TEDxBrussels-Jacques Vallee, A Theory of Everything (else) 11-2011

[SRL+]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9pR0gfil_0

 

[Angel of Ioren]

That was pretty interesting. I'm surprised he used Uri Gellar as an example though and didn't mention that he was a fraud.
Ted Talks are always great though.

 

[SRL+]

That was pretty interesting. I'm surprised he used Uri Gellar as an example though and didn't mention that he was a fraud.
Ted Talks are always great though.

Gellar wasn't a complete fraud, and Vallee was probably referring to an experiment conducted 1n 1972. You can read about it in Forbidden Science Vol. II, pages 168 & 169. Unfortunately Mr. Gellar ended up exploiting his talent, and duping some folks.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Gellar wasn't a complete fraud, and Vallee was probably referring to an experiment conducted 1n 1972. You can read about in in Forbidden Science Vol. II, pages 168 & 169. Unfortunately Mr. Gellar ended up exploiting his talent, and duping some folks.

Uri Gellar is a magician that has tried to convince people that he has actual powers. He's never been able to fool people that are skilled in his field.

 

[SRL+]

Well, perhaps the next time Dr. Vallee is on the Paracast someone could ask him how he was deceived.

 

[SRL+]

Here's a pretty interesting take from futurist John L. Petersen on Vallee's lecture.

VIEWPOINT | "Holy Crap!" The Future is Here Already | John L. Petersen's
FUTUREdition

 

[tyder001]

I got partway through and then "real world" work called. But, it's interesting and I bookmarked it to read later.

 

[trainedobserver]

Well, perhaps the next time Dr. Vallee is on the Paracast someone could ask him how he was deceived.

I think that would be an incredibly interesting discussion. What does Dr. Vallee actually know about the criticism of notables like Randi, Criss Angel, and Kreskin who explain and replicate Gellar's alleged powers?

What of Gellar's own admission that he does not have any supernatural powers? It is reported that in the November 2007 issue of the German magazine Magische Welt (Magic World), Geller said "I’ll no longer say that I have supernatural powers. I am an entertainer. I want to do a good show. My entire character has changed."

Also, has does it make sense that anyone with the fantastic powers that Gellar once claimed to have, would waste themselves bending spoons and healing toasters for a living? Isn't much more likely that such a person who makes their living entertaining others with their special powers is nothing more than what he appears to be, an entertainer performing an illusion?

 

[SRL+]

I have emailed Mr. Gellar, asking if he would please clarify if he in fact had any extrasensory abilities at any time.....this may be interesting....and this was the reply.


Hi ? I urge you to read Jonathan Margolis's book: Uri Geller Magician Or Mystic? And make up your own mind, also read The Geller Papers, these books are free to read on my web site.
Much energy Uri
------Original Message------
From: S.R.L.
To: Uri Geller
Subject: Jacques Vallee S.R.I. Remote viewing.
Sent: Jan 25, 2012 22:49

Dear Mr. Geller:
I am a forum member of the Paracast where I posted Jacques Vallee's latest lecture in Brussels. Your name was mentioned by Dr. Vallee as a person (at the time of the experiments) as a successful remote viewer.
After having read Jacques Vallee's Forbidden Science Vol. II, I was under the impression that you once had a genuine capability in RV. So the problem is Mr. Geller that some forum members are of the impression that you never had any true Remote Viewing capabilities, and it was just an illusion. And if that were the case, why would Dr. Vallee mention your name. I would appreciate any and all input you might have to offer. Thank you.

Please visit my website at www.urigeller.com
I wish you plenty of good health, happiness and peace of mind. Be positive, optimistic and believe in yourself. Follow me on Twitter: gelleruri
Much energy and love
Uri

From my BlackBerry

 

[trainedobserver]

I have emailed Mr. Gellar, asking if he would please clarify if he in fact had any extrasensory abilities at any time.....this may be interesting....and this was the reply.

"I urge you to read Jonathan Margolis's book: Uri Geller Magician Or Mystic? And make up your own mind, also read The Geller Papers, these books are free to read on my web site."

"Make up your own mind." is not an answer. "Illusion or real supernatural power?" is a yes or no question.

 

[SRL+]

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, as I am beginning to understand your paranormal disenchantment. I suppose a straight forward answer from Mr. Gellar would have been much too simple to ask for. The response given seemed like it came more from a magician than a mystic. I am once again surprised that Vallee would use someone as contentious as Gellar when he could have mentioned Ingo Swan, or Pat Price. If Mr. Gellar was such a good magician, why would he not have taken his road show to the public sooner, earning more than working for the C.I.A. , unless needing to hone his skills. Whatever the answer is, he obviously wants it earned. Perhaps reading through the material which he has suggested will provide some illumination.

 

[trainedobserver]

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, as I am beginning to understand your paranormal disenchantment. I suppose a straight forward answer from Mr. Gellar would have been much too simple to ask for. The response given seemed like it came more from a magician than a mystic.

I think it is very telling. It is misdirection, a magician's stock and trade.

I am once again surprised that Vallee would use someone as contentious as Gellar when he could have mentioned Ingo Swan, or Pat Price.

It is puzzling. No one is perfect I guess. I don't think it indicates a total failure of Vallee's critical thinking skills, but it is curious.

Oh and kuddos for emailing Gellar!

 

[SRL+]

Somewhere the truth lies, and only useful information will help bare the truth.

 

[trainedobserver]

Somewhere the truth lies, and only useful information will help bare the truth.

Therein lies the rub, "How to tell the lies from the truth?" The old adage, "If it is too good to be true, it probably is." can be applied liberally in the consideration of paranormal claims. The subject attracts con-men and the credulous as much as it does anyone looking for something as elusive as the truth, therefore caution and skepticism are called for in spades.

 

[SRL+]

I would suggest that unless you were the experientialist, the preponderance of evidence is going to be as close as your going to get, and one in which I advocate.

 

[tyder001]

It's like a poster said about the abduction experience. Once you've had it then all the stats and debunking mean nothing to you. Until, you've had it then I guess (since I have not had it.) all the stories and sightings just don't sway you one way or the other. I have had certain experiences in my life that were "proven" to be impossible by certain mindsets. Nobody here, I'm talking about a researcher who stated you couldn't have a prophetic dream and he had the "research to prove it." The thing is once you experience something that is considered paranormal then you can't go back to a reductionist mindset. On the other hand I am skeptical of all accounts. I also question my own experineces. I think it's healthy to question and to avoid absolutes when it comes to life experience. I don't think one size fits all in this field.

I was watching the Science channel the other day. It was a really interesting show about the Multi Verse. Thing is that the research convinced some and not others. So, there are times when we are all gonna disagree. Sorry, I'm rambling a little.

 

[trainedobserver]

I would suggest that unless you were the experientialist, the preponderance of evidence is going to be as close as your going to get, and one in which I advocate.

The experiencers interpretation of a given experience should always be called into questions though. It seems in many paranormal events the observer's emotional, mental, and physical state is effected. The subjective interpretation must be tempered with some objective observation of the available evidence.

In the individual it seems the experience trumps all other considerations. Another indicator that mental processes may have been influenced by the event and should be cautiously evaluated.

 

[trainedobserver]

The thing is once you experience something that is considered paranormal then you can't go back to a reductionist mindset.

That isn't true! Far from it. I know I am not the only person who has experienced things that they once considered paranormal only to change their opinions about the matter some time after. People do reevaluate their experiences from time to time or they should.

People have strange experiences and form strong opinions about them but there is nothing inherent in true paranormal experiences (whatever that is) that flips some switch in peoples heads.

 

[tyder001]

People have strange experiences and form strong opinions about them but there is nothing inherent in true paranormal experiences (whatever that is) that flips some switch in peoples heads.

If you are talking about religious experience then I might be inclined to agree with you. However, the experiences that I have and have had are not paranormal to me. It is a natural extension or aspect of my being. I have had several times in my life when I have "known" something through a dream It has been an objective event with other people involved and was not an "inner" feeling or orgasmic experience. Actually, a couple of them were rather mundane. But, a researcher had data and "science" by science I mean his own research, this is not an attack on the scientific method or progress. Anyway, if I had not had first hand knowledge of something that he said "couldn't happen" then I would have a completely different view of some things. Anyway, I do understand what you are saying. I do examine myself and I do question my world view and assuptions. I don't look for guru's and I don't prescribe to a religion. From what I've seen you and I have had "some" similar early experience with some form of Christinaity. We have reacted differently because we are different people and our experience (I'm sure) are not the same. I am (although, I know it's hard to believe from some of my posts) very agnostic toward religion and the paranormal. But, by agnostic I simply mean I question the ultimate meaning and assumptions. I don't mean that I don't believe in spiritual reality. I just don't think that there is a division I think it's all different aspects of being. But, I don't have an ultimate answer. At least not one that I can share like a one size fits all baseball cap.

 

[tyder001]

Recently, I read something by a Hindu mystic. I have no real in depth knowledge of that religion. I also have no intention of picking up a new religion in my old age. But, some of the thoughts about reality and illusion and some of the ideas of being were things that I have often thought myself. I also heard an interview with Bernard Haisch the astrophysicist who had some interesting things to say about "God" (not the bearded man in the sky.) He has been a guest on the Paracast and I find his thoughts to be interesting. Still, I don't know of anybody or anything that I completely agree with.