Out-of-Body Experiences

Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Out-of-Body Experiences

Here's a case of an out-of-body experience that was validated by researcher Dr. Charles Tart in a scientifically-controlled experiment.

http://www.near-death.com/tart.html

 

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Can it be a scientifically

Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist?

Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Abu Lahab
Superfan
Abu Lahab's picture
Posts: 628
Joined: 2008-02-29
User is offlineOffline
Out of brain experience

Out of brain experience would be closer.

 

"so the EEG findings should be taken with the realization that they are subject to more error than usual."

How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Here's a case

Paisley wrote:

Here's a case of an out-of-body experience that was validated by researcher Dr. Charles Tart in a scientifically-controlled experiment.

http://www.near-death.com/tart.html

 

You've got to be kidding. The link alone is a giveaway.

I think you wont find Harvard or Yale witha "para" course.

Paisley, stop deluding yourself. People are capable of making shit up because they want something to be true, not because they are conducting any lagit method.

"Para" crap was around when I was a kid, and I am 42. If there was anything valid about it it would have been peer reviewed by the AMA and be taught at major universities in science classes by now.

"In Search Of" was a popular show back in the 70s hosted by Lenard Nemoy. That was a conspiracy show too.

 

It is sold by quacks who want attention, nothing more.

There is no "Big Foot", Little green men's space ships being held in Area 52, and there was no 3rd man on the grassy knoll. You need to stop buying into popular myth.

NDEs are nothing more than an over active brain during times of stress. Anthing "reported" is made up because the deluded person "feeling it" doesn't understand their own brain chemistry or how it can fool them in times of stress.

This quack merely wants to play on your gullibility.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Can it be a

jcgadfly wrote:
Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist? Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.

You are such a party pooper. You cant deny all those sighting of Elvis!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Can it be a

jcgadfly wrote:
Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist? Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.


Why? Did that act of writing "para" magically pull his doctor certificate out of the shelf and set it on fire, or what???

Otherwise, you look for excuses. It's not a problem if a common person does that, but as for a potential peer-reviewer, it's called bias.
I have had an out-of-body experience myself, and I want this phenomenon researched!

Brian37 wrote:

Paisley, stop deluding yourself. People are capable of making shit up because they want something to be true, not because they are conducting any lagit method.

That's a nonsense. A lie can not be used to exchange a valuable information. Therefore, a research based on a lie would have no perspective, and it would inevitably became obvious. However, the mentioned study was done, so it's not the case.
 

Brian37 wrote:
"Para" crap was around when I was a kid, and I am 42. If there was anything valid about it it would have been peer reviewed by the AMA and be taught at major universities in science classes by now.
LOL. And if the evolution is true, my pastor would tell me that, by now.
Don't you understand? All aspects around the OOBE are unknown. (for example, how it is possible) This is why, when someone confirms it's existence, there is a big I DON'T KNOW, and I WAS WRONG ALL THE TIME, which has a great negative effect on many important people's prestige, funding, and chairmanship. In military there's a freer approach to that area of research, but on the other side, they'll never publish their results.


Brian37 wrote:
It is sold by quacks who want attention, nothing more.

Yeah, like that majority of scientific studies is done solely to be quoted in other scientific studies, not for their results. Attention, indeed.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
The funniest bit for me is

The funniest bit for me is the peer reviewed journal it appears in: http://www.aspr.com/jaspr.htm


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:jcgadfly

Luminon wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist? Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.


Why? Did that act of writing "para" magically pull his doctor certificate out of the shelf and set it on fire, or what???

Otherwise, you look for excuses. It's not a problem if a common person does that, but as for a potential peer-reviewer, it's called bias.
I have had an out-of-body experience myself, and I want this phenomenon researched!

Brian37 wrote:

Paisley, stop deluding yourself. People are capable of making shit up because they want something to be true, not because they are conducting any lagit method.

That's a nonsense. A lie can not be used to exchange a valuable information. Therefore, a research based on a lie would have no perspective, and it would inevitably became obvious. However, the mentioned study was done, so it's not the case.
 

Brian37 wrote:
"Para" crap was around when I was a kid, and I am 42. If there was anything valid about it it would have been peer reviewed by the AMA and be taught at major universities in science classes by now.
LOL. And if the evolution is true, my pastor would tell me that, by now.
Don't you understand? All aspects around the OOBE are unknown. (for example, how it is possible) This is why, when someone confirms it's existence, there is a big I DON'T KNOW, and I WAS WRONG ALL THE TIME, which has a great negative effect on many important people's prestige, funding, and chairmanship. In military there's a freer approach to that area of research, but on the other side, they'll never publish their results.


Brian37 wrote:
It is sold by quacks who want attention, nothing more.

Yeah, like that majority of scientific studies is done solely to be quoted in other scientific studies, not for their results. Attention, indeed.

I never said he stopped being a Ph.D - I said he stopped being a scientist when he began dealing in parapsychology.

Parapsychology isn't a science and when one stops practicing science, is one a scientist?

I'd like to have OBEs researched as well but not by people who are cheerleaders for them. Objectivity is important to me.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Can it be a

jcgadfly wrote:
Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist? Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.

Parapsychology is a science and is recognized as such by the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) - the largest scientific society in the world.

Quote:

Under the direction of anthropologist Margaret Mead, the Parapsychological Association took a large step in advancing the field of parapsychology in 1969 when it became affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the largest general scientific society in the world.[28]

(source: Wikipedia: Parapsychology)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology

Unfortunately, it seems to be the standard tack of skeptics to attack the individual's integrity and/or credentials in order to divert attention from his actual work. Charles Tart has a B.S. degree in electrical engineering from M.I.T. and a Ph. D. in psychology from the University of North Carolina.

 

 

 

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Abu Lahab wrote:Out of brain

Abu Lahab wrote:

Out of brain experience would be closer.

 

"so the EEG findings should be taken with the realization that they are subject to more error than usual."

The EEG findings are not paramount to this study. What is important is that the subject was able to identify the target number of 25132.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Paisley

Brian37 wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Here's a case of an out-of-body experience that was validated by researcher Dr. Charles Tart in a scientifically-controlled experiment.

http://www.near-death.com/tart.html

 

You've got to be kidding. The link alone is a giveaway.

I think you wont find Harvard or Yale witha "para" course.

I don't know if you will find a parapsychology course at Harvard or Yale, but both schools have Divinity Schools. Also, parapsychology research has been performed at some of the more prestigious universities in the U. S. (e.g. Princeton, Stanford). (I believe Albert Einstein was a professor of physics at Princeton University).

Quote:

During this period, other notable organizations were also formed, including the Academy of Parapsychology and Medicine (1970), the Institute of Parascience (1971), the Academy of Religion and Psychical Research, the Institute of Noetic Sciences (1973), the International Kirlian Research Association (1975), and the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory (1979). Parapsychological work was also conducted at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) during this time.[20]

(source: Wikipedia: Parapsychology)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology

Brian37 wrote:

Paisley, stop deluding yourself. People are capable of making shit up because they want something to be true, not because they are conducting any lagit method.

Refusal to deny the evidence is just that....denial - a denial based on an ideological commitment to materialism, not one on science.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:jcgadfly

Luminon wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:
Can it be a scientifically controlled experiment if it was conducted by a non-scientist? Tart stopped being a scientist as soon as he put para in front of psychology.


 

Why? Did that act of writing "para" magically pull his doctor certificate out of the shelf and set it on fire, or what???

Otherwise, you look for excuses. It's not a problem if a common person does that, but as for a potential peer-reviewer, it's called bias.
I have had an out-of-body experience myself, and I want this phenomenon researched!

Exactly. 1 in 10 have had an out-of-body experience.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:The

thatonedude wrote:

The funniest bit for me is the peer reviewed journal it appears in: http://www.aspr.com/jaspr.htm

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Di66en6ion
Di66en6ion's picture
Posts: 106
Joined: 2009-01-03
User is offlineOffline
 Tart mentioned a wide

 Tart mentioned a wide variety of uncontrolled conditions in the lab, one of them being the patient having a possible perspective on the numbers from a reflection in a clock. He even mentions the lack of 24/7 surveillance on the patient.

I honestly don't know how you can call that "scientifically-controlled" when a 6th grader could design better conditions than that Paisly, you'll have to do better. Keep digging.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
You're right, Paisley. It's

You're right, Paisley. It's so obvious that people are projecting their souls out of their bodies, and that must definitely somehow mean that Jesus sacrificed himself for our sins. Sticking out tongue

 

Doing it wrong. That's all you, bro.

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Parapsychology

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Nope, it's the abject failure of parapsychology to produce results. The fact that you are biased to accept shoddy research, bad science and flights of fancy as fact indicates a severe lack of intelligent discernment on your part. But you keep on posting crap like this. It's funny! Almost as funny as how you'll grasp any straw you think will help your case!

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Refusal to

Paisley wrote:

Refusal to deny the evidence is just that....denial - a denial based on an ideological commitment to materialism, not one on science.

Refusal to believe research where even the description written by the researcher reveals control mechanisms that would be laughed out of a real lab is a sign of intelligence. Embracing such drek because you really, really want to find some proofs for your silly beliefs...now that's denial. Keep up the search though, Paisley! You're a credit to dementia!

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
Di66en6ion wrote: Tart

Di66en6ion wrote:

 Tart mentioned a wide variety of uncontrolled conditions in the lab, one of them being the patient having a possible perspective on the numbers from a reflection in a clock. He even mentions the lack of 24/7 surveillance on the patient.

He did mention a possible reflection in a clock, but he said it would only be possible if he had shined a flashlight on the number. 

 

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Exactly. 1 in

Paisley wrote:

Exactly. 1 in 10 have had an out-of-body experience.

As far as I know, the other person on this forum who had OOBE was our dear, but now deceased I AM AS GOD AS YOU. Possibly one more guy, but I don't remember exactly.

thatonedude wrote:

Refusal to believe research where even the description written by the researcher reveals control mechanisms that would be laughed out of a real lab is a sign of intelligence. Embracing such drek because you really, really want to find some proofs for your silly beliefs...now that's denial. Keep up the search though, Paisley! You're a credit to dementia!

The researcher is naturally very careful. We have a saying here. 'One swallow doesn't make a spring.' And so, one study doesn't make a fact. Whatever happens, it is necessary to make a few more separate studies, before such a thing can be accepted. You fail to demonstrate, how exactly it is, that the science changes itself. You demand a perfect evidence and results from the only one study. It is not a time for denial, it is a time for another study, one way or another.


And it is not a problem, because this kind of research doesn't require billions of dollars. I would understand such a bitterness if LHC would find no Higgs boson. But you seem to be one of the believers in "If that would be true, science would discover it already." No, such a things won't be allowed to be proven, until enough of important peoplewill have OOBE themseves, so it will shut their mouths and let them think seriously about this concept for the first time. And because the terminology is taboo, all of it will have to be called differently, so it won't automatically trigger the stereotypical reaction in skeptical brains.  



As for a different source of research on such a topics, I'd mention The Monroe Institute. (http://www.monroeinstitute.org/) I have read the founder's books and I know personally people, who went through the course of neural training through their sound technology.


 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Paisley

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Nope, it's the abject failure of parapsychology to produce results. The fact that you are biased to accept shoddy research, bad science and flights of fancy as fact indicates a severe lack of intelligent discernment on your part. But you keep on posting crap like this. It's funny! Almost as funny as how you'll grasp any straw you think will help your case!

Parapsychology has already produced results to establish the reality of psi. That's why it was admitted into the AAAS.

The real reason that parapsychology meets resistance in the scientific community is twofold:

1) If psi were true, then this would contradict the corpus of scientific knowledge - namely, physics. Therefore, many scientists come to the conclusion that psi cannot possibly be true and therefore summarily dismiss the evidence.

2) If psi were true, then this would render materialism obsolete.

Item 1 is understandable, but it is not true. Psi does not violate any known law of physics. In fact, it meshes nicely with quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity. 

Item 2 is also undertandable. There is a lot emotional interest vested in the materialistic worldview. However, evidence for psi is evidence against materialism. And unfortunately for materialists, there is evidence for psi.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:thatonedude

Paisley wrote:

thatonedude wrote:

The funniest bit for me is the peer reviewed journal it appears in: http://www.aspr.com/jaspr.htm

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

It's amazing what can get recognized as science when enough money is pushed one's way.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paisley

Paisley wrote:

thatonedude wrote:

The funniest bit for me is the peer reviewed journal it appears in: http://www.aspr.com/jaspr.htm

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Legitimate? Not so sure. I'd bet if I had enough disposable income to throw at them I could get alchemy recognized by these good folks.

If it were a science, it would have all the trappings tha people love about science - consistently reproducible results and falsifiability come to mind.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:The researcher

Luminon wrote:

The researcher is naturally very careful. We have a saying here. 'One swallow doesn't make a spring.' And so, one study doesn't make a fact. Whatever happens, it is necessary to make a few more separate studies, before such a thing can be accepted. You fail to demonstrate, how exactly it is, that the science changes itself. You demand a perfect evidence and results from the only one study. It is not a time for denial, it is a time for another study, one way or another.

Let's see: the researcher admitted to going to sleep during the observation, the researcher admitted to interacting with the person being observed during the experiment, the researcher admitted that the person had possible physical access to the numbers. Shall I even bother going on? From a research point of view, this is a freaking joke. And this is drawing from the author's report! Who knows what other issues would exist if we had access to some real data about this.

Quote:

And it is not a problem, because this kind of research doesn't require billions of dollars. I would understand such a bitterness if LHC would find no Higgs boson. But you seem to be one of the believers in "If that would be true, science would discover it already."

Nope. I am a believer in "if it were true, it would be demonstrable in a basic double blind study." Start digging up a study where proper research techniques were used and actual data was acquired, and then you'll have something worth talking about. This study, even just reading the author's description, is as shoddy as that silly "preacher studies the effects of prayer on plants" claim that made the rounds a while back.

Quote:

No, such a things won't be allowed to be proven, until enough of important peoplewill have OOBE themseves, so it will shut their mouths and let them think seriously about this concept for the first time. And because the terminology is taboo, all of it will have to be called differently, so it won't automatically trigger the stereotypical reaction in skeptical brains.  

I don't care in the least who believes it or not. I care about one thing: evidence. And this flawed study is nothing of the sort.

Quote:

As for a different source of research on such a topics, I'd mention The Monroe Institute. (http://www.monroeinstitute.org/) I have read the founder's books and I know personally people, who went through the course of neural training through their sound technology.

LOL, you guys! That's awesome what you'll shell money out for! I should totally abandon my scuples and start fleecing people.

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Parapsychology

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology has already produced results to establish the reality of psi. That's why it was admitted into the AAAS.

Then pony up the peer reviewed studies that actually hold to basic research standards, me matey! I'll be sitting over here waiting with baited breath.

Quote:

The real reason that parapsychology meets resistance in the scientific community is twofold:

No, it's onefold: it does not return results when subjected to rigorous study.

Quote:

1) If psi were true, then this would contradict the corpus of scientific knowledge - namely, physics. Therefore, many scientists come to the conclusion that psi cannot possibly be true and therefore summarily dismiss the evidence.

You would have to actually come up with evidence for it to be dismissed. Throwing out physics(you know, the science which enables every technological advance the world has seen) for an idea that doesn't yield proof when subjected to tests would be more than stupid.

Quote:

2) If psi were true, then this would render materialism obsolete.

Too bad they can't manage to produce results when subjected to rigorous study, eh?

Quote:

Item 1 is understandable, but it is not true. Psi does not violate any known law of physics. In fact, it meshes nicely with quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity. 

And you immediately demonstrate that you are profoundly ignorant of both of those! Kudos!

Quote:

Item 2 is also undertandable. There is a lot emotional interest vested in the materialistic worldview. However, evidence for psi is evidence against materialism. And unfortunately for materialists, there is evidence for psi.

LOL, you're awesome! Keep it coming!

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
That whole thing reads like

That whole thing reads like a seventh grade science fair report. 

He openly admits breaching protocol, sleeping during the experiment, the possibility for a subliminal hint, etc. Give me a break.

This thread is now about kittens.

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
cervello_marcio wrote:That

cervello_marcio wrote:

That whole thing reads like a seventh grade science fair report. 

He openly admits breaching protocol, sleeping during the experiment, the possibility for a subliminal hint, etc. Give me a break.

This thread is now about kittens.

Those are cute and I'm not a cat person

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
cervello_marcio wrote:That

cervello_marcio wrote:

That whole thing reads like a seventh grade science fair report. 

He openly admits breaching protocol, sleeping during the experiment, the possibility for a subliminal hint, etc. Give me a break.

This thread is now about kittens.

Meow.

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Kittens? aye!   

Kittens? aye!

 

 

 


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

I approve of the above post.

 


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Let's see:

thatonedude wrote:

Let's see: the researcher admitted to going to sleep during the observation, the researcher admitted to interacting with the person being observed during the experiment, the researcher admitted that the person had possible physical access to the numbers. Shall I even bother going on? From a research point of view, this is a freaking joke. And this is drawing from the author's report! Who knows what other issues would exist if we had access to some real data about this.

Shit.. I've got to read that study even more closely and in a fully awake... Well, it looks to me like there was a great lack of finances and borrowed equipment. Maybe this is why this experiment is so shabby. I say what I said before - you exaggerate the importance of that experiment, like it would be a final answer. It needs another one, better funded and preferably with more subjects (including Miss Z) and preferably also with some other doctor. I don't understand how he could tolerate this low standard of work. Maybe he wasn't paranoid enough. However, I stay calm, I know from my own experience and from the experience of other people like me, that OOBE exists, it won't disappear from the surface of Earth, just because someone made a shabby test.

Btw, the physical access shouldn't be a problem, that woman was tied to EEG wires all the time. Neither the numbers were visible, the doctors checked it. However, my main complaint belongs to the lack of online EEG records, photographs, video records, protocols from the days of research, etc.
 

thatonedude wrote:

Nope. I am a believer in "if it were true, it would be demonstrable in a basic double blind study." Start digging up a study where proper research techniques were used and actual data was acquired, and then you'll have something worth talking about. This study, even just reading the author's description, is as shoddy as that silly "preacher studies the effects of prayer on plants" claim that made the rounds a while back.


All right. Maybe Dr. Tart would appreciate an e-mail with list of what was lacking to the scientific standards. I'm not critical enough to be the right person to write it. But I'd still be curious about his response. I think that Dr. Tart would need some close encounters with hard-boiled skeptics, so he would know their standards better.
 

thatonedude wrote:

I don't care in the least who believes it or not. I care about one thing: evidence. And this flawed study is nothing of the sort.

Eh, shit, you're right. I swear, I won't go to RRS forum after 23 PM anymore. There's too many surprises next morning.

thatonedude wrote:

LOL, you guys! That's awesome what you'll shell money out for! I should totally abandon my scuples and start fleecing people.

Robert Monroe proved, that the study of OOBE is a scientifically useful area of research. His sound technology allows the brain to do incredible things with brainwaves. It allows people to be awake with delta waves, this is something what meditators in the East are trained to do for 30 years. And this invention can teach it to the brain within several minutes. The course in the Institute costs 1500 dollars, but there are already travelling tutors, trained in USA or England, who offer the effective part of the course for a small price, easily affordable even for a poor working person from behind the former Iron Curtain. (my mother, for example) We also have a Russian rip-off of the Monroe's Hemi-Sync CD, we have mixed the alpha phase track into our meditation music.


 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
Luminon, stop derailing our

Luminon, stop derailing our cat thread!

 

 


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Paisley

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Refusal to deny the evidence is just that....denial - a denial based on an ideological commitment to materialism, not one on science.

Refusal to believe research where even the description written by the researcher reveals control mechanisms that would be laughed out of a real lab is a sign of intelligence. Embracing such drek because you really, really want to find some proofs for your silly beliefs...now that's denial. Keep up the search though, Paisley! You're a credit to dementia!

Brian37 didn't even bother to read the article I provided in the OP (that's who I was responding to in my post). He simply stated an uninformed, preconceived opinion based on a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:thatonedude

Paisley wrote:

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Refusal to deny the evidence is just that....denial - a denial based on an ideological commitment to materialism, not one on science.

Refusal to believe research where even the description written by the researcher reveals control mechanisms that would be laughed out of a real lab is a sign of intelligence. Embracing such drek because you really, really want to find some proofs for your silly beliefs...now that's denial. Keep up the search though, Paisley! You're a credit to dementia!

Brian37 didn't even bother to read the article I provided in the OP (that's who I was responding to in my post). He simply stated an uninformed, preconceived opinion based on a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

I notice you have yet to refute the people who did read it and brought up the shoddy research practices you're touting as gospel.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Luminom,All I'm really

Luminom,

All I'm really saying is that I have seen no compelling evidence of OOBE, and what little evidence does come my way is invariably tainted like this study. Therefore, I am withholding judgement on the issue until such time as someone does come up with serious evidence.

In regards to delta waves, I have heard of no credible evidence that waking delta waves do anything more than give one some a dream like feeling. It is commonly seen during intoxication and certain mental conditions(like schizophrenia). While one may interpret this as some different level of consciousness, there is no credible evidence that these states are anything more than dream states. I would not be terribly surprised to find out that manipulating brain states could result in better memory retention and the like, but until I see actual resuts, I still render the verdict of "unproved."

 

Also, in order not to derail the thread:

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


thatonedude
Superfan
Posts: 327
Joined: 2008-01-15
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Brian37 didn't

Paisley wrote:

Brian37 didn't even bother to read the article I provided in the OP (that's who I was responding to in my post). He simply stated an uninformed, preconceived opinion based on a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

I am also a materialist! Got plenty of evidence of that stuff! Ghosts, gods, psychic powers, spirits and whatnot? Yeah, have yet to see signs of that, let alone actual evidence gleaned from a rigorous study. Just like goblins, trolls, elves and honest politicians, I'm going to require some good evidence before I believe in such things. Inertia doesn't hide from researchers. We can pin down nuclei decay in a lab, and I can simulate evolution on the very desktop I am typing this message from. The supernatural? Still playing "hide and seek" when it comes to serious study.

 

Also:

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
And people wonder why i hate

And people wonder why i hate cats...

 


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
cervello_marcio wrote:That

cervello_marcio wrote:

That whole thing reads like a seventh grade science fair report. 

He openly admits breaching protocol, sleeping during the experiment, the possibility for a subliminal hint, etc. Give me a break.

This thread is now about kittens.

That's a misreading of Tart's conclusion. In his book "The End of Materialism," he goes into more detail and explains that skeptics have pounced on this passage (which was written in 1968) to infer that he did not really believe that there was any parapsychological effects in the study. The fact is that he was being overly-cautious (before he published his results) and had a colleague, Arthur Hasting (who was an amateur magician), to investigate the laboratory to ensure there was no reasonable way that the subject could have pulled off some kind of "magic trick." In fact, Tart believed that the only other possible explanation came, not from skeptics, but from believers, who postulated that telepathy was another explanation. [1]

1 < "The End of Materialism" by Charles Tart, pp. 205-07

By the way, it is interesting that you should bring up "kittens." Apparently, there was another OBE experiment involving subject Keith Harary (who was also able to induce OBEs) in which he had his out-of-body presence detected by his kitten located in a cage in a distant room. [2]

2 < http://www.rationalresponders.com/comment/reply/17991/253795?quote=1#comment-form

 

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Paisley

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Nope, it's the abject failure of parapsychology to produce results. The fact that you are biased to accept shoddy research, bad science and flights of fancy as fact indicates a severe lack of intelligent discernment on your part. But you keep on posting crap like this. It's funny! Almost as funny as how you'll grasp any straw you think will help your case!

The reason why parapsychology has been accepted into the AAAS is because the society believes that it has produced results. That's the bottom line.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:thatonedude

Paisley wrote:

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Nope, it's the abject failure of parapsychology to produce results. The fact that you are biased to accept shoddy research, bad science and flights of fancy as fact indicates a severe lack of intelligent discernment on your part. But you keep on posting crap like this. It's funny! Almost as funny as how you'll grasp any straw you think will help your case!

The reason why parapsychology has been accepted into the AAAS is because the society believes that it has produced results. That's the bottom line.

And you can't produce these results for some reason...

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:That's a

Paisley wrote:

That's a misreading of Tart's conclusion. In his book "The End of Materialism," he goes into more detail and explains that skeptics have pounced on this passage (which was written in 1968) to infer that he did not really believe that there was any parapsychological effects in the study. The fact is that he was being overly-cautious (before he published his results) and had a colleague, Arthur Hasting (who was an amateur magician), to investigate the laboratory to ensure there was no reasonable way that the subject could have pulled off some kind of "magic trick." In fact, Tart believed that the only other possible explanation came, not from skeptics, but from believers, who postulated that telepathy was another explanation. [1]

1 < "The End of Materialism" by Charles Tart, pp. 205-07

By the way, it is interesting that you should bring up "kittens." Apparently, there was another OBE experiment involving subject Keith Harary (who was also able to induce OBEs) in which he had his out-of-body presence detected by his kitten located in a cage in a distant room. [2]

Well why didn't you say there was an amateur magician there in the first place!!!! Now we can all speak to the validity and integrity of this study.

You're right, kittens are more interesting than your post. I'm glad we agree. In light of that, enjoy this kitten,

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paisley

jcgadfly wrote:

Paisley wrote:

The reason why parapsychology has been accepted into the AAAS is because the society believes that it has produced results. That's the bottom line.

And you can't produce these results for some reason...

Actually, I have already provided this forum with a Google Tech video from researcher Dean Radin who gave a presentation on the results for psi. Here's the link. The video is entitled "Science and the Taboo of Psi."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paisley

jcgadfly wrote:
Paisley wrote:

thatonedude wrote:

The funniest bit for me is the peer reviewed journal it appears in: http://www.aspr.com/jaspr.htm

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

It's amazing what can get recognized as science when enough money is pushed one's way.

What evidence do you have to suggest that the AAAS was bribed into accepting parapsychology as a science?

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:jcgadfly

Paisley wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Paisley wrote:

The reason why parapsychology has been accepted into the AAAS is because the society believes that it has produced results. That's the bottom line.

And you can't produce these results for some reason...

Actually, I have already provided this forum with a Google Tech video from researcher Dean Radin who gave a presentation on the results for psi. Here's the link. The video is entitled "Science and the Taboo of Psi."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew

Where did I ask for pseudoscience from pseudoscientists?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Actually, I

Paisley wrote:

Actually, I have already provided this forum with a Google Tech video from researcher Dean Radin who gave a presentation on the results for psi. Here's the link. The video is entitled "Science and the Taboo of Psi."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paisley

jcgadfly wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology is recognized as a legitimate science by the AAAS (the largest scientific society in the world). Failure to acknowledge this simply reveals a closed-minded and biased attitude based on willful ignorance.

Legitimate? Not so sure. I'd bet if I had enough disposable income to throw at them I could get alchemy recognized by these good folks. If it were a science, it would have all the trappings tha people love about science - consistently reproducible results and falsifiability come to mind.

"Scientific" skeptics subscribing to conspiracy theories? Interesting. Of course, you have absolutely no evidence to support these allegations.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:jcgadfly

Paisley wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Legitimate? Not so sure. I'd bet if I had enough disposable income to throw at them I could get alchemy recognized by these good folks. If it were a science, it would have all the trappings tha people love about science - consistently reproducible results and falsifiability come to mind.

"Scientific" skeptics subscribing to conspiracy theories? Interesting. Of course, you have absolutely no evidence to support these allegations.

Important parts now come in bold text!

But that's not all, we're now giving away free kittens with every correction!

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Paisley

jcgadfly wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Actually, I have already provided this forum with a Google Tech video from researcher Dean Radin who gave a presentation on the results for psi. Here's the link. The video is entitled "Science and the Taboo of Psi."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_O9Qiwqew

Where did I ask for pseudoscience from pseudoscientists?

Your response simply confirms my assertion that what purports to be "scientific skepticism" on this forum is nothing more than a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
Paisley wrote:Your response

Paisley wrote:

Your response simply confirms my assertion that what purports to be "scientific skepticism" on this forum is nothing more than a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

Your refusal to admit that materialism is the only thing able to be tested in a real laboratory as well as your insistence to flood these boards with laughable (and curiously not peer-reviewed) "studies" simply confirms my assertion that you are blind, dumb, and deaf to reason.

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Paisley

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Parapsychology has already produced results to establish the reality of psi. That's why it was admitted into the AAAS.

Then pony up the peer reviewed studies that actually hold to basic research standards, me matey! I'll be sitting over here waiting with baited breath.

Quote:

What evidence do you have that parapsychology doesn't have peer reviewed studies? Please cite sources.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead


cervello_marcio
Superfan
cervello_marcio's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-05-19
User is offlineOffline
A clever ruse indeed, for

A clever ruse indeed, for the only evidence for no peer reviewed studies would be the lack of peer reviewed studies. Therefore he has nothing to offer you.

You should probably shut him up by giving us some, since so far all we have is a journal on a shitty test written in the voice of a thirteen year old girl.

 

"Do not, as some ungracious pastors do, show me the steep and thorny way to heaven. Whiles, like a puff'd and reckless libertine, himself the primrose path of dalliance treads. And recks not his own rede."


Paisley
Theist
Paisley's picture
Posts: 1933
Joined: 2008-03-13
User is offlineOffline
thatonedude wrote:Paisley

thatonedude wrote:

Paisley wrote:

Brian37 didn't even bother to read the article I provided in the OP (that's who I was responding to in my post). He simply stated an uninformed, preconceived opinion based on a faith-commitment to the dogma of materialism.

I am also a materialist! Got plenty of evidence of that stuff!  

Yeah, what evidence do you have? Science has never proven that the physical is actually...well...physical.  And certainly, science has never proven that mental phenomena are physical. I believe you are conflating terms "scientific materialism" (which is an ideology and metaphysical position) with "science." The two terms are not exactly interchangeable.

"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead