Ability to detect being tested applicable? [Archive]

Pixel42

31st January 2012, 02:12 AM

666

31st January 2012, 04:49 AM

When they fail, as fail they will, they will simply claim that the designated person was no true skeptic.

Lamuella

31st January 2012, 05:05 AM

When they fail, as fail they will, they will simply claim that the designated person was no true skeptic.

or that as the whole thing was a test, their ability to detect being tested would not work in the presence of the overarching skepticism

curious pheonix

31st January 2012, 05:17 AM

so basically are they saying that anyone who thinks that their 'supernatural' perfomance is fallible has affected the quality of their supernatural performance? LOL

i think so long as the performer doesn't know about the occasional mix in of skeptics in the audience that it shouldn't do any harm - unless their reasons involve things like 'negative mental energies/etc etc affecting the outcome'lol.

as another option maybe you could get believers to complete a quantitative survey (and maybe a qualitative survey) on data perceived in the performance? their perceptions may be skewed but quantitative data can be pretty solid and later used by skeptics as a basis to challenge the supernatural nature of the performance....? without having to sit in on it

JWideman

31st January 2012, 05:20 AM

Wouldn't they first have to prove success?

Ladewig

31st January 2012, 09:30 AM

unless their reasons involve things like 'negative mental energies/etc etc affecting the outcome'lol.

I believe that (and slight variations) is the most common reason given.

Brown

31st January 2012, 09:49 AM

I can accept that some people legitimately might not be able to perform a feat that they genuinely can perform, if they are placed under observation. Being under observation, by itself, hinders their ability to perform. As others have noted, some people can't urinate if watched, and some cannot perform sexually if observed. Some folks sing beautifully while alone in the shower, but miserably in front of others. These people can do these things, but they can't do them in front of others.

That said, not everyone is so afflicted. Some people who say they can perform a feat can also do it whether someone is watching or not. As far as has been tested, no one has ever identified an ability that genuinely exists but that cannot be demonstrated to another by any person in the world. Further, many of those who claim to have abilities also claim to be able to perform them while observed. In the case of those who claim supernatural or paranormal abilities, however, the observation they object to is observation that is controlled to eliminate trickery.

Ladewig

31st January 2012, 12:19 PM

Cuddles

1st February 2012, 05:26 AM

Many people claiming to be able to perform something scientifically speaking supernatural also claim the presence of sceptics reduces their ability.
Would a test protocol consisting of having the claimant perform their stuff repeatedly in the presence of audience/being watched by audience with sometimes sceptical observers mixed in and the claimant must determine, when a sceptical observer is present, be in principle valid?

In principle, sure. In practice, properly observing a test where the effect of proper observation is actually the thing under test may be a little tricky. After all, flawed tests due to the lack of skeptical observers is exactly how many people fool themselves into believing in magic in the first place. It shouldn't be impossible, recording with multiple cameras and checking later would be an obvious solution, but it's likely to a lot more complicated than a regular test.

I can accept that some people legitimately might not be able to perform a feat that they genuinely can perform, if they are placed under observation. Being under observation, by itself, hinders their ability to perform. As others have noted, some people can't urinate if watched, and some cannot perform sexually if observed. Some folks sing beautifully while alone in the shower, but miserably in front of others. These people can do these things, but they can't do them in front of others.

It's also worth bearing in mind that people generally have trouble only when they know they're being observed. For example, to test whether someone is capable of singing in the shower, you could use a hidden microphone. Obviously with their consent, which would make it trickier since they'd know about it, but arranging it along the lines of having it there for one day during a month so they don't actually know when it's around could work. The point being, even if someone genuinely has trouble demonstrating their ability if you just drag them up on stage in front of a bunch of strangers, it's still possible to think up ways to allow them to demonstrate it.

That said, not everyone is so afflicted. Some people who say they can perform a feat can also do it whether someone is watching or not. As far as has been tested, no one has ever identified an ability that genuinely exists but that cannot be demonstrated to another by any person in the world. Further, many of those who claim to have abilities also claim to be able to perform them while observed.

Yes, it seems that believers all too often fail to remember what it is they actually believe in. No-one believes in magic solely because of personal experience. They believe because magic is firmly entrenched in our culture (I'm not aware of a single culture that doesn't have some kind of magic in its stories and traditions), and because there are numerous people constantly publicly proclaiming themselves to have magic power. Without that, very few people would come up with the idea that they can dowse, for example. It's an idea that has grown up and evolved over thousands of years, what are the chances that thousands of people all over the world would suddenly spontaneously come up with exactly the same idea?

So clearly, all these things people claim to believe in are actually claimed to be constantly publicly, and often quite prominently, demonstrated in front of all kinds of people. So obviously, skeptical thoughts can't actually make the magic disappear, because otherwise no-one would know about magic in the first place.

It's really just another example of the "paranormal of the gaps". I find PEAR makes a good example. People believe in all kinds of telekinesis - bending spoons, manipulating fire, levitation, and so on. So what does PEAR test? Whether people can have a tiny effect on a random number generator that's so small and unreliable it takes complex statistical analysis of hundreds of thousands of trials to even get as much as a "maybe". Even if it actually turned out that there was a real effect, it would have absolutely nothing to do with what people actually believe. People don't believe in obscure statistical anomalies that they couldn't ever notice in normal life, they believe in big effects that are clearly visible to everyone who see them. But because no-one can actually demonstrate such a thing exists, the claims constantly retreat to the little gaps at the fringes where no-one has yet conclusively proven nothing is happening, mostly simply because there's just been no point in looking.

This isn't actually a random derail, because the "skeptical disruptions" claim is exactly the same. No-one actually believes the presence of non-believers prevents magic from working, because clearly that doesn't actually happen in the real world where they're claims are made. It only appears as part of the retreat to the remaining gaps when it's shown that they can't actually demonstrate anything in a proper test. As with the classic god of the gaps, which goes from omnipotent cause of everything to a pointless impotent that does nothing other than supposedly exist, the claims go from huge and obvious effects to worthless nothings that have no effect on anything other than to prove that the believer really does believe.

Ahweh

27th February 2012, 11:24 PM

MRC_Hans

27th February 2012, 11:34 PM

or that as the whole thing was a test, their ability to detect being tested would not work in the presence of the overarching skepticism

That. Because the 'inability to perform when tested' argument is, obviously recursive.

So the ability to not perform when tested is obviously not applicable.

However, an ability to perform when not tested might be. This would require that incontrovertible proof of the performance could be produced post hoc.

For instance, filing a prediction before the predicted event happened.

Hans

Pixel42

27th February 2012, 11:51 PM

I do not know everything about what I do but what I do know about what I do I know beyond all doubt because I proved to myself the reality of it.
Please describe how you proved this to yourself.

Foolmewunz

28th February 2012, 12:17 AM

It has been a long time since I have been here and this subject is something that I can relate to. When it comes to choking in the clutch for those who are going through the challenge can be attributed to at least two things fear and not knowing everything related to what they do. I do not know everything about what I do but what I do know about what I do I know beyond all doubt because I proved to myself the reality of it.

My wife and I watched something recently where a couple of Psychics tried to complete the challenge and failed in part due to what I call dirty energy practices.
The Psychics did not know enough about energy to help set up the challenge correctly for what they were doing.

Unlike you, of course, who took the challenge* and won the million dollars, right?

Oh, wait.... You don't mean you haven't taken the challenge? What if we got some Clean Energy for you?

*That was your claim before you took off five and a half years ago - that you were going to take the Challenge, which you termed "seems fair", I believe. What happened? Were you too busy curing cancer and stuff with your laying on of hands. I'm sure I would've read that in the papers if you had, though.

So, how was this "dirty energy" causing these psychics to fail? Did it clog up their arteries and give them heart attacks, thus forcing the cancellation of the challenge? Did it appear to you as an aura?

Please give us some evidence this visit. We went through almost sixty posts of you pretending to condescension and offering nothing but anecdotes of your own tales. We haven't changed our minds. Provide actual evidence. **** or get off the pot.

MRC_Hans

28th February 2012, 03:43 AM

The Psychics did not know enough about energy to help set up the challenge correctly for what they were doing.

Or, the more likely conclusion: They could not do what they claimed they could do. This conclusion is reachable without inventing something you call 'dirty energy' (out of a concept of energy that has nothing to do with real energy).

Hans

Cuddles

28th February 2012, 04:02 AM

This conclusion is reachable without inventing something you call 'dirty energy' (out of a concept of energy that has nothing to do with real energy).

I assume it's related to heavy electricity:
IJCxJWwkHdQ

Baloney

28th February 2012, 05:09 AM

so basically are they saying that anyone who thinks that their 'supernatural' perfomance is fallible has affected the quality of their supernatural performance? LOL

Basically this:

skep·ti·cism also scep·ti·cism (skpt-szm)
n.
1. A doubting or questioning attitude or state of mind; dubiety.
2. Philosophy
a. The ancient school of Pyrrho of Elis that stressed the uncertainty of
our beliefs in order to oppose dogmatism.
b. The doctrine that absolute knowledge is impossible, either in a particular
domain or in general.
c. A methodology based on an assumption of doubt with the aim of acquiring
approximate or relative certainty.
3. Doubt or disbelief of religious tenets.
4. A power of the mind which renders supernatural phenomena inoperable and
undetectable.

ETA: Definition 4 works for both the physical AND, apparently, the metaphysical universe.

William Smith

28th February 2012, 11:59 PM

We do not treat conditions we work on the root cause so the body with the extra energy can fix it's self. Sorry no paper work Im not the type to keep good records. We are working on putting an experiment together using multiple EEG machines to prove or disprove the connection between practioner and the person being worked with. One of the most profound results was a little boy of three who had a kidney disease in which he was going to have one of his kidnes removed. We as in many Energy Healers worked together with him every night for over a week and when they took him in to remove the kidney they did not need to the disease was gone. That was over five years ago and he is still doing fine.

[citation needed]

It has been a long time since I have been here and this subject is something that I can relate to. When it comes to choking in the clutch for those who are going through the challenge can be attributed to at least two things fear and not knowing everything related to what they do. I do not know everything about what I do but what I do know about what I do I know beyond all doubt because I proved to myself the reality of it.

My wife and I watched something recently where a couple of Psychics tried to complete the challenge and failed in part due to what I call dirty energy practices.
The Psychics did not know enough about energy to help set up the challenge correctly for what they were doing.

[citation needed]

Ahweh

29th February 2012, 01:39 AM

wardenclyffe

29th February 2012, 02:18 AM

skep·ti·cism also scep·ti·cism (skpt-szm)
n.
4. A power of the mind which renders supernatural phenomena inoperable and undetectable.

If only it were true, so many of us here could make a mint causing ghosts to disappear, defeating alien invasions, stopping the voices. Oh, the money we'd make.

Sigh.

Ward

Pixel42

29th February 2012, 06:44 AM

The challenge is always in my thoughts on a daily basis and I am still trying to figure out a way to make it happen.
Maybe we can help.

Tell us what it is you think you can do and we can help you design a test protocol that would establish whether you are right. You could then try it (or perhaps a cut down version of it) to check that you haven't been inadvertantly fooling yourself before investing time and money taking the MDC. You might even find other people would be willing to put up the money for you to take it once you'd successfully demonstrated a paranormal ability under proper test conditions, even if it was a smaller scale test than would be required to win the $1m.

Another MDC applicant is currently in the process of doing this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=226770), his 'proof of concept' test is scheduled for March 25th.

Ahweh

1st March 2012, 02:51 AM

Pixel
Thank you for your interest without negativity.
I am a skeptic at heart myself I was born in Missouri which is the show me state.
When there is something that is new to me I have learned that I am the one who has to prove what ever it is to me otherwise it is just entertaining.
Some of the things I do I have proven to myself a number of times.
What I intend to show is a possibility of what people are capable of with the human energy connection.
Time for bed more later.

Pixel42

1st March 2012, 03:20 AM

Some of the things I do I have proven to myself a number of times.
The problem is that when people say they have proven to themselves that they have some kind of paranormal ability the proof has always previously turned out to be wholely inadequate. Usually they have failed to account for some well known and well understood cognitive biases which have led people throughout history to believe things which were later shown not to be true.

That's why I'm interested in how you have proved to yourself that you have whatever paranormal ability it is you think you have. Have you done any self testing using the kind of test protocol that would be acceptable for the MDC? The evidence that JREF ask for is not just the minimum that is required to convince them, it's the minimum that is required for anyone - including you - to be reasonably (let alone absolutely) sure that you have a paranormal ability.

MRC_Hans

1st March 2012, 03:42 AM

The problem is that when people say they have proven to themselves that they have some kind of paranormal ability the proof has always previously turned out to be wholely inadequate. Usually they have failed to account for some well known and well understood cognitive biases which have led people throughout history to believe things which were later shown not to be true.

Exactly! One problem is, unfortunately that people often make a very fuzzy definition of their claim. Just to use a pertinent example:

a possibility of what people are capable of with the human energy connection

- This could be virtually anything, and if you start looking for anything, you are likely to find something. And you may then get the idea that what you found is really what you looked for.

So, to test something you must first find out exactly what you are looking for.

Hans

William Smith

1st March 2012, 06:28 AM

...
So, to test something you must first find out exactly what you are looking for.

Hans

Ahweh, some Irish artists might ask: Have you climbed the highest mountain, have you run through the fields? Have you run, have you crawled, have you scaled these city walls, these city walls?

Ladewig

1st March 2012, 09:19 PM

The problem is that when people say they have proven to themselves that they have some kind of paranormal ability the proof has always previously turned out to be wholely inadequate. Usually they have failed to account for some well known and well understood cognitive biases which have led people throughout history to believe things which were later shown not to be true.

That's why I'm interested in how you have proved to yourself that you have whatever paranormal ability it is you think you have. Have you done any self testing using the kind of test protocol that would be acceptable for the MDC? The evidence that JREF ask for is not just the minimum that is required to convince them, it's the minimum that is required for anyone - including you - to be reasonably (let alone absolutely) sure that you have a paranormal ability.

Some days I am able to show patience and respect to potential applicants. Some days I am not.

Thank you for being above the petty snarkiness that sometimes permeates this sub-forum.

Lucian

1st March 2012, 10:56 PM

When I left a long time ago there were a few things I needed and growth was the most important thing upon the list.
Yes the experiment is still pending due to finances that I do not have at the moment.
Being broke tends to slow lots of projects down because the leaky roof is more important than an experiment.
The challenge is always in my thoughts on a daily basis and I am still trying to figure out a way to make it happen.

I understand that financial concerns can outweigh other matters. As you may know, the JREF is not the only organization that has a paranormal challenge (I believe wardenclyffe has a handy list). For instance, the Independent Investigation Group (IIG) offers a $50,000 challenge. There are several IIG affiliates throughout North America. Perhaps if you found a group offering a challenge nearer where you live, the financial burden (at least as far as travel is concerned) would be less. And if you win $50,000, then you would be able to afford to go through the JREF application process. Just something to consider.

Ahweh

2nd March 2012, 02:46 AM

Lucian
Thank you for the insight on possible finances.
Pixel
My abilities to help others to is not paranormal but awakening and exercising that which has been asleep for way to long.
more later

Ahweh

3rd March 2012, 01:55 AM

Pixel42

3rd March 2012, 02:36 AM

How do I prove to myself that energy healing is real by using it and seeing the results in the people that we work with

As I said:

The problem is that when people say they have proven to themselves that they have some kind of paranormal ability the proof has always previously turned out to be wholely inadequate. Usually they have failed to account for some well known and well understood cognitive biases which have led people throughout history to believe things which were later shown not to be true.

The anecdotes in your post are a textbook example of this wholely inadequate evidence. They are fully explainable as the result of the placebo effect, coincidence, confirmation bias etc etc. That doesn't necessarily mean that you are wrong to believe that energy healing is real, only that you do not currently have adequate reason to believe you are right.

In order to find out if your energy healing really does have an effect you need to design a test which carefully and methodically eliminates all these other explanations. Only then can you be sure that any improvement in health that appears to occur is (a) genuine and (b) the result of energy healing.

The problem with this particular kind of supposed healing treatment is that it is difficult to design a test that includes a placebo control. You need to be able to administer a treatment that seems to the patient to be the treatment being tested but which actually isn't, so you can compare how patients who receive the real treatment do with how those who receive the fake one do (single blinding). Ideally you also require the people administering the treatment to not know whether it's the real or fake treatment they are giving (double blinding).

Do you believe that everyone can administer this kind of energy healing, or is it just you/people who believe it works/some other subset of the population? If the latter then we could perhaps help you design a single blind test but I can't immediately see any way of designing a double blind test, which JREF would require for the MDC. I'll give the matter some further thought.

William Smith

3rd March 2012, 05:48 AM

How do I prove to myself that energy healing is real by using it and seeing the results in the people that we work with
The first person who helped know the reality of energy healing beyond any doubt was my uncle who recently passed from a massive stroke.
A few years ago that same uncle who was a farmer had a big bale of hay come over the top of the loader that was on his tractor.
That bale landed in his lap and broke his pelvis which put him in KU Medical ICU via Life Flight helicopter.
I went down to the hospital to see him an saw the distress he was and the monitors he was attached to were jumping all over the place so I put my hands on him.
When my hands made contact with his arm the monitors settled down and he fell asleep for a bit.
Then I lifted my hands off of my uncles arm the monitors instantly went nuts and he woke up in distress again.
So I put my hands back upon his arm and he fell asleep again as did the monitors.
When the nurse came to tell me it was time to leave and my hands came away from his arm again he awoke up in pain and the monitors started jumping about again as I left the room he was in.
Over the years we have witnessed many things that have astounded us and continually revitalized our knowing that energy healing is as real as us waking to see the new day.

Pixel42 responded nicely to your post. I just have a little addendum, referring to the highlighted section and your signature.

1. Seeing the new day is the result of the earth spinning, earth's orbit and the sun. All factors are known, named and the result is very much explainable, leaving absolutely no doubt about the process.

2. Take a cup of milk. Add cocoa. Stir. Similar principle, similar result.

3. Hammer. Nail. Piece of wood. And so on.

Can you name the factors in your process "energy healing is real"? Can you prove you are correct, forgive my directness, besides using an unverifiable anecdote?

Beerina

3rd March 2012, 07:50 AM

I don't see why not. Being able to tell whether a particular person was amongst a group of people sitting behind a screen would certainly count as a paranormal ability if all normal ways of telling were carefully excluded.

Haw haw, brilliant!

"You will tell us, by your abilities failing or not, whether a skeptic is behind the screen."

Ahweh

3rd March 2012, 09:27 PM

Do you believe that everyone can administer this kind of energy healing, or is it just you/people who believe it works/some other subset of the population? If the latter then we could perhaps help you design a single blind test but I can't immediately see any way of designing a double blind test, which JREF would require for the MDC. I'll give the matter some further thought.

[QUOTE=Pixel42;

Do you believe that everyone can administer this kind of energy healing, or is it just you/people who believe it works/some other subset of the population? If the latter then we could perhaps help you design a single blind test but I can't immediately see any way of designing a double blind test, which JREF would require for the MDC. I'll give the matter some further thought.[/QUOTE]

My current understanding of energy healing is that everyone at some level has the ability to do it.
For some people it will be easier to awaken the ability than others but everyone will have to do the work necessary to strengthen the results.

I have designed an experiment using electronic equipment that will show either that there is the ability for one human being to energetically connect to another or not depending on if the equipment is advanced and sensitive enough to do so.
I feel that the current EEG machines are capable of doing just that but I do not have the money to purchase two of them as well as the lead lined rooms and other equipment for the experiment.

What most people which also includes energy healers do not understand is that exercise is necessary to strengthen the ability after it is awakened just like our muscles.
Also a good understanding of the current theories of electricity, sound, radio and light just to name a few are very helpful.
The basic mechanism for energy healing is just that the different forms of energy and the ability to draw guide and send them to those who are being worked with through a multilevel energy connection.

I was asked some time ago how many people I have healed and my answer was none because I do not heal people I only help them with their healing needs.

Ahweh

3rd March 2012, 11:02 PM

I don't see why not. Being able to tell whether a particular person was amongst a group of people sitting behind a screen would certainly count as a paranormal ability if all normal ways of telling were carefully excluded.

I don't see why. The paranormal ability being tested would be the ability to tell whether a specific person was on the other side of the screen; what the claimant did on their side to determine that would be entirely up to them, and the details would be irrelevant to the test protocol and the success criteria.

We use something similar to this when we do our classes. We call it hide and seek even though no one actually hides.

Pixel42

4th March 2012, 01:10 AM

I have designed an experiment using electronic equipment that will show either that there is the ability for one human being to energetically connect to another or not depending on if the equipment is advanced and sensitive enough to do so.
Trying to detect the energy itself rather than verify its effects is certainly a possible alternative strategy, but presents its own difficulties. You would first need to specify how this energy would register on the equipment you are planning to use, which means you need to understand its nature. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the only way you know this energy exists is because of its perceived effect on peoples' health. A perception that might well be mistaken. How have you determined its nature?

If you understand the nature of this energy well enough to specify how it would register on existing measuring equipment then by all means describe how it would do so, and maybe someone who already has access to the necessary equipment will be willing to look for it on your behalf. But I have to say that I find it difficult to believe that a previously unknown type of energy which registers on EEGs and the like could exist without already having been detected. Plenty of research into energy healing and its supposed mechanism has already been done (http://www.skepdic.com/energyhealing.html), with uniformly negative results.

Ahweh

5th March 2012, 02:10 AM

Trying to detect the energy itself rather than verify its effects is certainly a possible alternative strategy, but presents its own difficulties. You would first need to specify how this energy would register on the equipment you are planning to use, which means you need to understand its nature. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the only way you know this energy exists is because of its perceived effect on peoples' health. A perception that might well be mistaken. How have you determined its nature?

If you understand the nature of this energy well enough to specify how it would register on existing measuring equipment then by all means describe how it would do so, and maybe someone who already has access to the necessary equipment will be willing to look for it on your behalf. But I have to say that I find it difficult to believe that a previously unknown type of energy which registers on EEGs and the like could exist without already having been detected. Plenty of research into energy healing and its supposed mechanism has already been done (http://www.skepdic.com/energyhealing.html), with uniformly negative results.

The energy that is registered on the EEG machines at the sending and receiving ends is the human brain waves which are measured out side of the body. So how far do those brain waves actually travel? It is my understanding that the brain waves of the sender influence the brain waves of the receiver and the stronger the sender along with how open the receiver is the better the results.

I was a sonar technician in the navy and learned about many different forms of energy an how they work and the things that influence them along their path.
You would be amazed at the things that can happen to a sound wave as it travels through the air or water and how far it can travel because of those things.
At our deepest level we human beings are made up of energy and only by exploring that energy will we understand what we are capable of.

Science and Spirituality are two side of the same thing just different ways of looking at it.

Pixel42

5th March 2012, 02:49 AM

The energy that is registered on the EEG machines at the sending and receiving ends is the human brain waves which are measured out side of the body.
No, brain waves (which are waves of particles, not energy) are measured by placing electrodes on the body, specifically the scalp. The waves of particles (ions, which are atoms which have lost some electrons) that are detected by an EEG do not leave the body. They simply affect particles (electrons) in the electrodes in ways which we can interpret to tell us something about what is going on in the brain. The electrodes must be in physical contact with the body for this to happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEG#Source_of_EEG_activity

The brain's electrical charge is maintained by billions of neurons. Neurons are electrically charged (or "polarized") by membrane transport proteins that pump ions across their membranes. Neurons are constantly exchanging ions with the extracellular milieu, for example to maintain resting potential and to propagate action potentials. Ions of like charge repel each other, and when many ions are pushed out of many neurons at the same time, they can push their neighbours, who push their neighbours, and so on, in a wave. This process is known as volume conduction. When the wave of ions reaches the electrodes on the scalp, they can push or pull electrons on the metal on the electrodes. Since metal conducts the push and pull of electrons easily, the difference in push or voltage between any two electrodes can be measured by a voltmeter. Recording these voltages over time gives us the EEG.[4]

So how far do those brain waves actually travel?
No further than the scalp.

Almo

5th March 2012, 06:53 AM

Congrats on the patience, Pixel42.

Ahweh

6th March 2012, 01:40 AM

A true skeptic never says prove it to me.
A true skeptic says show me I'll prove it to myself.
(detected by an EEG do not leave the body)

MRC_Hans

6th March 2012, 01:53 AM

I have designed an experiment using electronic equipment that will show either that there is the ability for one human being to energetically connect to another or not depending on if the equipment is advanced and sensitive enough to do so.
I feel that the current EEG machines are capable of doing just that but I do not have the money to purchase two of them as well as the lead lined rooms and other equipment for the experiment.

For your own sake do NOT dapple with sensitive electronic equipment unless you actually know what you are doing (and your idea about lead lining indicates that youdon't)! No, it is not dangerous, but sensitive instruments are expensive and csn under the right (wrong) conditions react to a fly in the room. You will only waste money and fool yourself.

Hans

MRC_Hans

6th March 2012, 01:54 AM

A true skeptic never says prove it to me.
A true skeptic says show me I'll prove it to myself.
(detected by an EEG do not leave the body)

I suggest you refrain from stating what a true skeptic must do, since you have no idea.

Hans

Pixel42

6th March 2012, 02:27 AM

A true skeptic never says prove it to me.
A true skeptic says show me I'll prove it to myself.
(detected by an EEG do not leave the body)
So you first have to prove something to yourself, then show me (or just explain to me) how you did it, and then I need to verify it for myself.

So the first thing you need to do, if you don't believe what the experts say, is find out for yourself if an EEG whose electrodes are not attached to the scalp shows the same brain wave activity as one that is. Have you done that?

Reno

6th March 2012, 04:51 AM

(detected by an EEG do not leave the body)

That sentence is gramatically incomplete and therefore makes no sense. What are you attempting to say here?

William Smith

6th March 2012, 05:12 AM

A true skeptic never says prove it to me.
A true skeptic says show me I'll prove it to myself.
(detected by an EEG do not leave the body)

Leaving aside for the moment that "true skeptic" is a nonsense term - you either are a skeptic or you are not, just as you are pregnant or you are not; one cannot be truly pregnant - I took you up on your offer to "show me" in the following post:

...
1. Seeing the new day ...
Over the years we have witnessed many things that have astounded us and continually revitalized our knowing that energy healing is as real as us waking to see the new day.
is the result of the earth spinning, earth's orbit and the sun. All factors are known, named and the result is very much explainable, leaving absolutely no doubt about the process.

2. Take a cup of milk. Add cocoa. Stir. Similar principle, similar result.

3. Hammer. Nail. Piece of wood. And so on.

Can you name the factors in your process "energy healing is real"...

...so that we might be able to reproduce your results?

Ahweh

6th March 2012, 11:15 PM

So you first have to prove something to yourself, then show me (or just explain to me) how you did it, and then I need to verify it for myself. Yes.

So the first thing you need to do, if you don't believe what the (experts) An expended drip under pressure!
say, is find out for yourself if an EEG whose electrodes are not attached to the scalp shows the same brain wave activity as one that is. Have you done that?
Nope not yet! But wouldn't it interesting if the the EEG out on the receiver was similar to that of the sender.

Have you ever heard of a false pregnancy?
Because there are false skeptics who rely on other people to prove things to them when they should be doing it for themselves.
I could produce reams of documents that energy healing is real but would it be real to you.
I hope not because you would have read a lot of trash.
Energy healing is something like air intangible but once you have personal experience with it you know it is either for you or not.
Air cannot be seen or touched but when you stop breathing you know beyond all doubt you need it.

Pixel42

6th March 2012, 11:59 PM

Nope not yet! But wouldn't it interesting if the the EEG out on the receiver was similar to that of the sender.
What sender and receiver? I asked you if you had looked to see whether an EEG registers someone's brain waves if its electrodes aren't connected to their scalp. That's what you've claimed - that brain waves travel outside the body - so that's the first thing you need to test. Only if you're right about that is there any point in doing further testing with senders and receivers.

Have you ever heard of a false pregnancy?
Because there are false skeptics who rely on other people to prove things to them when they should be doing it for themselves.
The person who makes a claim is the person who has to produce evidence to support it. It's called the burden of proof. Anything which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

A false sceptic would be one who didn't assess all the available evidence before deciding on a position to take. At the moment all the available evidence is that energy healing does not exist.

I could produce reams of documents that energy healing is real but would it be real to you.
Only if one of those documents was a peer-reviewed scientific paper describing a properly conducted double blind trial which showed that patients who receive energy healing recover more quickly than patients who receive a placebo.

Ahweh

7th March 2012, 12:24 AM

So you want some one else to prove that energy healing is real for you instead of figuring it out for yourself.
Another way I proved energy healing was real for me was getting in the chair for my own healing session.
It took me almost six months to fully let go an experience the full potential of a session at the time but when I did things really started happening within me.

Pixel42

7th March 2012, 12:39 AM

So you want some one else to prove that energy healing is real for you instead of figuring it out for yourself.
I don't have the resources to do a large scale clinical trial, so of course I expect the person who's claiming a medical treatment works to provide that evidence.

I don't have the resources to do a large scale clinical trial of aspirin either, but I can look at the results of the ones that have been done and assess whether it's worth buying for my headaches.

Another way I proved energy healing was real for me was getting in the chair for my own healing session.
It took me almost six months to fully let go an experience the full potential of a session at the time but when I did things really started happening within me.
As I've already explained, this is not adequate evidence to draw any conclusions whatsoever. You are not justified in your belief that you have proved that energy healing works to yourself. Even if I did exactly what you've done and had exactly the same experiences, I still could and would not conclude that energy healing works.

William Smith

7th March 2012, 03:00 AM

Nope not yet! But wouldn't it interesting if the the EEG out on the receiver was similar to that of the sender.

Have you ever heard of a false pregnancy?

Although you didn't direct the question at me directly: Yes, I have. In case of a false pregnancy the woman or animal is not pregnant.

Because there are false skeptics who rely on other people to prove things to them when they should be doing it for themselves.
...

I will try another example: You, Ahweh, say you can run the 100m dash in less than 9.5s. I say: Prove it. Now all you have to do is run it once and we would see if you can do what you claim. I can't run the 100m to prove what you claim. Perhaps I could afterward - if you showed me how it can be done.

Air cannot be seen or touched but when you stop breathing you know beyond all doubt you need it.

Air can be seen with large enough magnification and it can also be touched. Hold your hand in front of your mouth and exhale.

Gr8wight

7th March 2012, 04:24 AM

Czarcasm

7th March 2012, 04:42 AM

Congrats on the patience, Pixel42.No congrats from me. What is it called when you do the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result? This approach was tried before and it didn't work, and it isn't going to work the next time someone tries the "Let's start over at the beginning with an open mind" gambit.

Reno

7th March 2012, 06:03 AM

It took me almost six months to fully let go an experience the full potential of a session at the time but when I did things really started happening within me.

Did this culminate in a minor explosion resulting in your hand being covered in a sticky wet substance?

William Smith

7th March 2012, 06:04 AM

I hope you all know that this is going exactly nowhere.

Again.

It is a possibility. But I won't know until I try and I can spare the couple of joules it takes to find out.

Pixel42

7th March 2012, 06:44 AM

No congrats from me. What is it called when you do the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result? This approach was tried before and it didn't work, and it isn't going to work the next time someone tries the "Let's start over at the beginning with an open mind" gambit.
I wasn't around for any of the previous conversations with Ahweh, but I'll take your word that the approach I'm trying has been tried before and failed. Even so I'm prepared to try again, for a while at least. I don't really expect a different outcome but there's always a possibility, however remote, that someone who's had a point explained to him many times before without understanding it may eventually do so. Plus it's good mental exercise to make my case (the main reason I hang out on this board at all - I'm retired and I need to keep my brain working) and who knows, some lurker might learn something from my efforts even if Ahweh doesn't.

MRC_Hans

7th March 2012, 07:00 AM

So you want some one else to prove that energy healing is real for you instead of figuring it out for yourself.

Yes, of course. Do you really expect people to run around and trying out just any claim that anybody makes? If I claim that pigs can fly, would you go out and experiment, without further evidence?

You make a claim, you provide the evidence. If I find that the evidence you provide seems to have merit, then I might try to find more on my own account.

Like it or not, that's how things work.

Hans

Czarcasm

7th March 2012, 07:33 AM

I wasn't around for any of the previous conversations with Ahweh, but I'll take your word that the approach I'm trying has been tried before and failed. Even so I'm prepared to try again, for a while at least. I don't really expect a different outcome but there's always a possibility, however remote, that someone who's had a point explained to him many times before without understanding it may eventually do so. Plus it's good mental exercise to make my case (the main reason I hang out on this board at all - I'm retired and I need to keep my brain working) and who knows, some lurker might learn something from my efforts even if Ahweh doesn't.But this approach gives false legitimacy to claims that the subject hadn't been treated fairly in the past-it denies previous efforts, and allows the subject to start over instead of proceeding onward.
Just my humble opinion, based on many years of participating in discussions like these.

Pixel42

7th March 2012, 08:11 AM

But this approach gives false legitimacy to claims that the subject hadn't been treated fairly in the past-it denies previous efforts, and allows the subject to start over instead of proceeding onward.
There are always people coming and going on boards like this so a certain amount of repetition is inevitable. I certainly don't intend to imply that Ahweh wasn't treated fairly the last time he was here (I'm sure he was) or that the points I'm making weren't made just as well, if not better, then (I'm sure they were). But there's obviously no chance of Ahweh proceeding onward until he's grasped those points, however frustrating seeing him starting over each time must be for those who remember previous conversations. Indeed there's almost no chance of him ever proceeding onward, no matter how many times he's allowed to start over. I don't expect to make any more progress with him than anyone else did, I just like to try.

William Smith

7th March 2012, 10:32 AM

But this approach gives false legitimacy to claims that the subject hadn't been treated fairly in the past-it denies previous efforts, and allows the subject to start over instead of proceeding onward.
Just my humble opinion, based on many years of participating in discussions like these.

If Ahweh were shilling some "quantum new-age" products, I would probably be more concerned and share your defensive approach.

If you like, think of this thread as something similar to the 2012 GOP Presidential Candidate Search: If you hold a microphone just long enough before some of the eccentric black walnuts, they do more than enough to not only provide the public with nuggets and soundbites, but also discredit themselves in the process thoroughly enough to gladly be let speak as freely as possible: Herman Cain on Libya (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW_nDFKAmCo)

And in a couple of years, we will have the same thing again. It's the circle of ... um ... uh ...

Baloney

7th March 2012, 11:28 AM

And in a couple of years, we will have the same thing again. It's the circle of ... um ... uh ...

I think the word you're looking for is "doucheyness."

Ahweh

9th March 2012, 12:37 AM

I am here now and I am learning a lot of things.
There is no way that anyone can tell me that energy healing is not real because I proved it's reality to myself for myself over and over not for anyone else and then I share that with others.
Those who are here partaking of this thread are hear for their own reasons as am I.

Ahweh

9th March 2012, 12:58 AM

Hear is a thought that might help?
You are hear at my house and I tell you that there is a blue car in in the driveway how would you know I was telling you the truth?

Pixel42

9th March 2012, 01:10 AM

I am here now and I am learning a lot of things.
So far you've shown no indication of having learned anything at all.

There is no way that anyone can tell me that energy healing is not real because I proved it's reality to myself for myself over and over
You have convinced yourself that energy healing is real on the basis of evidence which is wholely inadequate. You have proved nothing, not even to yourself.

Hear is a thought that might help?
You are hear at my house and I tell you that there is a blue car in in the driveway how would you know I was telling you the truth?
No, that doesn't help.

A claim that a particular treatment is medically effective is much harder to verify than a claim that there is a blue car in the driveway. There are many ways - due to well known and well understood cognitive biases - in which someone can inadvertantly fool themselves into thinking a medical treatment is effective when it isn't. That's why pharmaceutical companies spend millions doing large scale clinical trials to find out whether the medicines they've developed really work. We've learned the hard way that that's the only reliable way to find out. Many medical treatments that had been believed to work for centuries (blood letting, purging, homeopathy etc etc) turned out to be useless when properly tested.

William Smith

9th March 2012, 03:30 AM

...
There is no way that anyone can tell me that energy healing is not real because I proved it's reality to myself for myself over and over not for anyone else and then I share that with others.

You are sounding like my little brother. He used to play a card game he called "tank truck". Whenever I asked him about the rules or the objective of the game, he would say nothing. The "game" was him laying out cards at random and making up the "rules" as he went. It was random, arbitrary and not what is generally called a game. (Later on it dawned on me he might have done it for attention.)

Ahweh, statements like yours above are textbook statements from believers. You need your belief to be true. You have invested very much time, energy, peace of mind and possibly money in it. No evidence will convince you otherwise, which is why you will very likely never submit to a test of your claimed ability.

Those who are here partaking of this thread are hear for their own reasons as am I.

It took me around ten phone calls, a little cajoling and 50 eurobucks to convince a friend and his doctor's assistant acquaintance to let us in her employer's practice after hours, set up an EEG properly, witness the procedure and comment on the results.

The by far biggest hurdle was to convince her to do it after hours and for some obscure reasoning of "we want to try something".

Because, as we realised afterward, I simply could have gotten a referral from my family doctor, made an appointment and walked in the neurologist's practice during regular hours, accompanied by my friend who then would have done whatever it is he claimed to be able to do. A medical professional would then have explained to us what happened and why. Or why nothing at all happened.

The conclusion should be obvious: The door is wide open, buddy. Whenever you're ready.

(Another obvious conclusion: The German health care system has its benefits.

And a third obvious conclusion: Since I would have been the one who made the doctor's appointment, I would have run the risk of wasting my fellow citizen's health care premiums, as well as probably never being able to return to that practice ever again.)

Oh yeah, one last thing: Upon telling the doctor's assistant about our intended use of the EEG procedure - I would have sat down and my friend would have placed his hand on my arms, shoulders and upper body - she said something like "That can mess up the readings."

Ahweh

10th March 2012, 01:59 AM

So far you've shown no indication of having learned anything at all.

I have learned a great deal during both of my times being here.

Just because you do not see the results you are looking for does not mean I have learned nothing.

You have convinced yourself that energy healing is real on the basis of evidence which is wholely inadequate. You have proved nothing, not even to yourself.

Oh I have convinced myself of nothing! But the things that have happened to those we have worked with as well as to ourselves have done the convincing in spades.

No, that doesn't help.

It should because the concept of proof is the same with energy healing or the car in the drive.

A claim that a particular treatment is medically effective is much harder to verify than a claim that there is a blue car in the driveway. There are many ways - due to well known and well understood cognitive biases - in which someone can inadvertantly fool themselves into thinking a medical treatment is effective when it isn't. That's why pharmaceutical companies spend millions doing large scale clinical trials to find out whether the medicines they've developed really work. We've learned the hard way that that's the only reliable way to find out. Many medical treatments that had been believed to work for centuries (blood letting, purging, homeopathy etc etc) turned out to be useless when properly tested.

I do not know how to set up the separate quotes so I hope you do not mind my interjections.

I do not know what claims you feel I have made but I have tried to make only one or two claims
The first is that energy healing is real and the other is that no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.
Energy healing is not a medical procedure and the results for each person is different so a study might be useless but personal experience could be worth more than you can imagine.

Ahweh

10th March 2012, 02:11 AM

You are sounding like my little brother. He used to play a card game he called "tank truck". Whenever I asked him about the rules or the objective of the game, he would say nothing. The "game" was him laying out cards at random and making up the "rules" as he went. It was random, arbitrary and not what is generally called a game. (Later on it dawned on me he might have done it for attention.)

Ahweh, statements like yours above are textbook statements from believers. You need your belief to be true. You have invested very much time, energy, peace of mind and possibly money in it. No evidence will convince you otherwise, which is why you will very likely never submit to a test of your claimed ability.

It took me around ten phone calls, a little cajoling and 50 eurobucks to convince a friend and his doctor's assistant acquaintance to let us in her employer's practice after hours, set up an EEG properly, witness the procedure and comment on the results.

The by far biggest hurdle was to convince her to do it after hours and for some obscure reasoning of "we want to try something".

Because, as we realised afterward, I simply could have gotten a referral from my family doctor, made an appointment and walked in the neurologist's practice during regular hours, accompanied by my friend who then would have done whatever it is he claimed to be able to do. A medical professional would then have explained to us what happened and why. Or why nothing at all happened.

The conclusion should be obvious: The door is wide open, buddy. Whenever you're ready.

(Another obvious conclusion: The German health care system has its benefits.

And a third obvious conclusion: Since I would have been the one who made the doctor's appointment, I would have run the risk of wasting my fellow citizen's health care premiums, as well as probably never being able to return to that practice ever again.)

Oh yeah, one last thing: Upon telling the doctor's assistant about our intended use of the EEG procedure - I would have sat down and my friend would have placed his hand on my arms, shoulders and upper body - she said something like "That can mess up the readings."

I will try to find a local EEG machine so we will have both ends of the setup and is the intended receiver willing to partake in a few sessions prior to being hooked up to the machine.
We also need to know which time zones we are both in.
I am in America central which is -6 without daylight savings time.

Pixel42

10th March 2012, 02:11 AM

I do not know what claims you feel I have made but I have tried to make only one or two claims
The first is that energy healing is real
A claim for which you have provided no credible evidence, and what evidence there is strongly suggests is false.

and the other is that no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.
A claim which is manifestly not true. Plenty of things have been proved by scientists which an individual has no hope of verifying for themselves, though they can examine the methods used and results obtained and verify that they are reliable. The efficacy of various medical treatments is just one example.

Energy healing is not a medical procedure and the results for each person is different so a study might be useless but personal experience could be worth more than you can imagine.
When it comes to this sort of subjective pheonomena, personal experience is utterly worthless. This has been proved over and over again, as things which peoples' personal experiences told them were true have been shown not to be when properly tested in ways which exclude the effect of our many cognitive biases.

William Smith

10th March 2012, 03:43 AM

...
The first is that energy healing is real and the other is that no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.
...

...
A claim which is manifestly not true. Plenty of things have been proved by scientists which an individual has no hope of verifying for themselves, though they can examine the methods used and results obtained and verify that they are reliable. The efficacy of various medical treatments is just one example.
...

Have you ever taken aspirin? Or ibuprofen? Antibiotics? Or anything prescribed by a doctor and felt the need to prove it to yourself first?

Another great way to make your highlighted statement seem ... impractical ... would be the following: You and a buddy are standing on the BREN Tower (http://en.structurae.de/structures/data/index.cfm?ID=s0011080). Having no safety equipment, your buddy decides to jump down. Do you really need to prove to yourself what is to 100% an unfortunate outcome for your buddy? (Please do not!)

Ahweh

11th March 2012, 12:40 AM

I have had many drugs and antibiotics in my life but why on earth would I want to prove anything to myself before I would experience it, when I could do it when I actually experienced it.
I have had drugs that have done very little and some that have effected me stronger than they should have.

The other drugs that I have taken which worked similar to what their labels said they were supposed to I still use from time to time if I need to which is very rare.
How can you know if the stake is good if you do not taste it.
The same is true for energy healing!
How do you know if energy healing is either for you or not if you if you do not try it for yourself.

Pixel42

11th March 2012, 12:59 AM

I have had many drugs and antibiotics in my life but why on earth would I want to prove anything to myself before I would experience it, when I could do it when I actually experienced it.
Your actual experiences are not reliable, because people experience perceived improvements in their symptoms when all they've taken is a placebo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo

That's why real medicines are tested in double blind clinical trials where any improvement they appear to cause in patients' symptoms can be compared to the amount of improvement those taking a placebo experience. Only if those taking the real medicine do objectively better than those taking the placebo can it be concluded that the medicine is effective.

So you cannot take a personal experience as proof that a medicine is effective. You need to verify that the medicine in question has been properly tested and shown to work better than a placebo.

William Smith

11th March 2012, 03:22 AM

Ahweh

12th March 2012, 12:29 AM

Pixel42

12th March 2012, 12:57 AM

So according to your personal experience, jumping off a large building won't kill you. Are you still sure that personal experience is more reliable than careful experiments?

Ahweh

12th March 2012, 01:03 AM

Your actual experiences are not reliable, because people experience perceived improvements in their symptoms when all they've taken is a placebo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo

That's why real medicines are tested in double blind clinical trials where any improvement they appear to cause in patients' symptoms can be compared to the amount of improvement those taking a placebo experience. Only if those taking the real medicine do objectively better than those taking the placebo can it be concluded that the medicine is effective.

So you cannot take a personal experience as proof that a medicine is effective. You need to verify that the medicine in question has been properly tested and shown to work better than a placebo.

Placebo is a possibility in all things but we have seen things happen in the people we worked with that goes beyond it.
I have also had things happen to me and within me that show the realty of energy healing.

Pixel42

12th March 2012, 01:14 AM

Placebo is a possibility in all things but we have seen things happen in the people we worked with that goes beyond it.
Have you seen people who have lost limbs grow them back? That's just about the only thing you could have seen which would qualify.

I have also had things happen to me and within me that show the realty of energy healing
No matter how many times you say this it still won't magically become true. The only way to show the reality of energy healing to anyone, including yourself, is to do a large scale double blinded clinical trial.

Ahweh

12th March 2012, 02:46 AM

Have you seen people who have lost limbs grow them back? That's just about the only thing you could have seen which would qualify.

No matter how many times you say this it still won't magically become true. The only way to show the reality of energy healing to anyone, including yourself, is to do a large scale double blinded clinical trial.

It is a shame that you have so little regard for your own awareness that you need someone else to tell you what you do and do not feel.
I do not need someone else to tell me how I feel because I trust myself and my awareness.
It is ok for you to believe what you wish to because you are living your life not me as I am living my life not you so my knowledge and yours may not be interchangeable but they could be equally as valid to those who are reading the posts.

William Smith

12th March 2012, 03:06 AM

How can you know that jumping off a large building would kill you, if you do not try it for yourself? (I absolutely do NOT want you to try it. It is a hypothetical question.)

Because of the damage that happened when when I wrecked my motorcycle.
I stood my motorcycle up against a guard rail on a 25 mph off ramp and then flew 70 feet out and 40 feet down from my bike.
Broke my knee vertically about 8 inches with the bones almost completely offset and the point coming out the skin, wrist and and thumb with a bruise across my chest from the wind shield.
40 feet is equal to a 4 story building but I do not know what you consider a large building.

You seem to have misunderstood the point of my hypothetical question. Let's take a step back and try to make the connection.

You have - repeatedly - stated the following:

...
The first is that energy healing is real and the other is that no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.
...

First of all, you have been asked many times to explain in more detail what you understand by "energy healing". You have yet to reveal more than a number of anecdotes and vague statements. I understand that you think these anecdotes qualify as evidence for the efficacy of what you call "energy healing", which by standards of common sense they do not. No one besides you has any way to verify the, and I am using this term as loosely as possible, "data" you provided. That is not enough to convince me - and likely most other people in this forum. Your claims could be true. Or they could not. We cannot shed a light on your claims, notable because you said in the other thread back in 2006 (highlights by me):

We do not treat conditions we work on the root cause so the body with the extra energy can fix it's self. Sorry no paper work Im not the type to keep good records. We are working on putting an experiment together using multiple EEG machines to prove or disprove the connection between practioner and the person being worked with. One of the most profound results was a little boy of three who had a kidney disease in which he was going to have one of his kidnes removed. We as in many Energy Healers worked together with him every night for over a week and when they took him in to remove the kidney they did not need to the disease was gone. That was over five years ago and he is still doing fine.

Another anecdote with no evidence - name of the patient, patient's medical history, location, doctor, hospital, etc. - to support it.

Second, I was trying to shed a light on your statement "[...]no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.[...]".

I used the example of jumping off a tall tower to make you see that your statement is at least very impractical and at the worst a death sentence.

Third, I just re-read the other thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=60459) and came across this:

What transmission mechanism. There is a Quantum physics explination but that would not be plin english so my explination is my understanding and may not fit into other peoples understanding of things. To me we are effectively all a part of the same thing so everyone and I are already connected and sending energy to someone is as simple as handing it to someone in the same room. If you wish to you can look up the quantum stuff for yourself.

If someone like you who seems to have very much trouble explaining in simple terms what he does invokes the big "Q", that is a double technical foul and hence an automatic ejection.

Why? Because it at least pinpoints that you have no clue what you are talking about; at worst, you are deliberately stringing people along for the attention and at the very worst, you are giving false hope to people in need.

Either way, I do not think it is reasonable to wait or try for a more detailed explanation and perhaps a revelation on your part. At least for me. Pixel42 might have the inclination and the time to do so.

Good day, Ahweh.

Pixel42

12th March 2012, 03:55 AM

It is a shame that you have so little regard for your own awareness that you need someone else to tell you what you do and do not feel.
It's a shame that you have so little knowledge and understanding of how the world really works that you are unable to grasp simple examples and explanations.

I do not need someone else to tell me what I do and do not feel. I do need objective evidence to determine how reliable those feelings are. I am not so arrogant to think I can obtain that evidence all by myself. Millions of people have devoted their lives for the last few centuries to building up a veritable mountain of knowledge and understanding about how the world works which is freely available to anyone who can read. That accumulated knowledge and understanding is humanity's greatest achievement and treasure. To choose to wilfully ignore it and wallow in ignorance and superstition is not only very very stupid, it is an insult to every single person who has contributed to it.

Either way, I do not think it is reasonable to wait or try for a more detailed explanation and perhaps a revelation on your part. At least for me. Pixel42 might have the inclination and the time to do so.
Nope, I'm giving up too.

Ahweh

13th March 2012, 12:46 AM

You seem to have misunderstood the point of my hypothetical question. Let's take a step back and try to make the connection.

You have - repeatedly - stated the following:

First of all, you have been asked many times to explain in more detail what you understand by "energy healing". You have yet to reveal more than a number of anecdotes and vague statements. I understand that you think these anecdotes qualify as evidence for the efficacy of what you call "energy healing", which by standards of common sense they do not. No one besides you has any way to verify the, and I am using this term as loosely as possible, "data" you provided. That is not enough to convince me - and likely most other people in this forum. Your claims could be true. Or they could not. We cannot shed a light on your claims, notable because you said in the other thread back in 2006 (highlights by me):

Another anecdote with no evidence - name of the patient, patient's medical history, location, doctor, hospital, etc. - to support it.

Second, I was trying to shed a light on your statement "[...]no one can prove anything to you you have to prove it to yourself.[...]".

I used the example of jumping off a tall tower to make you see that your statement is at least very impractical and at the worst a death sentence.

Third, I just re-read the other thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=60459) and came across this:

If someone like you who seems to have very much trouble explaining in simple terms what he does invokes the big "Q", that is a double technical foul and hence an automatic ejection.

Why? Because it at least pinpoints that you have no clue what you are talking about; at worst, you are deliberately stringing people along for the attention and at the very worst, you are giving false hope to people in need.

Either way, I do not think it is reasonable to wait or try for a more detailed explanation and perhaps a revelation on your part. At least for me. Pixel42 might have the inclination and the time to do so.

Good day, Ahweh.

In 2006 I had a lot of growing to do and I have done a lot so I will give a simple explanation of energy healing.
Energy healing is the drawing, guiding and sending of energy to those in need.
Energy for the one or ones who is or are being worked with is drawn from all the ambient energy that is available.
Then the drawn energy is guided to and sent to the one or ones being worked with.
When the energy is received by the one or ones in need their bodies process the energy as needed.
From what we have seen the energy goes to acute needs first.

Ahweh

13th March 2012, 01:16 AM

It's a shame that you have so little knowledge and understanding of how the world really works that you are unable to grasp simple examples and explanations.

I do not need someone else to tell me what I do and do not feel. I do need objective evidence to determine how reliable those feelings are. I am not so arrogant to think I can obtain that evidence all by myself. Millions of people have devoted their lives for the last few centuries to building up a veritable mountain of knowledge and understanding about how the world works which is freely available to anyone who can read. That accumulated knowledge and understanding is humanity's greatest achievement and treasure. To choose to wilfully ignore it and wallow in ignorance and superstition is not only very very stupid, it is an insult to every single person who has contributed to it.

Nope, I'm giving up too.

There are many forms of knowledge and some of it is in books and on the internet while some of it is lived and experienced. I choose to live my life and experience what their is for me in our world.
I have read much, am educated though my spelling and grammar are lacking and I am a world traveler from my time in the navy.
There are also many forms of ignorance and superstition in which I will gladly accept my ignorance in many subjects but I do not do superstition.
So believe what you wish to of me because I can handle it as I have people who are afraid of their own shadows here where we live.
I have found that those who are the most afraid of me and what I do are the ones who ridicule me the most.
People are fascinating because of the way they react to different things and we are avid watchers of human nature.

William Smith

13th March 2012, 02:35 AM

In 2006 I had a lot of growing to do and I have done a lot so I will give a simple explanation of energy healing.
Energy healing is the drawing, guiding and sending of energy to those in need.
Energy for the one or ones who is or are being worked with is drawn from all the ambient energy that is available.
Then the drawn energy is guided to and sent to the one or ones being worked with.
When the energy is received by the one or ones in need their bodies process the energy as needed.
From what we have seen the energy goes to acute needs first.

There are many forms of knowledge and some of it is in books and on the internet while some of it is lived and experienced. I choose to live my life and experience what their is for me in our world.
I have read much, am educated though my spelling and grammar are lacking and I am a world traveler from my time in the navy.
There are also many forms of ignorance and superstition in which I will gladly accept my ignorance in many subjects but I do not do superstition.
So believe what you wish to of me because I can handle it as I have people who are afraid of their own shadows here where we live.
I have found that those who are the most afraid of me and what I do are the ones who ridicule me the most.
People are fascinating because of the way they react to different things and we are avid watchers of human nature.

When the believer is faced with questions regarding his belief, the usual response is he pronounces, affirms and waves his belief even harder. Sometimes, the belief is formulated so vague it would probably medal at the vague-o-lympics.
Reaffirming belief is a common behaviour among primates and should be expected; not to avoid surprise or sadness, but because millions of years of experiences have designed primates that way.

I am a primate, as are all of you who are reading this. (If you're not a primate and you are reading this, congratulations. Or condolences. Please delete as needed.) We can choose to blindly abide to whatever faith, belief or superstition is handed down to us and live our lives accordingly.

Or we can take baby steps - and the occasional giant leap - to try to understand ourselves and our surroundings a little more each day of this single-fare solar roundtrip on a blue marble.

Pixel42

13th March 2012, 03:21 AM

I have found that those who are the most afraid of me and what I do are the ones who ridicule me the most.
I have not ridiculed you and I am certainly not afraid of you. I'd be sorry for you, if your mistaken beliefs weren't so easily corrected by a little effort on your part. As it is I am mostly disappointed by my failure to get you to understand why you cannot place blind faith in your personal experiences. Still I gave it my best shot, that's the main thing. It's your loss that you haven't learned a thing, not mine.

MRC_Hans

13th March 2012, 03:38 AM

I have found that those who are the most afraid of me and what I do are the ones who ridicule me the most.

Let me, just for the record, state that I find you anything but fearsome, but, admittedly, a triffle ridiculous.

Hans

Almo

14th March 2012, 08:30 AM

It is a shame that you have so little regard for your own awareness that you need someone else to tell you what you do and do not feel.

It is a shame you have so little regard for what countless people before you have learned: that personal experience is unreliable in determining cause and effect. Somehow, what you know is different than what all of the scientific literature says about personal experience being unreliable.

I find this kind of disregard the greater fault.

Ahweh

14th March 2012, 11:44 PM

I went back an read what I wrote that makes you feel as though I was accusing you of
ridiculing me which was not my intent.
So I revamped it as follows.

So believe what you wish to of me because I can handle it.
I have people who are afraid of their own shadows here where we live and have found that those who are the most afraid of me and what I do are the ones who ridicule me the most.
People are fascinating because of the way they react to different things and we are avid watchers of human nature.

Also no one should ever be afraid of me or what I do because I do my best to do no harm, but there are those who are afraid and their ridicule is quite mean at times.

Ahweh

14th March 2012, 11:56 PM

The drug companies do double blind studies to basically prove that their drugs work to some degree.
Then we the consumer take those drugs and find out how we will react to them for ourselves.
The package gives how we should expect to respond to the drug both negative and positive.
In taking the drug we are finding out for ourselves if the labeling is in fact correct or not therefore we are proving to ourselves whether that drug will work for us or not.

When I was in the hospital after my motorcycle accident they gave me morphine which was supposed to last around 6 hours but it only lasted about an hour and a half both times they gave it to me.
Then when I got hit by the semi truck in the drivers door they gave me valium to keep the muscles in my stomach from tearing out sutures.
When I woke up the next morning I could not move anything but my eyes for about a half hour.
I watched the nurse walk through the room, look out the window at the falling snow and out again.
I will not allow any doctor to give me either of these drugs because of what they do or do not do for me.
Proof of how any drug will perform for you only comes after you have taken the drug for the first time and some times for a longer period therefor proving for yourself if it is for you or not for you.
Energy healing is the same way because a double blind study will only basically prove that it is or is not real so the only way to know if it something that will work for you is to give it a good try.

Pixel42

15th March 2012, 01:49 AM

Also no one should ever be afraid of me or what I do because I do my best to do no harm, but there are those who are afraid and their ridicule is quite mean at times.
I must say I find it difficult to understand why anyone would be afraid of you - you're genuinely trying to help people, even if you are mistaken about your ability to do so. Some people may be angry with you for making claims which you cannot justify, that may result in some meanness.

The drug companies do double blind studies to basically prove that their drugs work to some degree.
The drug companies do double blind studies to find out to what degree, if any, their drugs produce results which are on average better than placebo, and to identify any side effects. The range of effects, both positive and negative, are established in a double blind trial, which is why that information can be printed on the package the drug comes in.

Then we the consumer take those drugs and find out how we will react to them for ourselves.
The package gives how we should expect to respond to the drug both negative and positive.
The double blind studies will have established the percentage of patients who can be expected to experience both positive results and side effects, but there's no way of knowing in advance where in either range each individual patient will fall.

In taking the drug we are finding out for ourselves if the labeling is in fact correct or not therefore we are proving to ourselves whether that drug will work for us or not.
In taking the drug we find out where in the known ranges of response, both positive and negative, we fall. We can then (in consultation with our doctor) decide whether the positive improvement is worth enduring any side effects, or whether we should try a different drug.

Energy healing is the same way because a double blind study will only basically prove that it is or is not real so the only way to know if it something that will work for you is to give it a good try.
A double blind study will first establish whether people given energy healing do better, on average, than people given a placebo. If they don't, then energy healing does not work. Period.

If it does work but not for everybody, a double blind study will show that too because there will be a large range of responses (with the average response being better than that of those who were taking the placebo). In that case it will be like any other treatment in that the extent to which it works for a particular patient can only be discovered by them trying it. But first it has to be established whether it works at all, which can only be done by a double blind trial. At the moment all available evidence is that it does not work at all, other than as a placebo.