Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Reply to thread

Message

My state of being bothered had nothing to do with you endlessness. My state of being bothered stems from the question you asked about why not prove it to science...and I thought I was pretty clear at addressing what it was that bothered me. It seems as though one should just go prove it to the world, but then on a second, perhaps deeper level it would make sense to not prove it to the world. My initial stance is to be bothered by those that would claim this and not prove it, but then I understand why those that could, 'if they could' would chose to not prove it to the world. Of course many of them seem ok proving it to a hand full of students...so an elements, a large element, of skepticism is also shared by me.

Thinking joe sixpack would get off the couch and start meditating because science proved a monk had telekinesis seems laughable to me.

How many times has joe six pack walked outside and seen the absolute incredible miracle that is life all around him? How many times has joe, a collection of particles from some distant star, taken the time to marvel at the fact that he has consciousness and awareness which apparently other parts of the universe such as rocks lack? If joe hasn't gotten the big ah ha moment from the world around him then I highly doubt he would get it because some scientist say's a monk has telekensis. Christ joe sixpack doesn't even like science because it challenges his world view.

Truth is. Even if scientists published this it would still remain unbelieved (The PEAR project actually did show statistical significant in a variety of phenomena...and where still shutdown). Unless EVERY scientist could gain direct access to the person with the skills it would not be believed and few scientists would even dare publish the results anyway.

I do understand why a true master in these arts would not want to subject themselves to this level of scrutiny. Besides that if it was proven then there would be throngs of religious fanatics that would seek to demonize the person? Wouldn't you agree?

Anyway I do think some of it looks fake, but then I'd ask what should a force throwing people back look like? I've never seen anything like it....and then in Globals video some of the 'jolts' look pretty realistic as well. But it's a video. Nothing can ever be proven with video any longer. The only way is direct experience. That is sort of a quagmire for those solely dependent upon science for their world view. Everything is not so easily subject to science. Subjective experience is all there really is anyway.

Besides that even when science gives people a direct insight into the nature of things many of them still refuse to believe it.

Science is the fastest growing religion today. It's becoming dogmatic. Those with out training are now spouting off as though they understand universal truths and such when in reality they are just reciting another persons dogma. I love science. It's why I chose it as a career, but I don't like scientist that refuse to allow for anything...science without an element of mysticism is totally lame to my eyes..but then I find science to be very mystical...

On another note. I'm starting to feel like it's time to take an extended break from the nexus.

<blockquote data-quote="joedirt" data-source="post: 3514812" data-attributes="member: 6370">My state of being bothered had nothing to do with you endlessness.&nbsp; My state of being bothered stems from the question you asked about why not prove it to science...and I thought I was pretty clear at addressing what it was that bothered me.&nbsp; It seems as though one should just go prove it to the world, but then on a second, perhaps deeper level it would make sense to not prove it to the world.&nbsp; My initial stance is to be bothered by those that would claim this and not prove it, but then I understand why those that could, &#039;if they could&#039; would chose to not prove it to the world.&nbsp; Of course many of them seem ok proving it to a hand full of students...so an elements, a large element, of skepticism is also shared by me.Thinking joe sixpack would get off the couch and start meditating because science proved a monk had telekinesis seems laughable to me.How many times has joe six pack walked outside and seen the absolute incredible miracle that is life all around him?&nbsp; How many times has joe, a collection of particles from some distant star, taken the time to marvel at the fact that he has consciousness and awareness which apparently other parts of the universe such as rocks lack?&nbsp; If joe hasn&#039;t gotten the big ah ha moment from the world around him then I highly doubt he would get it because some scientist say&#039;s a monk has telekensis.&nbsp; Christ joe sixpack doesn&#039;t even like science because it challenges his world view.&nbsp; Truth is.&nbsp; Even if scientists published this it would still remain unbelieved (The PEAR project actually did show statistical significant in a variety of phenomena...and where still shutdown).&nbsp; Unless EVERY scientist could gain direct access to the person with the skills it would not be believed and few scientists would even dare publish the results anyway.&nbsp; I do understand why a true master in these arts would not want to subject themselves to this level of scrutiny.&nbsp; Besides that if it was proven then there would be throngs of religious fanatics that would seek to demonize the person?&nbsp; Wouldn&#039;t you agree?Anyway I do think some of it looks fake, but then I&#039;d ask what should a force throwing people back look like?&nbsp; I&#039;ve never seen anything like it....and then in Globals video some of the &#039;jolts&#039; look pretty realistic as well.&nbsp; But it&#039;s a video.&nbsp; Nothing can ever be proven with video any longer.&nbsp; The only way is direct experience.&nbsp; That is sort of a quagmire for those solely dependent upon science for their world view.&nbsp; Everything is not so easily subject to science.&nbsp; Subjective experience is all there really is anyway.Besides that even when science gives people a direct insight into the nature of things many of them still refuse to believe it.Science is the fastest growing religion today.&nbsp; It&#039;s becoming dogmatic.&nbsp; Those with out training are now spouting off as though they understand universal truths and such when in reality they are just reciting another persons dogma.&nbsp; I love science.&nbsp; It&#039;s why I chose it as a career, but I don&#039;t like scientist that refuse to allow for anything...science without an element of mysticism is totally lame to my eyes..but then I find science to be very mystical...On another note.&nbsp; I&#039;m starting to feel like it&#039;s time to take an extended break from the nexus.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="joedirt, post: 3514812, member: 6370"] My state of being bothered had nothing to do with you endlessness. My state of being bothered stems from the question you asked about why not prove it to science...and I thought I was pretty clear at addressing what it was that bothered me. It seems as though one should just go prove it to the world, but then on a second, perhaps deeper level it would make sense to not prove it to the world. My initial stance is to be bothered by those that would claim this and not prove it, but then I understand why those that could, 'if they could' would chose to not prove it to the world. Of course many of them seem ok proving it to a hand full of students...so an elements, a large element, of skepticism is also shared by me. Thinking joe sixpack would get off the couch and start meditating because science proved a monk had telekinesis seems laughable to me. How many times has joe six pack walked outside and seen the absolute incredible miracle that is life all around him? How many times has joe, a collection of particles from some distant star, taken the time to marvel at the fact that he has consciousness and awareness which apparently other parts of the universe such as rocks lack? If joe hasn't gotten the big ah ha moment from the world around him then I highly doubt he would get it because some scientist say's a monk has telekensis. Christ joe sixpack doesn't even like science because it challenges his world view. Truth is. Even if scientists published this it would still remain unbelieved (The PEAR project actually did show statistical significant in a variety of phenomena...and where still shutdown). Unless EVERY scientist could gain direct access to the person with the skills it would not be believed and few scientists would even dare publish the results anyway. I do understand why a true master in these arts would not want to subject themselves to this level of scrutiny. Besides that if it was proven then there would be throngs of religious fanatics that would seek to demonize the person? Wouldn't you agree? Anyway I do think some of it looks fake, but then I'd ask what should a force throwing people back look like? I've never seen anything like it....and then in Globals video some of the 'jolts' look pretty realistic as well. But it's a video. Nothing can ever be proven with video any longer. The only way is direct experience. That is sort of a quagmire for those solely dependent upon science for their world view. Everything is not so easily subject to science. Subjective experience is all there really is anyway. Besides that even when science gives people a direct insight into the nature of things many of them still refuse to believe it. Science is the fastest growing religion today. It's becoming dogmatic. Those with out training are now spouting off as though they understand universal truths and such when in reality they are just reciting another persons dogma. I love science. It's why I chose it as a career, but I don't like scientist that refuse to allow for anything...science without an element of mysticism is totally lame to my eyes..but then I find science to be very mystical... On another note. I'm starting to feel like it's time to take an extended break from the nexus. [/QUOTE]