Psychic Ability.

[AnnetteMarie]

I actually am quite good at using he/her etc. I hate the sexual assumptions. BUT. I actually did re-go look at your name to know how to refer to you... yes, I am that lame...., and well, I don't know any women named Gen, so I left the he in. I swear I did actually think of it to that point. Over a little word. But, I could be lying couldn't I?

I'm Psychic now. I knew that this person named Gen, might not be a dude. Take my word for it. I knew that this person could be a man or woman. Or inbetween. I'm psychic. I just didn't state it. Just like many psychics don't display it. Through testing. But take my word for it. After you give me money of course.

But back to the more important issue. If you don't won't to be referred to as a guy. Call yourself Jean. Hi, I have a username of Lisa. Don't call me a she....

I didn't read the rest of your post. I'm sure I'd have more to say. But some how, I think you'll enjoy yourself speaking, or reading your own thoughts, more than me or mine.

oh man... I so totally did NOT get that impression from reading the posts in this thread.

what am I missing? oh, never mind, I don't want to know cause it will only make me sad...

 

[Stillborn]

I'm not a he.

There are many reasons why I charge for a lot of the psychic work I do. I would be happy to go into why, if you all are curious. But really I don't understand where the snideness comes from. You know next to nothing about me or my work.

I'm a little confounded by the response I've gotten from some of the posters here. People were asking questions about psychic ability. I jumped in because it's an area in which I have expertise, and because I thought people would be interested and we could have a good discussion.

I know that my perspective is different from the prevalent one here, but I've been really surprised by the seeming lack of curiosity and the apparent hostility. I don't know what to make of it. It's disappointing.

I think I know why, no need for you to explain.

I'm not suprised you are confounded.

I'm snide? Least I do it without taking money from people. And I make points while I'm at it, unlike you. You've behaved like a politician. Many points have been made, you deflect and bury.

No, Tommy asked about psychic experiments. Abilities didn't come into question until you chimed in about being a paid psychic. Re-read. I gave results in which some might consider being in favor of psi abilites... You being one of them. Tommy didn't even give a follow up reply. Whether it's ya or nay, doesn't seem to be an issue with the OP. In fact, there is a known flipping skeptic Derek, who came in and was quite nice and civil. He didn't even question psi abilities. You fucked it up with your defensiveness. There was a non-partial conversation going on which rarely happens.

So, if "People were asking questions about psychic ability." you may be the reason why. We have to ask because of people like you. If more psychic were willing to be tested instead of behaving like you, psi might not be a flippin mystery.

I will admit, I didn't read all of your reply I quoted. I think I read enough.

You like taking money from people, do Randi's challenge. You can shut up a skeptic and be rich. Even if you don't want the money, give it to someone who does like the poor. To not try, is to be as good as a lie in your case. If you fear Randi is crooked, take your own cameras in and expose him. To not do this is a shame. You have abilities that could enhance our world.... yet stick to your box.

If you have any psi abilities. What is the word I am thinking? Show us, won't take much of your time. Can't do words? Ok, I am thinking of an image. ..... Now a sound..... Get any of those remotely right.

 

[derekcbart]

Thats kinda the way I feel about DerekCBart. I like the way he approaches the subject and especially his dismantling of people like Browne and Horn, but he just seems to rub me the wrong way a lot of the time.

He has these stupid rules like you are only psychic if you can walk around and literally read another persons mind with exact precision. "Hey you were just thinking about your nieces birthday cake". But if someone gets an image in their head only some of the time and this is accurate, then that is not psychic. This makes no sense as it implies that the ability is extremely advanced in people, when in actuality even a slight sign of sign of occasional psychic awareness is a big deal in humans.

Ive heard a him interviewed a few times where he likes to present this overarching image of people as mininterpreters and liars and egotistical attention seekers, and uses the same couple examples to 'prove his case'. All it ends up doing is showing how Derek uses single cases as justification for sweeping statements and theories covering broad subjects, like "there is no evidence at all that psychic abilities even exists".

But I really dig his Horn work.

Umm... thanks?

In this particular case we started talking about how to test someone claiming to be telepathic: telepathy - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

In order to test this particular type of psychic ability you need to come up with guidelines that eliminate the possibility of a positive result through chance alone. Testing a remote viewer would require a different form of test. Testing an aura reader requires a different form of test. Testing a psychic dog requires a different form of test. And, yes, the IIG has tested each of these types of claims.

One thing to keep in mind is that the testing protocol is designed with the input of the person being tested. The IIG does not impose a form of protocol against the person's will. This is very important because we want to make sure that the applicant approves of everything related to the test prior to taking the test so that the person could not say that the IIG imposed something upon them if the testing result turns out to be negative. Which, so far, all of the tests done by the IIG have had negative results.

The following may appear to be an extreme statement to believers in psychic abilities, but it is analytically true: in over 100 years of properly controlled scientific testing not one person has ever demonstrated any form of psychic ability that was outside the range of chance.

Yes, there are many positive test results of psychics published, but when you examine the testing protocols you learn that the tests were not controlled through means such as double-blinding which is used to eliminate experimental bias. Yes, the United States government spent millions of dollars examining psychic abilities, specifically remote viewing, but abandoned the research after years of examination when the information provided by the psychics demonstrated to not be useful.

Examination of psychic abilities, or other paranormal claims, is important to do and should be done, but it should be done in a way that conforms to scientific protocols used to eliminate bias and chance. In my years of examining claims I have found this to be the hardest thing to explain to some people. Everyone has probably seen a "light in the sky" or experienced a prophetic dream, but the reasons for most of these experiences are able to be explained through non-paranormal means. Science is not a belief system. Science is a process.

It is well established that humans are pattern seeking creatures. We have an amazing ability to look at random occurrences and see a pattern. When this happens visually it is called pareidolia: Wikipedia - Pareidolia This appears to be an evolutionary adaptation because the most common object we recognize in the randomness is a human face. This would have been a very important ability to have, but it has also led us to see things which are simply not there. Not all paranormal events can be explained by pareidolia, but an awful lot can be.

As a skeptic, and as a member of a skeptical organization, I think it is important to mention that I am simply looking for evidence. I am not interested in theories. Many Paranormal Challenge applicants want to send us multi-page theories for how they can do something. All we want to see is if the person can do what they claim to be able to do.

We are still waiting for someone to be able to do what they claim to be able to do. And we will keep investigating until we find someone who can.

-Derek

 

[NNN]

Derek, does your organisation publish example test structures in order to guide would-be researchers? Or, do you know of somewhere that does?

P.S. What would you say was wrong with Rupert Sheldrake's "telephone telepathy" tests?

 

[Gen]

Gen,
I think another reason people get hostile is because there are so many hoaxers and fakes out there and they might be judging you because you make money doing this.

I am not one of those BTW at this point in reading your posts. I actually do have a question for you. How can you personally tell a prophetic dream from a regular or lucid dream. I am making an assumption here. Also what smells seem to be easier to pick up psychically?

Thank you. In my experience, the psychic world and the UFO community are actually not that different. But I guess there's a big wall between the two!

I don't believe there are as many outright frauds in the psychic world as one might think. There are a lot of nutty people who are really misled or on an ego trip, but I think most people who do this kind of work are genuinely well-meaning. Sylvia Browne, for instance, is a real rarity.

Dreams are really tricky. A lot of people have stuff come to them in dreams. I don't, personally, so I can only speak generally.

Most dreams seem to stem from anxiety or wish fulfillment. If you dream that you accidentally went to work naked or that George Clooney is taking you out to dinner, that's probably just your mind shuffling its internal deck.

But dreams that are particularly vivid and full of elements that don't feel like they come from your own psychology, those are the ones worth paying attention to.

I had an extremely realistic dream not too long ago that was apparently set during an uprising somewhere in East Asia. There was a brutal police crackdown. My point of view kept shifting -- sometimes I was a protester, other times it was as if I were filming the whole thing as a journalist. Because I have no particular personal or psychological connection to that part of the world, I tend to think that there was something to that dream that was "not me." Whether it was prophetic or whether I was tapping into someone else's fears or memories, who knows? The dream didn't give me any useful psychic information, but it was still fascinating (if a bit harrowing).

If you think you're having psychic dreams, the number one thing to do is to write down your dreams as soon as you wake up. This is a harder habit to pick up than one might think, but it's really useful.

As far as psychic smells, I don't have much experience with that either. I tend to be very visual in terms of the kind of information I can pick up. But if you're smelling something that has meaning to you (a loved one's perfume) and there's no source for it, there could definitely be a message involved.

 

[derekcbart]

Derek, does your organisation publish example test structures in order to guide would-be researchers? Or, do you know of somewhere that does?

P.S. What would you say was wrong with Rupert Sheldrake's "telephone telepathy" tests?

The IIG does not have their various protocols used posted online, but the JREF does have a section on their forum dedicated to their challenge applicants:
Challenge Applications - JREF Forum

Telepathy tests done via telephone are generally okay if used for preliminary demonstration purposes only, but are not valid if done for actual testing or publishing purposes. The reasons for this are because it is impossible to control for sensory leakage or experimenter bias when doing a phone call. The person could have someone listening in and providing clues, or searching the Internet for clues. It is also very easy to fall into a cold reading situation when doing it over the phone. BTW, cold reading is an impressive ability, but it is not a paranormal one. When doing an actual test you really need to isolate the sender and the receiver and make sure that there is no way to send signals between the two of them. You also need to double-blind the protocols and that is impossible to do when doing a telephone test.

For example, when we do a test one person creates the cards that contain the words to be transmitted and then has no further involvement. Two people are observing the sender and another two people are observing the receiver. After the first five words are transmitted and received one observer from the sender and one observer from the receiver meet in a third location to compare notes and see how the test is going and then are prevented from returning to the observation areas. Also, the sender and receiver are videotaped in their separate locations during the whole process. There are usually around 15 IIG members required for the testing of 2 people. The reason for this is to make sure that we do not accidentally influence the results of the test. It is a rather long and laborious process, but it is required in order to do a test properly.

-Derek

 

[TClaeys]

For those of you that have tested so-called psychics, are the psychics surprised when they fail the tests?? And if so, what accounts for, in their mind, the inability to pass such scientific testing?? Just curious.

 

[Tommy Allison]

All I know, is that I am interested in being tested for my own reasons. I'm still waiting for Derek to get things together, and formally contact me with a time, day and all that to move forward with it.

 

[Tommy Allison]

The IIG does not have their various protocols used posted online, but the JREF does have a section on their forum dedicated to their challenge applicants:
Challenge Applications - JREF Forum

Telepathy tests done via telephone are generally okay if used for preliminary demonstration purposes only, but are not valid if done for actual testing or publishing purposes. The reasons for this are because it is impossible to control for sensory leakage or experimenter bias when doing a phone call. The person could have someone listening in and providing clues, or searching the Internet for clues. It is also very easy to fall into a cold reading situation when doing it over the phone. BTW, cold reading is an impressive ability, but it is not a paranormal one. When doing an actual test you really need to isolate the sender and the receiver and make sure that there is no way to send signals between the two of them. You also need to double-blind the protocols and that is impossible to do when doing a telephone test.

For example, when we do a test one person creates the cards that contain the words to be transmitted and then has no further involvement. Two people are observing the sender and another two people are observing the receiver. After the first five words are transmitted and received one observer from the sender and one observer from the receiver meet in a third location to compare notes and see how the test is going and then are prevented from returning to the observation areas. Also, the sender and receiver are videotaped in their separate locations during the whole process. There are usually around 15 IIG members required for the testing of 2 people. The reason for this is to make sure that we do not accidentally influence the results of the test. It is a rather long and laborious process, but it is required in order to do a test properly.

-Derek

I do not, DO NOT, want my name up on that site. For me this is a private matter, and not something flippant.

 

[Ally]

I have some ability but do not want or need to be tested because one sure way for it not to work, for me ,is when I am trying. Friends and family have seen it in action. I am also not good enough to count on this ability all the time.

Gen,
I get information many ways but rarely is that in a visual way. I remember my dreams most every night and I only write them down once in awhile because it is a pain the ass to do that every day!

However when I go back and read the times that I have done dream journaling on a consistant basis they are quite interesting.

 

[derekcbart]

I do not, DO NOT, want my name up on that site. For me this is a private matter, and not something flippant.

It absolutely will not happen. I wasn't even going to mention anything on this site, but since you did mention that I will be helping to come up with a form of examination I will state publicly that the results will not be released on the IIG website, or any other website, without your written authorization.

-Derek

 

[Tommy Allison]

The only place I wish to discuss ANYTHING, is in e-mail. Nothing is to be published anywhere, on ANY website.

I will never disclose the testing or the results, regardless of the outcome.

 

[derekcbart]

For those of you that have tested so-called psychics, are the psychics surprised when they fail the tests?? And if so, what accounts for, in their mind, the inability to pass such scientific testing?? Just curious.

It can actually be rather devastating for the applicant when they fail the test. One of the tests that we did in conjunction with the James Randi Educational Foundation's Million Dollar Challenge was with a man from Hawaii named Achau Nguyen.

Before traveling from Hawaii to Los Angeles we provided him with a form of self test so that he could be sure that he had an ability before spending the money for travel. His specific claim was that he could send his thoughts into the mind of his friend and that his friend was able to receive those thoughts with 100% accuracy. For a passing result on the test we told him that 80% accuracy would be sufficient. He got 0% accuracy.

I described the test a little bit earlier. We gave Achau three envelopes with twenty index cards in each envelope with one word on each index card. He chose one of the envelopes. He then attempted to send each word to his friend who was on the floor below him, but within a 20 foot direct line of Achau's position. After sending the 20 words Achau said that everything went well as far as he was concerned and his friend (the receiver) said the same. Everyone was then gathered into a room where we wrote the word sent on a white board and then wrote the word received next to it. Achau and his friend got 0 out of 20 correct.

Achau was sobbing by the end of the results. It was really hard to look at him because he was so devastated. He really believed that he had this ability and to be shown that he got zero words correct when everything about the test was done to his approval was very hard on him.

A few weeks later he started to say that it was his friend (the receiver) who was at fault and a year later he applied to be tested again. After a couple of months of discussions he withdrew his application and we haven't heard from him since.

-Derek

 

[Tommy Allison]

Well, since I have no expectations, I won't be devastated.

 

[mike]

I looked up this

as per usual - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

What does per usual mean? - Yahoo! Answers

I like your search better. I tried at least.

per usual is not part of the equation, the word used was perusal, its context and use was correct.

i posted the link because if you dont have the word perusal in your vocabulary i feel you are missing out.

its a fantastic word.

now you can say i visited my local book store and perused the Sci fi section, or settle down with coffee and croisant and peruse the sunday paper at leisure.
or better yet you can now peruse the wine list.........

as we speak i am perusing this forum.

 

[mike]

The only place I wish to discuss ANYTHING, is in e-mail. Nothing is to be published anywhere, on ANY website.

I will never disclose the testing or the results, regardless of the outcome.

ive already remote viewed the results, and posted them at other sites.....................

 

[Stillborn]

ive already remote viewed the results, and posted them at other sites.....................

Project Camelot will take it.

 

[Gen]

I have some ability but do not want or need to be tested because one sure way for it not to work, for me ,is when I am trying. Friends and family have seen it in action. I am also not good enough to count on this ability all the time.

It's that way for a lot of people. Typically it is helpful to be in a certain relaxed state of mind, yet totally detached from the outcome. The "detached from the outcome" part is the hardest -- this is why most readers don't read for themselves.

If you're being tested, then there's extra pressure on the situation and it would be harder to get into that "detached" state of mind.

Gen,
I get information many ways but rarely is that in a visual way. I remember my dreams most every night and I only write them down once in awhile because it is a pain the ass to do that every day!

However when I go back and read the times that I have done dream journaling on a consistant basis they are quite interesting.

It is a total pain in the ass. But if you already have good dream recall, you may not need to keep a consistent journal.

How does the information come to you?

 

[Ally]

My psychic hits can come from just knowing, dreams ,smells, being empathic, hearing things and rarely visual. The most frequent way is through just knowing.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

Just about every incident I experienced that I could consider as of the psychic variety, has happened without any effort, or attempt to 'see' something.
I have had a vision of my life 5 years ahead, but did not recall it until I was living it, and then nearly fell over when I recognized it, have had some other odd things happen, but never by trying to make them happen.
I think testing would put a lot of stress on someone who experiences, but is unable to command psychic abilities, and prevent them from relaxing into the state they normally would be when they get flashes of prescience.
However, since I am not one who has regular psychic episodes, that is just my opinion