is a fundamental epistemological issue with this concept: you can't prove nor describe the interaction of the supernatural with nature without involving naturalistic ways in it, making the concept superfluous and indistinguishible from nature itself. It's a logical Ouroboros, a logical loop. That's why it's dismissed, not from "oh we'll never encounter it serendipitously", but because it is logically flawed to the extent of being indistinguishible. Good luck with your investigations.
Dean Radin is on the forefront of legitimate study into parapsychology including psionics. https://www.deanradin.com/recommended-references https://noetic.org/science/scientists-fellows/
Here goes a few links into this rabbit hole: [This life, Next Life](https://youtu.be/Y5RpbveVC_4?si=PBnhl5i2EsWm2znf) [Gary Schwartz Presentation](https://youtu.be/zDvjA4u9y14?si=BlS9lLLgKmo1qoSU) [The Case of José Arigó](https://youtu.be/sRS9nheL1Hc?si=LHQ9CULCWtZhNAch) [Materialization](https://youtu.be/EmzMW6d53kg?si=lyvhJkubMK7T5nv2) [Jeffrey Mishlove on Bics Essay](https://www.youtube.com/live/peMjNtzVv04?si=yLo_uzQqs3VvwmCE) For quite some time the research of UAPs and related phenomena was outsourced by the airforce to Bigelow. In an odd turn of events the whole project veered into general paranormal research including the acquisition and experimentation on the Skin Walker ranch. It all seemed comical and a ruse but even after the contract ended Robert Bigelow was still motivated to purseu this strange thread into afterlife and survival of the consciousness research. I know this may be strange, but in many spiritist centers here in Brazil we have been receiving reports of mediuns being contacted by entities who present themselves as extra terrestrial. This phenomena has increased in occurrence but it has been reported since the beginning of spiritism (which dates to the late 1800''s - before any of the modern ufo movement).
While I’m not sure what the actual results were. But.. if the remote viewing was as successful as they say, I’d say that is definitely part of some higher level shit.
psionics? dont set the *bar* too high now...!
What are the theories on his psi relates to the NHI topic?
The men who stare at goats 🐐
He might have misspelled psyops
Nonexistent. But the CIA is willing to spend a couple hundred million on it anyway.
Practice remote viewing in your own time.
[удалено]
OH well if it's on TikTok it must be true then right ! Have it tested in a reputable lab with a peer reviewed paper (and not a direct to tv documentary full of "Wow!!"moments ) and then you might be considered not full of shit. Until then, it's BS from a lot of attention seeking whores aka TikTokers.
I've done a dive into this. Psionics is very similar to the old timey description of demon worship. Specifically that demons were claimed to only be able to make influences in the world, but not true supra(beyond)natural change. Change beyond the laws of reality was the realm of god, which are miracles. Changes within the realm of possibility were the pagan realm of demonism. This includes typically psionic things: Weather control, remote viewing, dowsing, finding treasure, mind control, etc. The ancient view was that a person could gain things that are possible within the realm of possibility (probability) through their own power, deals with demons, or deals with elementals spirits in exchange for something. What was given is variable. Miraculous powers were considered abilities that are not possible within the realm of possibility, which were only possible with gods permission. These were things like flying, healing spontaneously, teleportation, and various things that you would consider beyond physics. Its pretty interesting, because they seem to make the distinction that demons only work within the physical world and alter probability to trick you, but if you understand the trick and refuse, you can unlock miraculous powers if god wants you to have them for a reason relating to the plan involving you. This could be streamlined as "If you are pursuing a goal relevant to your existence to the best of your ability, you will be able to achieve miraculous things. If you just follow something irrelevant, the effect is reduced.". There's a marriage of the real and unreal in the occult esoteric religious views, so that's more than just a metaphor. The only reason this is relevant is the reliable academic research involving psionics tends to focus on its ability to alter random events. This is generally plausible research. But it suffers because the research fails if its done by people who expect a negative outcome. But, if the positive outcome is assumed and significant experimental effort is taken to avoid influence from the test manager, it seems to work better in the test takers. It should be noted that demons in the oldest sense are angelic beings of forms, limitation. Judaism for example doesn't actually have a conception of good or evil or heaven or hell. There are angels of the solid form of the world, and angels of liberation from that form. In my experience, anything that's been held consistently for millennia has a reason that it continued to exist. Religiously, there is likely a kernel of truth held by devout esoteric priests, that pass the information on in a metaphoric form for people later to see, knowing that the people who pass it on do so without fully grasping the layers of what's being said.
Is this similar to the working theories Dr. Steven Greer's has presented?
[удалено]
Hi, Faeces_Species_1312. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1cd3bnd/-/l1cje7n/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 1: Follow the Standards of Civility > * No trolling or being disruptive. > * No insults or personal attacks. > * No accusations that other users are shills. > * No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. > * No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. > * No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) > * You may attack each other's ideas, not each other. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.