mind over matter

blue deamon · 11th August 2010, 11:15 AM

hello,

I saw this video from national geographic channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KArX8iNnY4Q

They said that this feat (Bending the spear) is "defy science"

And it is proof of existing qi energy

Can this be real?

DallasDad · 11th August 2010, 11:31 AM

No.

Ladewig · 11th August 2010, 11:46 AM

Quote:

"this is the actual spear that was tested on the watermelon"

C'mon.

He is definitely in excellent shape, but the video does not convince me of Qi. The assistant who used the bat was "pulling the punch" as evidence by how quickly he pulled the bat back. Of course, as he tells it, he was pushed back by the master's powerful force. A teacher's students will often play along with demonstrations of the teacher's powers. Let someone else wield the bat, and I will be more convinced.

jakesteele · 11th August 2010, 12:09 PM

I was disappointed how they conducted the tests. The guy hit was considerably less force than the dummy and they the batman really stepped into the swing. Anybody who's played baseball or tennis knows that if you step into the swing too early you haven't reached max power and speed or if you swing too late you are past the point of max power and speed. Hence, as you saw by the psi, the guy didn't get hit as hard as the dummy.

If you want to see people get hit full force and absorb it, watch MMA and guys getting kicked max power and speed in their guts or ribs. Most of the time they can absorb and incredible amount of abuse without going down.

that the contact will be less than full force. you could also step in too late learns there is a perfect way to swing at the ball

Mirrorglass · 11th August 2010, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by jakesteele

I was disappointed how they conducted the tests. The guy hit was considerably less force than the dummy and they the batman really stepped into the swing. Anybody who's played baseball or tennis knows that if you step into the swing too early you haven't reached max power and speed or if you swing too late you are past the point of max power and speed. Hence, as you saw by the psi, the guy didn't get hit as hard as the dummy.

If you want to see people get hit full force and absorb it, watch MMA and guys getting kicked max power and speed in their guts or ribs. Most of the time they can absorb and incredible amount of abuse without going down.

that the contact will be less than full force. you could also step in too late learns there is a perfect way to swing at the ball

Now that would be a scientific examination.

JoeTheJuggler · 11th August 2010, 01:14 PM

From the "scientist" in the video: "So we'll be able to tell exactly how much force you generate [hitting the crash test dummy] and how much force your iron shirt [the Qi gong guy] can withstand."

What bad methodology! There's no reason to believe both swings are the same.

In fact, when they showed the motion tracking data, they calculated that the swing to the "iron shirt" guy delivered just over half the force delivered to the crash test dummy. (790 vs. 484 pounds of force.) So the one thing we know for certain is that the two swings were very different.

JoeTheJuggler · 11th August 2010, 01:18 PM

And with the spear, the video showed it running through a watermelon. (They didn't show any measure of how much force was required to do so.)

From the narration: "Since 'chi' is outside of science [blather about bringing in some martial arts experts to talk about how 'chi' works.]"

What they mean is, "Since 'chi' is outside of science, we're only pretending to conduct something that looks like a test of easily testable claims without really testing those claims."

One example of such a claim is that the force of the spear against the guy's throat was more than enough to break the trachea. That claim was never substantiated. Yet the narrator claims that this demonstration "defies science".

sadhatter · 11th August 2010, 01:36 PM

You know i saw a good documentary on this exact phenomenon. I can't, for the life of me remember it though ( i was about maybe 11-13 at the time. So about 12 years ago.). From what i remember the spear tip is being bent with the bones around the eye as opposed to the eye itself. And the trick is to ( forgive my ignorance of medical terminology) not push on the point, but rather use the top part of your eye socket to apply pressure to the flat of the blade just below the spear point.

In the documentary ( All i remember is it was a guy going to different woo claims such as this and speaking with someone willing to explain how they were done. Then doing them himself. ) the guy was able to preform the trick with a fair amount of bend in the spear within about a day or so.

Accidental Martyr · 11th August 2010, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

From the "scientist" in the video: "So we'll be able to tell exactly how much force you generate [hitting the crash test dummy] and how much force your iron shirt [the Qi gong guy] can withstand."

What bad methodology! There's no reason to believe both swings are the same.

In fact, when they showed the motion tracking data, they calculated that the swing to the "iron shirt" guy delivered just over half the force delivered to the crash test dummy. (790 vs. 484 pounds of force.) So the one thing we know for certain is that the two swings were very different.

Shouldn't they have used some sort of machine/device that swung the bat with the same force each time? Kind of like the way they test stuff on Mythbusters a lot of times?

dlorde · 11th August 2010, 04:44 PM

With the spear bending they always seem to do it in the same parts of the body (e.g. throat - the Shaolin monks do it the same way), and the stick breaking is always done by hitting fairly close to where the stick is held - using leverage and the momentum of the overhanging end of the stick to break it. I have seen wooden baseball bats broken with a shin strike, but this can go horribly wrong if the bat isn't held rigid at each end...

fossilhound · 11th August 2010, 05:11 PM

I don't believe in qi necessarily, but I do believe that guy could kick my ass.

Skeptalk · 11th August 2010, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by DallasDad

No.

I'm going with this guy.

MattusMaximus · 11th August 2010, 08:15 PM

Yeah, I call FAIL. I'd like to know what the baseball bat was made of - wood, aluminum? I also noticed that when the striker hit the dummy, he hit it in the chest, but when he hit the qi-master, he hit the guy in the abdomen. One reason why I think this is important is because one can, at the last moment, suck in your abdomen muscles (thus giving the illusion of being hit) but you can't do this with your chest. Why not just smash the qi-master in the chest like with the dummy?

Better yet, I'd like to see them hand an aluminum baseball bat to a hardcore skeptic (like some of the folks over at Bullshido.net) and have it swung full-force into the qi-master's kneecap without said "master" moving at all. That would impress me, assuming that the qi-master doesn't end up in the hospital with a shattered knee. Or how about in the face?

Think they'll accept that challenge?

Btw, here's a good example of what happens to these nuts when they try this sort of stuff out for real, instead of faking it (Warning: not for the squeamish)

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Steve001 · 11th August 2010, 09:15 PM

I like to see what happens to that iron shirt if it were to meet a bat studded with nails. Something tells me that iron shirt would end up with a few holes in it.

blue deamon · 12th August 2010, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Btw, here's a good example of what happens to these nuts when they try this sort of stuff out for real, instead of faking it (Warning: not for the squeamish)

Thank you for this video it is a proof that the spear in the first video is real
and could cause death to shaolin monk.

Becuse both videos are taken from documentary channel
so , both weapon (sward and spear) is real.

blue deamon · 12th August 2010, 05:27 AM

Quote:

With the spear bending they always seem to do it in the same parts of the body (e.g. throat - the Shaolin monks do it the same way)

No, not necessary they can do it while the spear to the stomach

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZWGEJC3j9c

But they usually select the weakest points on the body

The problem is that all Skeptics say "If this energy actually exist , and people are willing to demonstrait it, then it could be studied by science and shown to be true."

It actually studied by science but the Skeptics insist it just a trick

I just can't understand why the documentary video didn't ,at least, proof the spear bending is not a trick

Cuddles · 12th August 2010, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Btw, here's a good example of what happens to these nuts when they try this sort of stuff out for real, instead of faking it (Warning: not for the squeamish)

I was expecting that to be this one:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Originally Posted by blue deamon

Thank you for this video it is a proof that the spear in the first video is real
and could cause death to shaolin monk.

Becuse both videos are taken from documentary channel
so , both weapon (sward and spear) is real.

No. Just, no. The fact that there's a real sword in one video in no way proves there's a real spear in another. It may well be a genuine trick, or it could be a complete fake. It's not possible to tell which by looking at something else entirely.

Bikewer · 12th August 2010, 05:39 AM

I haven't looked at the video, since my squad-car computer lacks the software (they really don't like us to surf...)
However, having seen many such, I can guess.... The "spear" is a very long, flexible steel item, correct? When the point is placed on the "master's" throat and pressure applied, the spear bends into an arc and the master is amazingly unharmed.
Correct?
All one need do is place the spearpoint deeply enough into the skin to prevent slipping, and then apply sideways force.... Looks terrific, doesn't it?

The bat-breaking (or board breaking, or whatever) has been adequately explained above.
In these demonstrations, the striking point is never at the "business end" of the board; it's always about halfway back from the tip, or even further.
Momentum, which is maximum at the tip, results in the board breaking at the point of contact.
Cheesy old "demonstrations" that have been long debunked.

I am usually impressed by the National Geographic offerings. However, their "fight science" series (from which I presume this is taken) is really, seriously suspect.

Zeuzzz · 12th August 2010, 06:09 AM

I would say the only few compelling cases for mind over matter (whatever the definition of that is, I'm not actually sure) is the experiment where people put on glasses where their vision was flipped upside down. After a week their mind had solved the problem (different theories exist as to how), by redistributing matter and neurons so they all now worked the right way up. Some think that a reflective type of neural mirror was generated to invert the picture back up.

When they took the glasses off at the end everything was upside down still for a few days I recall. Interesting experiment anyway.

MattusMaximus · 12th August 2010, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

But they usually select the weakest points on the body

Why aren't kneecaps considered a weak point? Have you ever been kicked hard in the side of the knee? If so, you'll drop like a stone. Why not have someone smash an aluminum baseball bat into the Shaolin monk's kneecap?

Better yet, why not take the hit square in the nose? Or the teeth? Or how about a nice, sharp knife stab to the eyeball?

Don't any of those count as weak points?

Skeptic Ginger · 13th August 2010, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

...

Btw, here's a good example of what happens to these nuts when they try this sort of stuff out for real, instead of faking it (Warning: not for the squeamish)

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Looks like someone didn't tell this guy the other guys were faking it.

Skeptic Ginger · 13th August 2010, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

No, not necessary they can do it while the spear to the stomach

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZWGEJC3j9c

But they usually select the weakest points on the body

The problem is that all Skeptics say "If this energy actually exist , and people are willing to demonstrait it, then it could be studied by science and shown to be true."

It actually studied by science but the Skeptics insist it just a trick

I just can't understand why the documentary video didn't ,at least, proof the spear bending is not a trick

There is a well known principle of puncturing with a rapid thrust while slowing pushing a sharp object won't break the skin tension. And with the bed of nails the weight is distributed over the nails. When walking on hot coals the heat doesn't reach the actual skin.

I'm not convinced the guy in your video doesn't have a well disguised device blocking the puncture point.

But in all of these cases, the laws of physics are not being broken. There is no Qi magically preventing the swords from puncturing the skin. Your definition of a "trick" may differ from mine. Walking on coals or lying on a bed of nails are tricks if you don't understand the physics involved. Putting your weight on a sword and not having it skewer your belly is going to be either a trick with a hidden device, or it is going to be a sword with a tip that if one pushes into the belly slowly is not sharp enough to puncture the skin.

Maybe you've been fooled here, but physics is physics. There is an explanation that does not involves some magical Qi.

BobR · 13th August 2010, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Think they'll accept that challenge?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

No.

blue deamon · 14th August 2010, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Maybe you've been fooled here, but physics is physics. There is an explanation that does not involves some magical Qi.

maybe I am been fooled , But what about the Scientists ,they fooled too?
They don't know the physics ? And they don't know your "explanation that does not involves some magical Qi "?!

You are looking at this scientific video in the same way you watch any other demonstration does not include scientists and measuring instruments.

What is the Importance of Scientists if you will ignore them.

(under proper observing conditions)

blue deamon · 14th August 2010, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Or how about a nice, sharp knife stab to the eyeball?

Don't any of those count as weak points?

And what do you think using the RPG?

the power of qi has limits after all

Ladewig · 14th August 2010, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

maybe I am been fooled , But what about the Scientists ,they fooled too?
They don't know the physics ? And they don't know your "explanation that does not involves some magical Qi "?!

You are looking at this scientific video in the same way you watch any other demonstration does not include scientists and measuring instruments.

What is the Importance of Scientists if you will ignore them.

(under proper observing conditions)

Here's the problem. What was presented on the video was most certainly not science performed under proper observing conditions. In simplest terms, when it comes time to do a scientific experiment the most important aspect is to isolate the variable being studied. Without that step, the results are meaningless because the scientist cannot determine if the results of the experiment are based on the principle being studied or are based on some other difference that is introducing variability and other errors into the experiment.

When experimenting on how powerful an "iron shirt qi stance" is, one cannot let the subject's assistant swing a bat. One needs an objective and consistent force applied in a precise, repeatable manner. This concept has already been mentioned in several posts. I could list all the other reasons why this performance is not science in any way, but all the reasons have already been listed in previous posts.

Before you claim that this was science properly performed, you must address each issue that was previously raised.

Of course, the simplest way to prove that what the qi master was doing is not beyond the realm of the normal is to have someone who has never studied qi perform the same tricks.

Biscuit · 14th August 2010, 08:20 AM

One other variable I noticed was that the assistant's front leg was still in front of the dummy when he connected. In the test his front leg appeared to go past his master causing the bat to make contact before it reached full speed. This and a lot of rehearsals would explain the nearly 50% drop in power.

Fight science and other shows that attempt a scientific look at mysterious phenomenon always fall way short in my opinion. I am not a scientist but I can can come up with more rigid controls than they ever do. Also they always seem to leave occam's razor out of the list of possible explanations always ending with a, "we may never know!" type conclusion.

MattusMaximus · 14th August 2010, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

maybe I am been fooled , But what about the Scientists ,they fooled too?
They don't know the physics ? And they don't know your "explanation that does not involves some magical Qi "?!

You are looking at this scientific video in the same way you watch any other demonstration does not include scientists and measuring instruments.

What is the Importance of Scientists if you will ignore them.

(under proper observing conditions)

Ahem. I'm a physics professor, a scientist if you will, and I can give you many very good reasons why the "scientist" on the show was fooled: she was either paid to be "impressed", she wants to believe it and that is clouding her objectivity, or she's just an idiot.

I have personally performed many similar live demonstrations (the double bed of nails with a concrete block being broken by a sledgehammer, breaking boards with my hands & feet, walking barefoot on hot coals, walking barefoot on broken glass, being hit by a sledgehammer with an anvil on my chest, etc - some in front of very large audiences) as a method of illustrating various physics principles, and I have no training in qi gong, I hold no beliefs in ki/chi/qi, and I think all of that rot is a load of hooey. I have performed many of these demonstrations upwards of 50+ times over the last dozen or so years, and to date I have yet to be seriously injured and/or killed, because I understand all of the physics involved and can properly prepare for it. But I can also testify that the laws of nature are fickle, and if you don't do things right you can get hurt.

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Of course, the simplest way to prove that what the qi master was doing is not beyond the realm of the normal is to have someone who has never studied qi perform the same tricks.

Exactly - precisely my point. I have performed many of these supposed "miracles", and I have no training in qi gong.

It's physics, not chi. The reason why the guy in the Fight Science video isn't hurt is because it was a sham demonstration (for all the reasons outlined above) - if it's for real, then give a skeptic (a non-believer in qi gong) the baseball bat and let them take a really good whack at the monk's kneecap, or the base of his spine, or his face. Or let them try to stab him with a knife while he doesn't move. Why is it that the monk's assistant is wielding the bat?

There's nothing magical, mystical, or supernatural going on in these demonstrations. If you start to seriously believe in this magical nonsense, one of these days THIS is going to happen to you...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

... or THIS...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

... or even THIS (not for the squeamish)...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

So, what have you got to say to my post, blue deamon?

majamin · 14th August 2010, 09:51 PM

Are TV channels hitting some kind of Nash Equilibrium where you have to present sensationalized, "sciencey" (i.e. watered-down pseudo-analysis) shows to keep an audience quota? I know this will sound like an appeal to nostalgia, channels like Discovery (which is still quite good), History Channel (Every Woo Under the Sun), TLC (Another Weird Family Channel), etc. used to be quite dedicated to "Learning" and "History", etc. They used to be much more specialized, and better, if I remember correctly.

Anyways, this is somewhat of a rant, so feel free to ignore ...

7th sextile · 15th August 2010, 12:52 AM

Two words : "Iron Cup".

Halfcentaur · 15th August 2010, 01:57 AM

Originally Posted by majamin

Are TV channels hitting some kind of Nash Equilibrium where you have to present sensationalized, "sciencey" (i.e. watered-down pseudo-analysis) shows to keep an audience quota? I know this will sound like an appeal to nostalgia, channels like Discovery (which is still quite good), History Channel (Every Woo Under the Sun), TLC (Another Weird Family Channel), etc. used to be quite dedicated to "Learning" and "History", etc. They used to be much more specialized, and better, if I remember correctly.

Anyways, this is somewhat of a rant, so feel free to ignore ...

I agree, what happened? I stopped watching TV around 1994-95 until around 2005, and I was stunned by the differences, like a time traveler out of sync with the collective pop culture.
TLC was a channel about science and movie effects, like Discovery, and History was about ww2 and the revolution and the civil war.

I like variety, but sensationalism seems to rule the day,..or air waves, these days.

blue deamon · 15th August 2010, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Of course, the simplest way to prove that what the qi master was doing is not beyond the realm of the normal is to have someone who has never studied qi perform the same tricks.

I completly agree with you , show me some one who Does not believe in qi power,
demonstrate throat bending spear on Documentary show like fight science
and I will accept it.

blue deamon · 15th August 2010, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Ahem. I'm a physics professor,

Can you make your own experiment to test that throat spear?

And tell me please what is the correct experiment so I can do it by my self

"isolate the variable being studied"
Can you explain that to me?

How can I do that in throat spear experiment?

Quote:

have personally performed many similar live demonstrations (the double bed of nails with a concrete block being broken by a sledgehammer, breaking boards with my hands & feet, walking barefoot on hot coals, walking barefoot on broken glass, being hit by a sledgehammer with an anvil on my chest, etc -

Good , then you can do like this man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbRkq...eature=related

Quote:

.. or even THIS (not for the squeamish)...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

I like this video
So, here is Another episode from same show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a69y3nhMaZY

Quote:

So, what have you got to say to my post, blue demon?

What I trying to say is : tell me what is the trick and how can I do it?

ِAnd something else , I want your opinion in this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hebr2ytgv2I

7th sextile · 15th August 2010, 04:52 AM

A point on the spear (sorry) :

The computer generated graphics showing the spear vs trachea start at about 6:44 on the video and run to about 7:00.In the CPG the spear point is a flattened pyramid whose edges form an isosceles triangle with relatively large base angles , I believe the technical term is "pointy".
Now go back to about 5:36 for a quick (don't blink) look at the actual spear.The head doesn't come to a point,it's a gently rounded,almost flat tip.(Strange:the camera pans downward after less than a second).This is just after the "spear through the melon" shot,which as Skeptic Ginger suggested,has more to do with the spear's velocity (pace Mattmax , I mean momentum) than the sharpness of the spear.This sort of apples to oranges,or watermelon to windpipe comparisons are an annoying feature of what I'm starting to think of as "psteudio" science.
Certainly if a bona fide TV show wishes to call such an object "a steel tipped bamboo spear " who am I to argue,but has anyone seen the like of it ? I wouldn't want to hunt anything except maybe butter with that handsome article,much less fight with it.(Warrior :
"I'm looking for an accurate throwing spear." Armorer :Check out the point on this baby-it'll shish-kebab four enemy scum with one toss!" Warrior : I'm kinda looking for something that will really annoy them but not break the skin?" Armorer : "You mean a Qi-Gong 'spear'?Sure,we got those-comes with a free watermelon."

dafydd · 15th August 2010, 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by Bikewer

I haven't looked at the video, since my squad-car computer lacks the software (they really don't like us to surf...)
However, having seen many such, I can guess.... The "spear" is a very long, flexible steel item, correct? When the point is placed on the "master's" throat and pressure applied, the spear bends into an arc and the master is amazingly unharmed.
Correct?
All one need do is place the spearpoint deeply enough into the skin to prevent slipping, and then apply sideways force.... Looks terrific, doesn't it?

The bat-breaking (or board breaking, or whatever) has been adequately explained above.
In these demonstrations, the striking point is never at the "business end" of the board; it's always about halfway back from the tip, or even further.
Momentum, which is maximum at the tip, results in the board breaking at the point of contact.
Cheesy old "demonstrations" that have been long debunked.

I am usually impressed by the National Geographic offerings. However, their "fight science" series (from which I presume this is taken) is really, seriously suspect.

I agree.If ten guys with weighted pool cues set upon one of those super fighters that they have on there,they would beat the crap out of him.In the Bruce Lee movies the baddies always lined up to take their turn,lol.

Ladewig · 15th August 2010, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

Can you make your own experiment to test that throat spear?

And tell me please what is the correct experiment so I can do it by my self

"isolate the variable being studied"
Can you explain that to me?

Sure. The claim is that qi power allows a master to adopt a physical disposition in which his skin and body are less susceptible to damage than those of a non-qi master. [correct me if I have misstated the claim]. In order to test that we need to precisely calculate how susceptible to damage people who haven't studied qi are and then precisely calculate how susceptable to damage people who have studied qi are. Watching a qi master break a bamboo "spear" in this manner fails to be science on two counts. First, there is no objective measure. Second, there is no baseline to compare the master's performance to.

Originally Posted by blue deamon

How can I do that in throat spear experiment?

You can't. At least you can't without putting your life in jeopardy. But what scientists can do is devise a test to determine the accuracy of the original claim. If the master's body becomes "like iron." Then we could take a knife with a 2 cm blade and apply it with a measured amount of force (perhaps with a spring of other device) to a non-critical part of the master's body (e.g. the same place he took the bat hit). We could then apply the same amount of force with the same knife on someone who hasn't studied qi.

Several years ago, I saw Siegfried and Roy make a tiger disappear. Do I believe that they can send large animals into other dimensions? No. A few days I ago I saw a video of a qi master breaking a spear. Do I believe that he has harnessed a life force in such a way that makes his body dramatically less pervious to damage? No.

. . . . . . . . . . .

Originally Posted by 7th sextile

Two words : "Iron Cup".

well played.

dafydd · 15th August 2010, 12:36 PM

I saw David Copperfield being cut in half by a huge buzzsaw and he joined himself together again.His chi must be off the scale.

MattusMaximus · 15th August 2010, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

Can you make your own experiment to test that throat spear?

Sure I could, so long as I used exactly the same props as those supposed chi-masters were using.

Quote:

And tell me please what is the correct experiment so I can do it by my self

"isolate the variable being studied"
Can you explain that to me?

How can I do that in throat spear experiment?

As someone else already pointed out, a close look at the end of the spear - the "business end" - shows that it is not sharp at all. In fact, it is rounded like a spoon. Another related video shows this fact clearly (look at the 0:24 mark for confirmation)...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

If it really were so "miraculous", then why do these guys always do these demonstrations with their own equipment? This spear is not a lethal weapon; hell, as I've shown, it isn't even sharp! Why not allow someone else (a skeptic) to bring in their own sharpened weapon, like a razor-sharp hunting arrow, to do the spear-to-the-throat demonstration? Like this (forward to 4:40 for the demos and 6:25 for the skeptic's challenge)...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Quote:

Good , then you can do like this man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbRkq...eature=related

I like this video
So, here is Another episode from same show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a69y3nhMaZY

What I trying to say is : tell me what is the trick and how can I do it?

See my previous comments: if you use their equipment & practice carefully, it will work every time. For the guy pounding the nail into the wood with his fist, note that this isn't an ordinary nail - it has a really wide & flat head on it. That means that when he hits it with his hand the pressure on his hand isn't very large (since there's so much area of impact) and he won't get hurt; however, the force of impact is still transferred to the wood where the sharp point is touching, so the pressure is very high there (sharp point, get it?) and the nail goes into the wood. If this qi-master wants to impress me, he'd reverse the nail and slam the sharp point with his hand & drive the flat head into the wood. I'm willing to bet large sums of money that he'd only do this once.

On the stuff with the swords, if you stop the videos and look carefully, you can see the swords are not sharpened at all - they are basically pieces of metal about 1/8"-1/4" thick. That isn't going to cut someone. Now if they were to sharpen those swords up to be razor-sharp, then we'd see something interesting - perhaps like this (forward to about the 3:20 mark for the real action)...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Quote:

And something else , I want your opinion in this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hebr2ytgv2I

The explanation is contained within the video: he doesn't really experience any pain since he's used to it - a perfectly natural explanation. A bit impressive, but nothing paranormal or supernatural. Now, if he were to let me smash him in the balls with a 14-lb sledgehammer and he didn't experience a broken pelvis or any sever injury from it, that would be something.

You also have still not addressed my earlier questions upthread concerning the baseball bat and the Shaolin monk. Why not let a skeptic come in with their own aluminum baseball bat and have them take a swing at the monk's stomach or chest? Or the monk's knee, face, base of spine, etc? Why not allow the skeptic to stab at the monk's "iron shirt" with the skeptic's own sharpened knife? Why is it that the only people allowed to wield these weapons are the monk's assistants? Why do they always use their own equipment?

Please address those questions.

MattusMaximus · 15th August 2010, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by blue deamon

I completly agree with you , show me some one who Does not believe in qi power,
demonstrate throat bending spear on Documentary show like fight science
and I will accept it.

Seems to me like this guy, Terry Cole, who is a UK stuntman & martial artist (not a qi master from what I can see) - is performing your push-a-car-by-a-spear-in-the-throat trick, and he makes zero mention of qi/chi/ki...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

So, do you accept it?

Bikewer · 15th August 2010, 04:42 PM

OK, I watched the thing...
About the baseball bat... Let me hit him. The "monk" who wielded the bat pulled back harder than he struck to my eye.
The spear bending. Pretty much as I initially described, but the guy bends the spear himself, instead of having his assistant do the same thing.
The process is the same; the force is lost in bending the spear-shaft, not causing linear penetration.
And hitting him on the back adds nothing as any novice at physics knows.

11th August 2010, 11:15 AM	#1
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	mind over matter hello, I saw this video from national geographic channel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KArX8iNnY4Q They said that this feat (Bending the spear) is "defy science" And it is proof of existing qi energy Can this be real?
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

11th August 2010, 11:31 AM	#2
DallasDad Muse Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 688	No.
DallasDad Muse Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 688

11th August 2010, 11:46 AM	#3
Ladewig Hipster alien Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: not measurable Posts: 16,786	Quote: "this is the actual spear that was tested on the watermelon" C'mon. He is definitely in excellent shape, but the video does not convince me of Qi. The assistant who used the bat was "pulling the punch" as evidence by how quickly he pulled the bat back. Of course, as he tells it, he was pushed back by the master's powerful force. A teacher's students will often play along with demonstrations of the teacher's powers. Let someone else wield the bat, and I will be more convinced.
	__________________ Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board.

11th August 2010, 12:09 PM	#4
jakesteele Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 1,223	I was disappointed how they conducted the tests. The guy hit was considerably less force than the dummy and they the batman really stepped into the swing. Anybody who's played baseball or tennis knows that if you step into the swing too early you haven't reached max power and speed or if you swing too late you are past the point of max power and speed. Hence, as you saw by the psi, the guy didn't get hit as hard as the dummy. If you want to see people get hit full force and absorb it, watch MMA and guys getting kicked max power and speed in their guts or ribs. Most of the time they can absorb and incredible amount of abuse without going down. that the contact will be less than full force. you could also step in too late learns there is a perfect way to swing at the ball
	__________________ Occam’s Beard – The simplest solution isn’t always the best

11th August 2010, 12:48 PM	#5
Mirrorglass Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Northern Europe Posts: 3,474	Originally Posted by jakesteele I was disappointed how they conducted the tests. The guy hit was considerably less force than the dummy and they the batman really stepped into the swing. Anybody who's played baseball or tennis knows that if you step into the swing too early you haven't reached max power and speed or if you swing too late you are past the point of max power and speed. Hence, as you saw by the psi, the guy didn't get hit as hard as the dummy. If you want to see people get hit full force and absorb it, watch MMA and guys getting kicked max power and speed in their guts or ribs. Most of the time they can absorb and incredible amount of abuse without going down. that the contact will be less than full force. you could also step in too late learns there is a perfect way to swing at the ball Now that would be a scientific examination.
	__________________ _{When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less. -Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass}

11th August 2010, 01:14 PM	#6
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,667	From the "scientist" in the video: "So we'll be able to tell exactly how much force you generate [hitting the crash test dummy] and how much force your iron shirt [the Qi gong guy] can withstand." What bad methodology! There's no reason to believe both swings are the same. In fact, when they showed the motion tracking data, they calculated that the swing to the "iron shirt" guy delivered just over half the force delivered to the crash test dummy. (790 vs. 484 pounds of force.) So the one thing we know for certain is that the two swings were very different.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

11th August 2010, 01:18 PM	#7
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,667	And with the spear, the video showed it running through a watermelon. (They didn't show any measure of how much force was required to do so.) From the narration: "Since 'chi' is outside of science [blather about bringing in some martial arts experts to talk about how 'chi' works.]" What they mean is, "Since 'chi' is outside of science, we're only pretending to conduct something that looks like a test of easily testable claims without really testing those claims." One example of such a claim is that the force of the spear against the guy's throat was more than enough to break the trachea. That claim was never substantiated. Yet the narrator claims that this demonstration "defies science".
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons Last edited by JoeTheJuggler; 11th August 2010 at 01:22 PM.

11th August 2010, 01:36 PM	#8
sadhatter Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 5,743	You know i saw a good documentary on this exact phenomenon. I can't, for the life of me remember it though ( i was about maybe 11-13 at the time. So about 12 years ago.). From what i remember the spear tip is being bent with the bones around the eye as opposed to the eye itself. And the trick is to ( forgive my ignorance of medical terminology) not push on the point, but rather use the top part of your eye socket to apply pressure to the flat of the blade just below the spear point. In the documentary ( All i remember is it was a guy going to different woo claims such as this and speaking with someone willing to explain how they were done. Then doing them himself. ) the guy was able to preform the trick with a fair amount of bend in the spear within about a day or so.
sadhatter Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 5,743

11th August 2010, 03:42 PM	#9
Accidental Martyr Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry. Posts: 1,852	Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler From the "scientist" in the video: "So we'll be able to tell exactly how much force you generate [hitting the crash test dummy] and how much force your iron shirt [the Qi gong guy] can withstand." What bad methodology! There's no reason to believe both swings are the same. In fact, when they showed the motion tracking data, they calculated that the swing to the "iron shirt" guy delivered just over half the force delivered to the crash test dummy. (790 vs. 484 pounds of force.) So the one thing we know for certain is that the two swings were very different. Shouldn't they have used some sort of machine/device that swung the bat with the same force each time? Kind of like the way they test stuff on Mythbusters a lot of times?
	__________________ "Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile!" Kurt Vonnegut

11th August 2010, 04:44 PM	#10
dlorde Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,646	With the spear bending they always seem to do it in the same parts of the body (e.g. throat - the Shaolin monks do it the same way), and the stick breaking is always done by hitting fairly close to where the stick is held - using leverage and the momentum of the overhanging end of the stick to break it. I have seen wooden baseball bats broken with a shin strike, but this can go horribly wrong if the bat isn't held rigid at each end...
dlorde Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,646

11th August 2010, 05:11 PM	#11
fossilhound Thinker Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Whittier, CA, USA Posts: 174	I don't believe in qi necessarily, but I do believe that guy could kick my ass.

11th August 2010, 05:34 PM	#12
Skeptalk Scholar Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 92	Originally Posted by DallasDad No. I'm going with this guy.
Skeptalk Scholar Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 92

11th August 2010, 09:15 PM	#14
Steve001 Muse Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 533	I like to see what happens to that iron shirt if it were to meet a bat studded with nails. Something tells me that iron shirt would end up with a few holes in it.
Steve001 Muse Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 533

12th August 2010, 05:06 AM	#15
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Quote: Btw, here's a good example of what happens to these nuts when they try this sort of stuff out for real, instead of faking it (Warning: not for the squeamish) Thank you for this video it is a proof that the spear in the first video is real and could cause death to shaolin monk. Becuse both videos are taken from documentary channel so , both weapon (sward and spear) is real.
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

12th August 2010, 05:27 AM	#16
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Quote: With the spear bending they always seem to do it in the same parts of the body (e.g. throat - the Shaolin monks do it the same way) No, not necessary they can do it while the spear to the stomach http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZWGEJC3j9c But they usually select the weakest points on the body The problem is that all Skeptics say "If this energy actually exist , and people are willing to demonstrait it, then it could be studied by science and shown to be true." It actually studied by science but the Skeptics insist it just a trick I just can't understand why the documentary video didn't ,at least, proof the spear bending is not a trick
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

12th August 2010, 05:39 AM	#18
Bikewer Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: St. Louis, Mo. Posts: 9,517	I haven't looked at the video, since my squad-car computer lacks the software (they really don't like us to surf...) However, having seen many such, I can guess.... The "spear" is a very long, flexible steel item, correct? When the point is placed on the "master's" throat and pressure applied, the spear bends into an arc and the master is amazingly unharmed. Correct? All one need do is place the spearpoint deeply enough into the skin to prevent slipping, and then apply sideways force.... Looks terrific, doesn't it? The bat-breaking (or board breaking, or whatever) has been adequately explained above. In these demonstrations, the striking point is never at the "business end" of the board; it's always about halfway back from the tip, or even further. Momentum, which is maximum at the tip, results in the board breaking at the point of contact. Cheesy old "demonstrations" that have been long debunked. I am usually impressed by the National Geographic offerings. However, their "fight science" series (from which I presume this is taken) is really, seriously suspect.

12th August 2010, 06:09 AM	#19
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241	I would say the only few compelling cases for mind over matter (whatever the definition of that is, I'm not actually sure) is the experiment where people put on glasses where their vision was flipped upside down. After a week their mind had solved the problem (different theories exist as to how), by redistributing matter and neurons so they all now worked the right way up. Some think that a reflective type of neural mirror was generated to invert the picture back up. When they took the glasses off at the end everything was upside down still for a few days I recall. Interesting experiment anyway.
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241

12th August 2010, 09:11 PM	#20
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,175	Originally Posted by blue deamon But they usually select the weakest points on the body Why aren't kneecaps considered a weak point? Have you ever been kicked hard in the side of the knee? If so, you'll drop like a stone. Why not have someone smash an aluminum baseball bat into the Shaolin monk's kneecap? Better yet, why not take the hit square in the nose? Or the teeth? Or how about a nice, sharp knife stab to the eyeball? Don't any of those count as weak points?
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin' Last edited by MattusMaximus; 12th August 2010 at 09:30 PM.

13th August 2010, 07:48 AM	#22
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,507	Originally Posted by blue deamon No, not necessary they can do it while the spear to the stomach http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZWGEJC3j9c But they usually select the weakest points on the body The problem is that all Skeptics say "If this energy actually exist , and people are willing to demonstrait it, then it could be studied by science and shown to be true." It actually studied by science but the Skeptics insist it just a trick I just can't understand why the documentary video didn't ,at least, proof the spear bending is not a trick There is a well known principle of puncturing with a rapid thrust while slowing pushing a sharp object won't break the skin tension. And with the bed of nails the weight is distributed over the nails. When walking on hot coals the heat doesn't reach the actual skin. I'm not convinced the guy in your video doesn't have a well disguised device blocking the puncture point. But in all of these cases, the laws of physics are not being broken. There is no Qi magically preventing the swords from puncturing the skin. Your definition of a "trick" may differ from mine. Walking on coals or lying on a bed of nails are tricks if you don't understand the physics involved. Putting your weight on a sword and not having it skewer your belly is going to be either a trick with a hidden device, or it is going to be a sword with a tip that if one pushes into the belly slowly is not sharp enough to puncture the skin. Maybe you've been fooled here, but physics is physics. There is an explanation that does not involves some magical Qi.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

14th August 2010, 03:19 AM	#24
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Quote: Maybe you've been fooled here, but physics is physics. There is an explanation that does not involves some magical Qi. maybe I am been fooled , But what about the Scientists ,they fooled too? They don't know the physics ? And they don't know your "explanation that does not involves some magical Qi "?! You are looking at this scientific video in the same way you watch any other demonstration does not include scientists and measuring instruments. What is the Importance of Scientists if you will ignore them. (under proper observing conditions)
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Last edited by blue deamon; 14th August 2010 at 03:35 AM.

14th August 2010, 03:22 AM	#25
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Quote: Or how about a nice, sharp knife stab to the eyeball? Don't any of those count as weak points? And what do you think using the RPG? the power of qi has limits after all
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

14th August 2010, 05:56 AM	#26
Ladewig Hipster alien Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: not measurable Posts: 16,786	Originally Posted by blue deamon maybe I am been fooled , But what about the Scientists ,they fooled too? They don't know the physics ? And they don't know your "explanation that does not involves some magical Qi "?! You are looking at this scientific video in the same way you watch any other demonstration does not include scientists and measuring instruments. What is the Importance of Scientists if you will ignore them. (under proper observing conditions) Here's the problem. What was presented on the video was most certainly not science performed under proper observing conditions. In simplest terms, when it comes time to do a scientific experiment the most important aspect is to isolate the variable being studied. Without that step, the results are meaningless because the scientist cannot determine if the results of the experiment are based on the principle being studied or are based on some other difference that is introducing variability and other errors into the experiment. When experimenting on how powerful an "iron shirt qi stance" is, one cannot let the subject's assistant swing a bat. One needs an objective and consistent force applied in a precise, repeatable manner. This concept has already been mentioned in several posts. I could list all the other reasons why this performance is not science in any way, but all the reasons have already been listed in previous posts. Before you claim that this was science properly performed, you must address each issue that was previously raised. Of course, the simplest way to prove that what the qi master was doing is not beyond the realm of the normal is to have someone who has never studied qi perform the same tricks.
	__________________ Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board.

14th August 2010, 08:20 AM	#27
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	One other variable I noticed was that the assistant's front leg was still in front of the dummy when he connected. In the test his front leg appeared to go past his master causing the bat to make contact before it reached full speed. This and a lot of rehearsals would explain the nearly 50% drop in power. Fight science and other shows that attempt a scientific look at mysterious phenomenon always fall way short in my opinion. I am not a scientist but I can can come up with more rigid controls than they ever do. Also they always seem to leave occam's razor out of the list of possible explanations always ending with a, "we may never know!" type conclusion.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

14th August 2010, 09:51 PM	#29
majamin Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 309	Are TV channels hitting some kind of Nash Equilibrium where you have to present sensationalized, "sciencey" (i.e. watered-down pseudo-analysis) shows to keep an audience quota? I know this will sound like an appeal to nostalgia, channels like Discovery (which is still quite good), History Channel (Every Woo Under the Sun), TLC (Another Weird Family Channel), etc. used to be quite dedicated to "Learning" and "History", etc. They used to be much more specialized, and better, if I remember correctly. Anyways, this is somewhat of a rant, so feel free to ignore ...

15th August 2010, 12:52 AM	#30
7th sextile Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Hudson Valley NY Posts: 767	Two words : "Iron Cup".
	__________________ Remember the misses!

15th August 2010, 01:57 AM	#31
Halfcentaur Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 5,935	Originally Posted by majamin Are TV channels hitting some kind of Nash Equilibrium where you have to present sensationalized, "sciencey" (i.e. watered-down pseudo-analysis) shows to keep an audience quota? I know this will sound like an appeal to nostalgia, channels like Discovery (which is still quite good), History Channel (Every Woo Under the Sun), TLC (Another Weird Family Channel), etc. used to be quite dedicated to "Learning" and "History", etc. They used to be much more specialized, and better, if I remember correctly. Anyways, this is somewhat of a rant, so feel free to ignore ... I agree, what happened? I stopped watching TV around 1994-95 until around 2005, and I was stunned by the differences, like a time traveler out of sync with the collective pop culture. TLC was a channel about science and movie effects, like Discovery, and History was about ww2 and the revolution and the civil war. I like variety, but sensationalism seems to rule the day,..or air waves, these days.
Halfcentaur Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 5,935

15th August 2010, 02:05 AM	#32
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Quote: Of course, the simplest way to prove that what the qi master was doing is not beyond the realm of the normal is to have someone who has never studied qi perform the same tricks. I completly agree with you , show me some one who Does not believe in qi power, demonstrate throat bending spear on Documentary show like fight science and I will accept it.
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

15th August 2010, 02:28 AM	#33
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46	Originally Posted by MattusMaximus Ahem. I'm a physics professor, Can you make your own experiment to test that throat spear? And tell me please what is the correct experiment so I can do it by my self "isolate the variable being studied" Can you explain that to me? How can I do that in throat spear experiment? Quote: have personally performed many similar live demonstrations (the double bed of nails with a concrete block being broken by a sledgehammer, breaking boards with my hands & feet, walking barefoot on hot coals, walking barefoot on broken glass, being hit by a sledgehammer with an anvil on my chest, etc - Good , then you can do like this man http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbRkq...eature=related Quote: .. or even THIS (not for the squeamish)... YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. I AGREE I like this video So, here is Another episode from same show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a69y3nhMaZY Quote: So, what have you got to say to my post, blue demon? What I trying to say is : tell me what is the trick and how can I do it? ِAnd something else , I want your opinion in this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hebr2ytgv2I
blue deamon Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 46

15th August 2010, 04:52 AM	#34
7th sextile Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Hudson Valley NY Posts: 767	A point on the spear (sorry) : The computer generated graphics showing the spear vs trachea start at about 6:44 on the video and run to about 7:00.In the CPG the spear point is a flattened pyramid whose edges form an isosceles triangle with relatively large base angles , I believe the technical term is "pointy". Now go back to about 5:36 for a quick (don't blink) look at the actual spear.The head doesn't come to a point,it's a gently rounded,almost flat tip.(Strange:the camera pans downward after less than a second).This is just after the "spear through the melon" shot,which as Skeptic Ginger suggested,has more to do with the spear's velocity (pace Mattmax , I mean momentum) than the sharpness of the spear.This sort of apples to oranges,or watermelon to windpipe comparisons are an annoying feature of what I'm starting to think of as "psteudio" science. Certainly if a bona fide TV show wishes to call such an object "a steel tipped bamboo spear " who am I to argue,but has anyone seen the like of it ? I wouldn't want to hunt anything except maybe butter with that handsome article,much less fight with it.(Warrior : "I'm looking for an accurate throwing spear." Armorer :Check out the point on this baby-it'll shish-kebab four enemy scum with one toss!" Warrior : I'm kinda looking for something that will really annoy them but not break the skin?" Armorer : "You mean a Qi-Gong 'spear'?Sure,we got those-comes with a free watermelon."
	__________________ Remember the misses!

15th August 2010, 05:46 AM	#35
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	Originally Posted by Bikewer I haven't looked at the video, since my squad-car computer lacks the software (they really don't like us to surf...) However, having seen many such, I can guess.... The "spear" is a very long, flexible steel item, correct? When the point is placed on the "master's" throat and pressure applied, the spear bends into an arc and the master is amazingly unharmed. Correct? All one need do is place the spearpoint deeply enough into the skin to prevent slipping, and then apply sideways force.... Looks terrific, doesn't it? The bat-breaking (or board breaking, or whatever) has been adequately explained above. In these demonstrations, the striking point is never at the "business end" of the board; it's always about halfway back from the tip, or even further. Momentum, which is maximum at the tip, results in the board breaking at the point of contact. Cheesy old "demonstrations" that have been long debunked. I am usually impressed by the National Geographic offerings. However, their "fight science" series (from which I presume this is taken) is really, seriously suspect. I agree.If ten guys with weighted pool cues set upon one of those super fighters that they have on there,they would beat the crap out of him.In the Bruce Lee movies the baddies always lined up to take their turn,lol.

15th August 2010, 06:51 AM	#36
Ladewig Hipster alien Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: not measurable Posts: 16,786	Originally Posted by blue deamon Can you make your own experiment to test that throat spear? And tell me please what is the correct experiment so I can do it by my self "isolate the variable being studied" Can you explain that to me? Sure. The claim is that qi power allows a master to adopt a physical disposition in which his skin and body are less susceptible to damage than those of a non-qi master. [correct me if I have misstated the claim]. In order to test that we need to precisely calculate how susceptible to damage people who haven't studied qi are and then precisely calculate how susceptable to damage people who have studied qi are. Watching a qi master break a bamboo "spear" in this manner fails to be science on two counts. First, there is no objective measure. Second, there is no baseline to compare the master's performance to. Originally Posted by blue deamon How can I do that in throat spear experiment? You can't. At least you can't without putting your life in jeopardy. But what scientists can do is devise a test to determine the accuracy of the original claim. If the master's body becomes "like iron." Then we could take a knife with a 2 cm blade and apply it with a measured amount of force (perhaps with a spring of other device) to a non-critical part of the master's body (e.g. the same place he took the bat hit). We could then apply the same amount of force with the same knife on someone who hasn't studied qi. Several years ago, I saw Siegfried and Roy make a tiger disappear. Do I believe that they can send large animals into other dimensions? No. A few days I ago I saw a video of a qi master breaking a spear. Do I believe that he has harnessed a life force in such a way that makes his body dramatically less pervious to damage? No. . . . . . . . . . . . Originally Posted by 7th sextile Two words : "Iron Cup". well played.
	__________________ Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board. Last edited by Ladewig; 15th August 2010 at 06:54 AM.

15th August 2010, 12:36 PM	#37
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	I saw David Copperfield being cut in half by a huge buzzsaw and he joined himself together again.His chi must be off the scale.

15th August 2010, 04:42 PM	#40
Bikewer Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: St. Louis, Mo. Posts: 9,517	OK, I watched the thing... About the baseball bat... Let me hit him. The "monk" who wielded the bat pulled back harder than he struck to my eye. The spear bending. Pretty much as I initially described, but the guy bends the spear himself, instead of having his assistant do the same thing. The process is the same; the force is lost in bending the spear-shaft, not causing linear penetration. And hitting him on the back adds nothing as any novice at physics knows.