• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Any Evidence of Authentic Predictions?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Great post Rick!
I agree with just about all that you stated, however, I would add a bit about being 'objective.'
I was raised--and damn near terrified as a boy--about this 'end of the world' and of the 'anti-Christ.' Once in college, I studied philosopy and was a student teacher as well.
I learned how to be 'objective' through Plato, and many of the other 'great thinkers' of our long ago history when people were searching for 'objective truths.'
* The 'anti-Chirst' is not mentioned ONCE in the Bible, although many, if not all christian religions, make claims that the 'beast' is this 'anti-christ.'
And the religion I was exposed to seemed to have a new date of the end of the world with the mushroom clouds every 8 years or so. Of course, it never happened. They are saying that still.
And yes, you are correct: if parents brain-wash their kids
into thinking as they think, believing as they believe, then chances are they will grow up and be carbon copies of their parents, even if their parents are closed-minded.
I know people who go to church on Sunday, and then they can't wait to get home, pop open a beer and turn the TV on for the football games. These are the people who concern me. Their closed minds could be deadly.
And should there appear a 'seer' or a 'clairvoyant,' then they will be tagged as being 'devil-controlled.' I know: my own family used to believe such about me, despite the proof, I think until they realized that I was not doing the things that 'evil' people do.
I do, however, believe in a Great Spirit, as I found Him early in life as a small boy, before religion crowed my mind with confusion. I thought that I was going to church to make my family happy, as if it was a good deed. You know.
But when I was given a 'dream' that came true, and then another, and another; I knew that there was something, a 'Great Spirit,' that was the being of 'eternal mind.'
Perhaps those 'parallel realities' you mention are the highways between ourselves and the Great beyond???
We can only grow by trying our strengths with others; not by showing them off.
Thank you for your post!
(And thanks for the off-forum email!).
Jason Greywolf Leigh
http://jasonleigh.org
 
Uh, Greywolf, the term "antichrist" appears several times in the gospel of John. If we're going to make arguments, let's keep our facts in order. I'm not being confrontational, just trying to keep a level playing field.
 
CapNg:
Well, yes, depending upon which version of the Bible you are reading.
* I should not have brought up the 'anti-Christ' to begin with, as it was not within my Topic, however, pardon me.
Yes, the 'anti-Christ' is mentioned in the books of Matthew, I John, II John, several times, of course, in the "King James version.'
You must ask yourself, as I did many years ago, who was 'King James,' and why is it called 'The authorized version?'
Short cut: King James lived in the 16th Century. You'll discover that he 'ordered' certain Books of the previous Bible to be omitted, like The Book of Wisdom.
Now ask yourself, why did he do that? Better yet, you must discover just who King James was and what gave him the right to omit Books of the Bible? Why did he 'order' that certain words and phrases be left out entirely and or changed?
Thus, your adventure with King James would then begin.
I have been there, done that.
I spent 6 months learning of King James, and I will try to save you some time by adding that he was certainly no saintly enough person to have omitted 'Holy Texts' and to have omitted certain Books and to have ordered many, many changes made for what he called, "The common good."
Who was the 'common good,' coming from a man who will likely as not have a warm place in hell?
Thusly, I ask your pardon for even mentioning the Bible, as this is what happens.
I was only trying to relate my boyhood of awakening to clairvoyance when I was being forced into going to church.
My points and proofs on my own portents (predictions) still, nevertheless, stands.
Thank you for your post.
Greywolf
http://jasonleigh.org/new.html
 
It was never my intention to distract from your experiences, I just have this thing about trivial points of quibbling (It's a bad habit, really). So when someone says something like "there's NO mention of the anitchrist in the Bible!" the devil's advocate in me leaps forward and says "Oh really?" It's a thing that I do.

A bit about me: by no accout am I some bible-thumping, extremist christian. Quite the opposite, in fact. I am however the son of an Anglican priest and I've probably spent more time in church than most people have had hot dinners. Also my dad is not your arechtypal priest, he has more books on comparative theology than most libraries (although whether that speaks to his bibliophelia or the sad state of most local libraries is anyone's guess). So, strange as it may seem, I've actually developed this sort of response mechanism for dealing with people who ARE bible-thumping, extremist christians who make all sorts of grandeous claims about the contents of the bible yet seemingly haven't actually read it once.

I'm aware of the apocrypha and other omitted texts. The King James version is considered the codified version but it's generally accepted that the Greek orthodox councils had also boiled the Bible down to basically the same books at around the same time, so it seems like the other books weren't popular with anyone. Plus they were somewhat contradictory (well, moreso than the other existing texts) and were omitted in large part for the sake of clarity. I'm not saying the motives behind their occlusion weren't political as well, I'm just saying the immedeiate "it's-a-conspiracy-to-hide-the-truth" reaction is perhaps over-simplified.

OK, grabbing the wheel and steering us back on topic! I have my doubts about psychics. I have known people get premonitions, funny "feelings" and "impressions" that turned out to be connected to events down the road but I've never seen anything that I would say goes beyond chance, luck or simple expectation.

For instance, if I think about talking to someone and then a few minutes later the phone rings, is that a psychic experience or is it that I just know my friend's habits and am thinking about them at a time when they're likely to call anyway?
 
CapnG:
Thank you for your Reply.
I am glad that you are to the point! And you're slant about attending church was most amusing.
So, perhaps in asking your Dad to give you a bit of history about King James, it might also bring you two closer to each other, for a father loves to share knowledge with his son, and vice versa. I can state this as an expert, as I am childless--with eyes wide open.
I, too, have my doubts about 'psychics.' I have nothing to do with them, nor does the term apply to my 'gift.'
Psychics charge a fee to read Tarot cards, read the lines in your palms, look at tea leaves, etc. I have nothing to do with them.
However, I do believe in a form of 'psychic ability' as you related.
That phone ringing example you gave. Suppose it were someone you hadn't heard from in a long while, but you had this 'feeling' that they would call, and then they did. That's much more concrete than someone you hear from all of the time, and yet, even your friend you do hear from: just the meer fact that you had a 'feeling' that they would call is enough to try to develope the ability.
Those 'feelings' have saved my life and the lives of others many times over. Would it be something 'evil' if you were to have a 'feeling' that a train or a bus your friend was going to ride on had and accident--but you had warned your friend NOT to take that route and they were saved; it would take on a more serious study for you, don't you think?
I cannot count the times those 'feelings' saved my life and that of those I knew and those I have loved. I recall the most outstanding ones that made National and World news, because we had a record of them, although, if you would just read how those 'portents' came to me in the form of 'dreams,' then ask your Dad what the Bible relates about someone who tells of 'a dream' and then that dreams comes true; who sent it?
Then you will know why I refer to it as my 'God-given-gift.'
Blessings to you and yours this Holiday Season.
Jason Greywolf Leigh
http://jasonleigh.org/new.html
 
CapnG said:
Precognition violates basic temporal mechanics. Let's say I'm "psychic":

- I make a prediction with a negative outcome (eg. "You will be struck by a bus on thursday.")
- The person in question makes changes to negate that outcome. (eg. He takes the subway)
- The event does not occur.

Since the event did not occur, I could not have forseen it, thus warning the victim. Ergo the event does happen, thus I predict it, thus it does not occur, which means it will now occur because it didn't happen and I therefore could not have predicted it, etc, etc

The only way out of the loop is to assume some quantum level of clairvoyance giving way to possible futures which is really no better than guessing anyway, making it essentially equal to luck.
Click to expand...

I'm currently reading a book called the holographic universe by Michael Talbot, it deals with how this kind of thing could be possible, and not violate our current laws. It doesn't violate them because our fundamental understanding of the universe is not complete. Therefore in this new model, its a perfectly natural function of a deeper order of nature to see a potential future event.

When i get time ill post some stuff from his book. As it blew most of my head off when i read it. Its just a theory, but seems to be gaining some ground with quantum physicists etc.

Bohm, and pribram are two big names who seem to have come to roughly the same conclusions from different starting points.
 
Dear idontunderstand:
Thank you for your post.
? Please don't insert quotes from Mr. Talbot's book. I, personally, am ONLY interested in what YOU have to say.
? Your example is somewhat dismissed since you ?saw? your friend getting struck by the bus, which did not happen. One could state that because you warned him; he avoided getting struck! And since the event did not happen, that does not mean that you did not ?see? it happening, simply because you warned your friend and he did not get struck. Here's a more prefect example:
~ I made a 'prediction' in which a bridge was going to be out in the path of some friends who were traveling out west from Louisiana. When I gave the prediction, the bridge had not fallen at that point, although, my friends DID change their route and the bridge DID go out when they were in that area that took several cars down with it, killing all. Should my friends had taken the route that took them over the bridge, there is a great chance that they would have fallen victim of it. The chances that they could have traveled over it with the bridge falling right after they crossed it would be up for debate in percentages, ALTHOUGH IT DID HAPPEN.
~ When one of the predictions (I prefer the term 'portent') I had made on world wide radio (and shared the next day with Dr. Martin Fischer, MD: see his letter of Testimony: http://jasonleigh.org/new.html ) of a small jetliner that would crash into the mountains of Colorado on a Tuesday evening due to a strange snow/sleet/fog bank DID happen, despite me calling the FAA to inform them of the event; all on-board were lost. I related this ?portent? the next day at my appointment with Dr. Fischer who had listened to the radio interview at my request. He asked me in his office the next day, ?So, you think that this plane crash WILL HAPPEN?? I told him that it would, and then he said that he would write a letter to testify that I had related it to him the next day, and if it did in fact happen, he would allow me to post his letter and to discuss it in my follow up interview. I saw the crash, as if I were on the plane myself, in a vivid dream (portent).
I don't recall ANY portent that I have related that did not come to pass, as I keep a Journal of all of them. Some took days, weeks, months and years, but they all came to pass in this world.
This is unequalled in history, even in the case of Nostradamus who did not live to see most (about 90%) of his 'portents' come true.
Therefore, if one has a portent and warns others of it, then it comes true; then the portent was true. If people avoided the mishap, then they were true believers and were saved. If one relates an event that does not happen as you assert, then it wasn't a prediction, or a portent at all and your assertion does not pan out.
You see, a ?portent? HAS to come true, whether someone was saved or not for it to be a portent, or a prediction.
I hope that these examples help you to better understand this great mystery.
Sincerely?in truth,
Jason Greywolf Leigh
 
Greywolf said:
Dear idontunderstand:
Thank you for your post.
? Please don't insert quotes from Mr. Talbot's book. I, personally, am ONLY interested in what YOU have to say.
? Your example is somewhat dismissed since you ?saw? your friend getting struck by the bus, which did not happen. One could state that because you warned him; he avoided getting struck! And since the event did not happen, that does not mean that you did not ?see? it happening, simply because you warned your friend and he did not get struck. Here's a more prefect example:
~ I made a 'prediction' in which a bridge was going to be out in the path of some friends who were traveling out west from Louisiana. When I gave the prediction, the bridge had not fallen at that point, although, my friends DID change their route and the bridge DID go out when they were in that area that took several cars down with it, killing all. Should my friends had taken the route that took them over the bridge, there is a great chance that they would have fallen victim of it. The chances that they could have traveled over it with the bridge falling right after they crossed it would be up for debate in percentages, ALTHOUGH IT DID HAPPEN.
~ When one of the predictions (I prefer the term 'portent') I had made on world wide radio (and shared the next day with Dr. Martin Fischer, MD: see his letter of Testimony: http://jasonleigh.org/new.html ) of a small jetliner that would crash into the mountains of Colorado on a Tuesday evening due to a strange snow/sleet/fog bank DID happen, despite me calling the FAA to inform them of the event; all on-board were lost. I related this ?portent? the next day at my appointment with Dr. Fischer who had listened to the radio interview at my request. He asked me in his office the next day, ?So, you think that this plane crash WILL HAPPEN?? I told him that it would, and then he said that he would write a letter to testify that I had related it to him the next day, and if it did in fact happen, he would allow me to post his letter and to discuss it in my follow up interview. I saw the crash, as if I were on the plane myself, in a vivid dream (portent).
I don't recall ANY portent that I have related that did not come to pass, as I keep a Journal of all of them. Some took days, weeks, months and years, but they all came to pass in this world.
This is unequalled in history, even in the case of Nostradamus who did not live to see most (about 90%) of his 'portents' come true.
Therefore, if one has a portent and warns others of it, then it comes true; then the portent was true. If people avoided the mishap, then they were true believers and were saved. If one relates an event that does not happen as you assert, then it wasn't a prediction, or a portent at all and your assertion does not pan out.
You see, a ?portent? HAS to come true, whether someone was saved or not for it to be a portent, or a prediction.
I hope that these examples help you to better understand this great mystery.
Sincerely?in truth,
Jason Greywolf Leigh
Click to expand...

Hi there,

I didn't mention a bus lol. I'll only insert them if i think its relevant to what I'm saying, and feel it explains in better detail what i mean.

Many thanks
 
My mistake: I thought you were serious in your post and in your intentions:
You: "(eg. "You will be struck by a bus on thursday.")."
Since you DID mention a 'bus,' I haven't a clue as to why you would deny it, and then post a contradiction.
Thanks for your post, nevertheless.
Happy New Year to ALL!
Jason Greywolf Leigh
 
Greywolf said:
My mistake: I thought you were serious in your post and in your intentions:
You: "(eg. "You will be struck by a bus on thursday.")."
Since you DID mention a 'bus,' I haven't a clue as to why you would deny it, and then post a contradiction.
Thanks for your post, nevertheless.
Happy New Year to ALL!
Jason Greywolf Leigh
Click to expand...

Hi wolf,

I think you have your wires crossed. Inserted into my post was CapnG's text, which has HIS comment about the bus. Please look carefully at the posting. My response mentions nothing about a bus.

Cheers
 
Pardon me.
No, I could not tell the difference. Actually, I think I had thought you were placing 'accents' upon your words.
Yes, upon scanning down I see that you are correct.
Again, Pardon me. My error. It was posted by CapnG. Your words appeared below his.
I am used to repying with the original post being below one's new reply.
Thank you.
Jason Greywolf Leigh
http://jasonleigh.org
 
Greywolf said:
Pardon me.
No, I could not tell the difference. Actually, I think I had thought you were placing 'accents' upon your words.
Yes, upon scanning down I see that you are correct.
Again, Pardon me. My error. It was posted by CapnG. Your words appeared below his.
I am used to repying with the original post being below one's new reply.
Thank you.
Jason Greywolf Leigh
http://jasonleigh.org
Click to expand...


Hey thats ok,

Ive done it before on forums, so much information to take in sometimes. Many thanks to you :)
 
Well done, Rick.
You told it like it is: most Ufologists DO in fact, rely heavily upon the Net for their information, which, unfortunately, can sometimes be the work of others more dedicated and unconcerned about copyrighting their work. And research IS WORK!
I regret that your post cannot be seen when posting a reply, otherwise, I would have made a better comment with your words to back me up, but for those who take the time to read the posts, then it should all be very clear. Just figuring out where your 'reply' begins and the previous post ends could be some work for with the Webmaster to consider changing, or maybe I'm not holding my mouth right???
You just gotta watch out for those damn 'typos.' If you use Firefox, I can understand. 'No spell checkers that actually work.
With IE 6, you have to worry about 'my dooms' around ever corner (many hate Bill Gates), and Ispell not knowing words like, 'Ufologists,' or you could write your post in MS Word, begin a file of Blogs, then have your post ready for reading by the masses.
At any rate, thank you for your post. Each and every one is important and has its own merit.
Blessings!
Greywolf
http://jasonleigh.org
 
Ah Bohm. My favorite physicist. Or at least one of them. I don't hear his name enough unfortunately.

Holographic Universe is a good book.

You might like a book called "Bridging Science and Spirit" by Norman Friedman. Bohm, the paranormal and the perennial philosophy is dealt with in that book. One of my favorites.

Also Edgar Mitchel's "The Way of the Explorer". Ed's book might be hard to come by these days though. I got it when it first came out several years ago. Psychics and physics is discussed a lot in that book.
 
I'm not sure why I got the notice that you made a 'reply' to one of my posts.
I've never read 'Bohm,' or any other along that line when the term 'Psychics' is used, as there is a huge difference (please see my previous posts) between them and 'clairvoyants.' I have no interest in 'parlor tricks' and Tarot card readers. Some do, I do not.
* Dr. Edgar Mitchell is a friend of mine. We have discussed many things, much to my joy. He is a very kind and caring soul. After his trip to the Moon, he found a form of 'spiritualism' that is more like religion. I suggest his books as well, but to correct you; 'all' of his works are available at his website, and even autographed copies and photos.
Thanks for your reply.
Greywolf
http://jasonleigh.org
 
Greywolf said:
I'm not sure why I got the notice that you made a 'reply' to one of my posts.
I've never read 'Bohm,' or any other along that line when the term 'Psychics' is used, as there is a huge difference (please see my previous posts) between them and 'clairvoyants.' I have no interest in 'parlor tricks' and Tarot card readers. Some do, I do not.
* Dr. Edgar Mitchell is a friend of mine. We have discussed many things, much to my joy. He is a very kind and caring soul. After his trip to the Moon, he found a form of 'spiritualism' that is more like religion. I suggest his books as well, but to correct you; 'all' of his works are available at his website, and even autographed copies and photos.
Thanks for your reply.
Greywolf
http://jasonleigh.org
Click to expand...


I'm not into parlor tricks either.

I said it might be hard to come by. I wasn't aware he had a site, or just forgot. Thanks for mentioning it, I'll check it out.


What do you all make of Uri Geller? I was convinced he was bogus for awhile, until I read what Ed claims in one of his books. Now, I'm not sure.
 
Not only can I see the future of Baked Goods, I can change it.

Today, I saved a strawberry pie from going bad, by eating it. I saw its future as it languished in the frozen food aisle of Rainbow. As I touched the box, I saw a montage of how it was created, how it would languish there never being picked up due to poor product placement. How many French Silk pies were carted off, while this one expired after being dropped by a customer who was trying to get the dutch apple off the shelf.

I knew... I KNEW that I had to stop it from going to waste. I know I made the right choice.

If you could go back in time, and kill Hitler with a piece of poison Strudel, would you do it? Yes, Yes I would.
 
Tommy Allison said:
If you could go back in time, and kill Hitler with a piece of poison Strudel, would you do it? Yes, Yes I would.
Click to expand...

you would harm an innocent piece of strudel? you monster! i know, i know...it's for a good cause
 
Remember, this is Hitler... Then again... I'd probably have to put the poison in some kind of vegetarian dish, as the guy probably wouldn't have eaten strudel anyway.

Complex is the issue of time travel and seeing the future of baked goods.
 
Back
Top