This a great forum for researching human nature.

[Carl-NC]

Carl---

First, let me point out that you never answered my question to you, in post #63.

Eh, OK, I usually let rhetorical questions drive on by.

Yes, I'm sure that dowsing is a psychic ability.

Out of curiosity... what evidence lead you to that conclusion?

If you really want to get down with it, then tell me one, single, meaningful, discovery that Psychology has made which helps to cure mental illness.

And puleeeeeeeeez don't say "drugs." I hope you realize that drugs only cover up symptoms, and thus usually require people to take them for the rest of their lives. That's not curing anything, whether it's applied to any illness, either physical or mental.

It could be that mental "illnesses" are not curable at all, and that drugs which control the problems are the best we can ever do. Is that really a Bad Thing? A person with diabetes will happily accept the non-cure of life-long insulin injections, given that the alternative of doing nothing results in a very permanent cure. Since pancreatic science hasn't cured diabetes, would you therefore conclude that the study of the pancreas can't possibly be science?

EE, in a previous post I said, "Tell that to someone...who has a kid with Asperger's." Know anything about Asperger's? It's a form of autism, and can manifest itself in a variety of behavioral problems. In more severe cases, it can cause the victim to be socially and mentally dysfunctional to the point they cannot possibly live an ordinary life. Depression and suicide are not uncommon. Treated with appropriate medications, that same person can become indistinguishable from someone without Asperger's.

So what would you recommend... should the Asperger's victim take their meds, cover up those inconvenient problems, and live an ordinary life? Or, is the process by which psychologists and biochemists identified the particular problems and developed corrective drugs too "unscientific" -- and not a even Real Cure besides -- and therefore their solution is to be shunned? Before it's suggested I have no idea what I'm talking about... I have a kid with Asperger's.

If you owned a race car, and you were the driver, could it win a race without a engine? (No.) Would that mean that you don't exist? (No.)

Actually, it is possible to own a race car, and win the race without an engine. But I wouldn't recommend entering a soap box derby car in the Daytona 500.

Post a statement of something you regard as scientific unassailable fact in any field you choose, and then you prove it to us.

How much easier could it get? One fact, and you get to choose it.

EE, in a different forum I once said that a simple "Show Me" cuts to the chase, and usually cuts the conversation mercifully short. It can be a devastatingly sharp instrument.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

Carl---

Glad to see you back.

My question in #63 wasn't really totally rhetorical, I was trying to establish your definitions, in order to communicate. Were you totally loose with the word "science," or do you acknowledge that it actually means something. I'm assuming that you appreciate the dictionary definitions, which I posted a link to, but you just didn't want to give up anything.

I'm not on the attack for opponents, it's just that I would like to be able to agree on what the heck is being talked about. Otherwise things just get nonsensical real quick, and nobody knows what the heck is actually being meant by anything. That's just disgusting, and no fun, and nothing is learned by either party. Boring.

So my questions are either to get the other person to think for himself, like the ones about "who is watching the little screen?" Or to find out the other person's definition, and maybe suggest that there can be more than one, and it depends on how the word is used. That was the case with "science." But I also ask things to see if the person can agree with anything, especially the things he apparently should agree with. If somebody can't agree on any basic thing, then it's also a situation of not being much hope of a decent conversation, so, again, what's to be gained by anyone from that?


I'm not claiming any evidence for saying that I know that dowsing is a psychic ability. Like I said in the very beginning, it's something that can be proved to oneself, but not to another. But, to a person, himself, that's the only thing that is important.

I am, however, willing to tell you some of the reasons why I know, if you would like to hear them, but like I also said before, I'm not going to debate it. And I don't demand that anyone accept my viewpoint. The only value it is to anyone is what they experience and know, themselves. Debates don't really accomplish any gain for either party (that's politics, which is the worst invention the human race has ever come up with, in my opinion.)


But I also feel the same as woofie stated in another thread, that apparently money is often deemed more important than people, by the medical/pharmaceutical industry, and it appears to me that they are politically protected.

I had a hunch about the Asperger's, that's why I didn't press it. I'll admit that certain drugs are helpful, especially in the way you mentioned, in the current state of medical knowledge. And by "certain" medicines, I don't mean for that to seem like just a few. I did, however, apply my opinion of psychology over-broadly, for brevity. For example, if asked, I would simply say psychology stinks. They have also, like the medical "industry," neglected certain directions of research which have shown great promise. You may have some idea what I am referring to, but I won't be going any further about that.


woofie's "show me," and the one you are referring to are two different concepts altogether. Yours was asking for proof of the person's claim. I've made no claims, just refuted some others' claims, and backed that up with references, when applicable. While woofie's "show me" was non-sequitur, and nonsensical, hoop jumping. Sorry, no thanks, "I don't do dat."

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HIO: I seem to be missing two posts, sniff, however here is a copy / paste interesting article -->

Don jose de La Mancha
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Don jose de La Mancha
Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it…
AKPC_IDS += "7670,";Popularity: 100% [?]


http://www.piramidasunca.ba/en/inde...MAGNETNIH-POLJA-IZNAD-BOSANSKIH-PIRAMIDA.html

 

[EE THr]

I get a feeling that he didn't take "pulling punches" into consideration much, on that one.

 

[woof!]

I've worked directly under two State Climatologists and of course (!) had access to meteorological records. I thought it was very interesting work.

So what did Hal have to say about LRL'ing or dowsing?

--Toto

 

[Carl-NC]

I'm not claiming any evidence for saying that I know that dowsing is a psychic ability. Like I said in the very beginning, it's something that can be proved to oneself, but not to another. But, to a person, himself, that's the only thing that is important.

I am, however, willing to tell you some of the reasons why I know, if you would like to hear them, but like I also said before, I'm not going to debate it. And I don't demand that anyone accept my viewpoint. The only value it is to anyone is what they experience and know, themselves. Debates don't really accomplish any gain for either party (that's politics, which is the worst invention the human race has ever come up with, in my opinion.)

If you "know," then surely there is evidence that has convinced you. And, yes, debate is phenomenally valuable in science. Necessary, even.

But I also feel the same as woofie stated in another thread, that apparently money is often deemed more important than people, by the medical/pharmaceutical industry, and it appears to me that they are politically protected.

Well, heck, you can say that for just about anything, as politics has its fingers in practically everything. Want another example? Prolly not, but here it is. Another interest of mine is astronomy, since I was a kid. My first post-college job was at NASA-KSC, as a shuttle engineer (ergo, I can legitimately call myself a "rocket scientist"). Think I was excited about that? I left in utter disgust 5 months later. The whole shuttle project was a politically engineered boondoggle, and managed in a way to maximize the number of employees. An even bigger Waste of Money is the ISS, which will become self-evident the day it augers into the Pacific Ocean.

Despite my disillusionment with NASA manned space flight, I still keenly follow their unmanned missions. But wait a sec, has the Hubble telescope ever cured a disease? Did Cassini give us new technology? Heck no! They were entirely for pure knowledge. So with politics clearly in control, and the fact that none of this stuff really does squat to improve our lifestyles, does that make it all non-science? Science is a lot more than an idealistic image of Newton or Faraday using textbook scientific method. Some of it is downright ugly.

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Woof~

I've worked directly under two State Climatologists and of course (!) had access to meteorological records. I thought it was very interesting work.

That must have been hard for you to be involved in their scam..Art

 

[EE THr]

Carl---

It all depends on what the claims are, for a given "field," group, or item. I've never heard of a telescope being claimed to cure the common cold. I don't think that concept needs any more explanation. I would expect a more relevant question, actually.

The first part of your post has been asked, and answered. But I'll give you another example. If you met someone from another location, which you had never visited, but wanted to know about that place, you would ask him some questions, and he would probably tell you what you wanted to know. You might not believe exactly everything he said, but would form your own knowledge of the place when you did go there.

But you wouldn't get much of an idea of what to look for if you argued against everything he mentioned. If something wasn't understandable, or seemed unusual, you would question him for more specific answers, until you at least understood what he was saying. Understanding what the person is saying, does not mean that you believe it, it only means you see what is being said.

Some people think that understanding what is being communicated, means that they must believe it. On the contrary, "believing" leads to problems.

Believing means to assign absolute truth to what is communicated to you. Not good. For example, if I asked my wife where the baking soda was, and she told me, I would go there to get it. While she is probably right, she could be mistaken, as it might have been left somewhere else than the usual place.

However, if I asked a total stranger where to find placer gold on a certain river, I would take his answer into consideration, along with several other factors. But I would be sure that I understood what he was saying. If I didn't want to listen and understand, asking questions if necessary, then I wouldn't waste the time and energy to ask him in the first place.

Additionally, if a con-artist is trying to sell you a phony securities scheme, if you listen to what he is saying, and ask questions, in order to understand it, you will soon discover that he is a crook.

If any of that doesn't make sense to you, please let me know what part of what I said that you don't understand.

My experience is that people who try to make their story very, very complex; are usually trying to put one over on you. This is referred to as "the confusion factor." Part of politics.

But I think that life is a lot simpler than some people try to make it, huh?

 

[EE THr]

Carl---

I should add to that, people who go around just trying to make everybody else wrong, are pretty messed up.

But if someone realizes that something is significantly wrong, and says so, he isn't necessarily goofy, especially if the thing is dangerous.

In the case with psychology, they spread the word that they are "all goodness and light," yet that is, for several reasons, about 95% wrong. All the public sees is the tip of their iceberg, which, itself is given a nicey-nicey facade. But the unseen area, which can be seen upon close inspection, is all politics and mega-money oriented. Brutally so.

And I should add that the computation of, "But there are no other alternatives," is false. They don't want other alternatives, they fight against other alternatives, and have no desire to do real research that would lead to actual cures for mental illness.

Actually Freud came the closest, and had some success, but because of his limited success, thought that he "had it solved," and stopped at the sex thing.

The problem is that a solution to mental illness would make the patient better, in his own estimation. Whereas psychology considers success to make the patient better in the practitioner's estimation. Big, big, huge, difference! The psychologist thinks that he should make the guy behave like a "good boy," but people really want to be successful in life, not just be "acceptable" to their shrink. But there are those who are intimidated by the authority figure, and just want to please their "doctor." That ain't cured!

 

[EE THr]

Carl---

Also, let me re-state my position on dowsing, again. I have said this in various places on here, but, for brevity, not in complete form every time.

If there is successful dowsing, it's a psychic ability. I've heard so many reports of various kinds of dowsers, from many different sources, mostly water witching, but then various others, that it seems realistic that some of them are true. I have no reason to doubt most of them. Since I wasn't there that's about all I can say. Again, if it's true, I know it's a psychic ability, and can't be explained by contemporary "science."

Please don't just take one part of that, and claim it's my full statement.

 

[fenixdigger]

I see the ole digger is going to have to drag the couch out again. This smacks of needing a little Gestalt therapy. And if you want to see some real results, try a little of Ugo's medicine.

Very few glitches cannot be ironed out with sufficient voltage. (Or at least forced into hibernation) No drugs required.

Spare the lightning rod and spoil the child. (something like that)

 

[EE THr]

 

[aarthrj3811]

~EE THr~

If there is successful dowsing, it's a psychic ability. I've heard so many reports of various kinds of dowsers, from many different sources, mostly water witching, but then various others, that it seems realistic that some of them are true. I have no reason to doubt most of them. Since I wasn't there that's about all I can say. Again, if it's true, I know it's a psychic ability, and can't be explained by contemporary "science."

http://twm.co.nz/dowsing_jse_com.html
http://www.water-diviner.com/articles3.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_does_a_water_dowser_work

The outcome was striking. An overall success rate of 96% (by dowsers) was achieved in 691 drillings in Sri Lanka. Based on geological experience in that area, a success rate of 30-50% would be expected from conventional techniques alone.
But the overall success rate is not the only indication that the dowsing phenomenon is of considerable practical use. According to Betz, what is both puzzling but enormously useful, is that in hundreds of cases the dowsers were able to predict the depth of the water source and the yield of the well to within 10 to 20 percent. We carefully considered the statistics of these correlations, and they far exceeded lucky guesses.

 

[Mike(Mont)]

Read the "Handbook to Higher Consciousness" you will see exactly what is going on here. The three low life addictions are Security, Sensation, and Power. Everytime you get upset, it's a clue you have an addiction. Addictions can never bring you happiness. You always want more or try to protect what you have, be it money, status, ANYTHING except air to breathe, food when you are starving, shelter when it's freezing--if it makes you upset when you don't get it. It's called emotionally-backed demands.

 

[Carl-NC]

In the case with psychology, they spread the word that they are "all goodness and light,"

I didn't realize they were saying that.

If there is successful dowsing, it's a psychic ability.

If I go out in my back yard, dowse for water, drill a well, and it produces water, does that mean it is necessarily the result of psychic ability? Is there no other possibility?

 

[aarthrj3811]

~Carl~

If I go out in my back yard, dowse for water, drill a well, and it produces water, does that mean it is necessarily the result of psychic ability? Is there no other possibility?

Gee Carl..that would be all about where you live..What is the success rate in area of the well drillers ? In Sri-Lanka the success rate of the educated people is between 30 and 50 %..I presume that is just Random chance. So who would you pick to find water for you..The Random chance guys or the dowser with a 96 % success rating ?...Art

 

[woof!]

~Woof~

I've worked directly under two State Climatologists and of course (!) had access to meteorological records. I thought it was very interesting work.

That must have been hard for you to be involved in their scam..Art

Art, I had access to the meterological data. You don't know carp about this stuff.

Now back to Hal, if you read what Hal wrote, and thought about it for about 2 minutes, and spent the next 2 minutes using the calculator on your Ranger, and spend the next minute thinking about the results, it would Ranger-Tell you that Hal was telling a baldface lie. You don't need access to meterological data, the letter itself and a rudimentary knowledge of politics it all it takes. The man is a liar. Read the advertisement!

--Toto

 

[aarthrj3811]

I started the board on global Warming years before the Climatologists got their hands caught in the cookie jar..Just like on this board I have done my research..Now the Climatologists want us to put the money up for research on global cooling…Same people..Why are the skeptics so intent about LRL dealers when they could be doing something important like saving tax payers money on fraudulent science?..Art

 

[EE THr]

In the case with psychology, they spread the word that they are "all goodness and light,"

I didn't realize they were saying that.

If there is successful dowsing, it's a psychic ability.

If I go out in my back yard, dowse for water, drill a well, and it produces water, does that mean it is necessarily the result of psychic ability? Is there no other possibility?

What psychology says---

Don't they "advertise" that their sole purpose is to study the mind, and use the results to help people?

What else have you heard them say?



You finding water---

There is the possibility that it was just accidental.

But just making the body walk and talk, is a psychic ability. Everyone has psychic ability. Most people have experienced it as such, at one time or another. If people have been led to believe that there is no such thing as soul (and that's exactly what has been going on for a couple thousand years), then they must attribute it to something else. It's the old Multiple Choice (of one) Limitation sales pitch, which, like advertising, has become drilled into folks until it has become virtually hypnotic. Now days, just to mention otherwise, gets some people very upset.

Especially psychologists!

 

[woof!]

I started the board on global Warming years before the Climatologists got their hands caught in the cookie jar..Just like on this board I have done my research..Now the Climatologists want us to put the money up for research on global cooling…Same people..Why are the skeptics so intent about LRL dealers when they could be doing something important like saving tax payers money on fraudulent science?..Art

Okay, but how about the whopper that Hal told? (That guy from Tayopa sure knows how to throw an irrelevant post into a conversation just to see what it'll stir up, don't he?)

--Toto