How woudl you structure a pseudo proof using the internet?

[ozziemate]

Hi,
Just wanted to ask what method could you use to provide proof of telepathy [symbol, image or verbal ] comunications using the internet as a test medium.
Keeping in mind this would in no way be conclusive...and actually if it was able to demonstrate ability then conclusivity would no longer be and issue anyways...The proof would be way too self evident....IMO
care to discuss?:)
btw. There was a methodology used at another forum that seemed close to being adequate, using three independant verifiers and a random number generator....I'll explain more after some feedback if you want...

[Drs_Res]

A simple line of text + MD5 hash.

[tnerb]

Hi,
Just wanted to ask what method could you use to provide proof of telepathy [symbol, image or verbal ] comunications using the internet as a test medium.
Keeping in mind this would in no way be conclusive...and actually if it was able to demonstrate ability then conclusivity would no longer be and issue anyways...The proof would be way too self evident....IMO
care to discuss?:)
btw. There was a methodology used at another forum that seemed close to being adequate, using three independant verifiers and a random number generator....I'll explain more after some feedback if you want...

Usually people who think about telepathy and "psychic" (****) are the people who consider theory and work out their own ideas based off it that.
imo

And so it is a highly verbal process at least it is for me. Comming to terms with what the reality of psychic is and what involves the issues and areas of concern.

A proof would involve one being able to come into contact with others skepticism and allowing them to be able to view the data as congruent or incongruent with previous data (superficial wordsings of course from me as always).

So you might say that I believe proof of telepathy involves one being able to become centered around the evidences involved in many or be it ALL "psychics" and the parapsychologists/ etc researchers into this paranomal area of concern (which IMO is the only real area of concern!!).

Thank you for applauding my brilliance however whatever.
In every case ... I know that examining their wordings and theory would allow someone to get an insight into how they think, and dismissal of anything remotely similar to their thought and methodology without disproof of their thought to begin with is where skepticial claims lye and are dismissed as a nuclear bomb is dismissed in the mind of an infant.

One cannot dismiss "proof" of telepathy that exists verbally or through meaning which, I believe there are some psychics like, of the 1930s or something or so I have heard from a friend at a therapy group.

So to me proof of telepathy is more capable of being firmly grasped and understood if one is allowed time to present their case. In which case the skeptics will have a hard time refuting.

Being MADE to look at what they are SUPPOSED to look at to begin with is a necessary predicament.

[Third Eye Open]

try this, http://www.psychicscience.org/esp3.aspx

[ozziemate]

interesting link thanks!

[ozziemate]

Usually people who think about telepathy and "psychic" (****) are the people who consider theory and work out their own ideas based off it that.
imo

And so it is a highly verbal process at least it is for me. Comming to terms with what the reality of psychic is and what involves the issues and areas of concern.

A proof would involve one being able to come into contact with others skepticism and allowing them to be able to view the data as congruent or incongruent with previous data (superficial wordsings of course from me as always).

So you might say that I believe proof of telepathy involves one being able to become centered around the evidences involved in many or be it ALL "psychics" and the parapsychologists/ etc researchers into this paranomal area of concern (which IMO is the only real area of concern!!).

Thank you for applauding my brilliance however whatever.
In every case ... I know that examining their wordings and theory would allow someone to get an insight into how they think, and dismissal of anything remotely similar to their thought and methodology without disproof of their thought to begin with is where skepticial claims lye and are dismissed as a nuclear bomb is dismissed in the mind of an infant.

One cannot dismiss "proof" of telepathy that exists verbally or through meaning which, I believe there are some psychics like, of the 1930s or something or so I have heard from a friend at a therapy group.

So to me proof of telepathy is more capable of being firmly grasped and understood if one is allowed time to present their case. In which case the skeptics will have a hard time refuting.

Being MADE to look at what they are SUPPOSED to look at to begin with is a necessary predicament.
I understand the general gist of what you are saying but this is not a good post tnerb and I know you can do better.