PDA

View Full Version : Psychic reading study, if no one close to you has died


Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
8th January 2012, 06:03 PM
The Windbridge Institute is seeking PRRRs for a psychic reading study. You cannot have experienced the deaths of any family members, romantic interests, or close friends. This prevents such decedents from dropping in during the psychic readings.

http://deanradin.blogspot.com/2011/07/windbridge-institute-recruiting-test.html

~~ Paul

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
8th January 2012, 06:14 PM
Here's the latest paper out of the Windbridge Institute. It's an instrumental transcommunication study using EVP. Results were negative.

http://www.windbridge.org/papers/BoccuzziBeischel2011JSE25ITC.pdf

~~ Paul

JWideman
8th January 2012, 06:38 PM
Right, because that's a concern.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
8th January 2012, 06:51 PM
Those pesky uninvited departed co-investigators cause real trouble. You gotta take it seriously.

~~ Paul

Marduk
8th January 2012, 06:53 PM
You must be 18 years or older, reside in the US
because again, not being in the US would be limiting to the psychics range and we all know the effects adolescence has on spirits
:D

rjh01
8th January 2012, 08:32 PM
I wonder how many adults have never had a relative or someone close to them die in their lifetime? I have had several such people die while I was a child.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
9th January 2012, 05:10 AM
Also, what if you had someone die when you were one or two? You very well might not remember that, but it will totally and completely screw up the study!

~~ Paul

roger
9th January 2012, 05:46 AM
Psychic research is really, really hard. Why, I can move things like pages in a book with just my mind, but those pesky Styrofoam bits, feathers, and plexiglass plates the researchers put between the book and me create a negative chi vortex/feng shui sink that completely block my power!

Garrette
9th January 2012, 06:04 AM
1. What constitutes "family members?" Grandparents? Aunts? Great aunts?

2. The blog says "...have NOT experienced the death of any family members, romantic interests, or close friends during their lives." (Highlighting is mine). At what other time might we experience the death of someone? NOT during their lives?

3. The blog is dated July of 2011, so I assume there is no longer the opportunity to sign up. I considered it.

More excellence in parapsychology.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
9th January 2012, 07:12 AM
2. The blog says "...have NOT experienced the death of any family members, romantic interests, or close friends during their lives." (Highlighting is mine). At what other time might we experience the death of someone? NOT during their lives?
I believe the antecedent of their is the applicant. But it couldn't possibly have grammar that bad, so you're right. It's dead people dying when they are already dead!

~~ Paul

Darat
9th January 2012, 08:34 AM
I believe the antecedent of their is the applicant. But it couldn't possibly have grammar that bad, so you're right. It's dead people dying when they are already dead!

~~ Paul

Well these are the lot that gave us "departed co-investigators"!

steenkh
9th January 2012, 08:49 AM
2. The blog says "...have NOT experienced the death of any family members, romantic interests, or close friends during their lives." (Highlighting is mine). At what other time might we experience the death of someone? NOT during their lives?
That would mean that you could have seen a film of your great great grandfather being executed after the Nuremberg trials, but that would not screw up the study, because although experience it during your own lifetime, his actual death happened before you were born.

More excellence in parapsychology.
Even if the researchers do not believe in parapsychology themselves they have to take such factors into account, or they will risk having the woo crowd complaining that the lack of positive results is due to interference by deceased family members.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
9th January 2012, 09:20 AM
Well these are the lot that gave us "departed co-investigators"!
Departed hypothesized co-investigators.

How can you not love this stuff?

~~ Paul

George152
9th January 2012, 12:28 PM
They have to have a cop out..
i.e

Oh well it didn't work because some-one three houses over died when you were an infant...
Just watch

Hitch
12th January 2012, 09:30 AM
I'm not sure what this study is going for, but it seems related to the "spirits are jerks" phenomena. If you lie to a psychic and make them believe you had a non-existent aunt die recently, some spirit will show up and lie to the psychic about being that aunt. No one knows why spirits do this, except possibly, they just like screwing with the living.

Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
12th January 2012, 04:12 PM
I do believe we now have enough goodies to make the entire thing unfalsifiable. Excellent!

~~ Paul

Beaver Hateman
13th January 2012, 01:21 PM
I'm not sure what this study is going for, but it seems related to the "spirits are jerks" phenomena. If you lie to a psychic and make them believe you had a non-existent aunt die recently, some spirit will show up and lie to the psychic about being that aunt. No one knows why spirits do this, except possibly, they just like screwing with the living.

It's amazing they don't do it more. I mean, live jerks presumably turn into dead jerks. The fact that mediums aren't constantly plagued by spirits seeking only to waste everyone's time is a pretty strong indicator that they're not communicating with the dead, to be honest.

Soapy Sam
15th January 2012, 03:34 PM
I've got three funerals this week.
I guess that disqualifies me.

steenkh
15th January 2012, 10:53 PM
I've got three funerals this week.
I guess that disqualifies me.
That is amazingly sad. Unless you are priest ...