Well, Ted.

I am trying to see what constitutes a good working theory on this forum, and where the limits on the working theories are set. Leaving the teleportation aside for a moment, this is what I am observing:

– An explanation that builds on a statement that "Magic is not real" can be a well regarded explanation. A good explanation must be factual, it can't contain statements similar to that.
– A statement such as "You are highly unlikely to convince any of us that David Copperfield, who is a well known illusionist, is actually performing 'magic'" appears manipulative to me, again, one needs to use facts in explaining things. Using a phrase "who is a well known illusionist" immediately sets limits on your perception. Phrases such as these do not belong in debate. Come'on, he is an illusionist! That surely can't be a good argument.

Telekinesis also needs to be explained. The referenced fragment was done by a CNN crew and shown on CNN.

If this were really teleportation, there is a possible benefit that offsets the fact that he is making money from the shows. That benefit is that of "The world is not what it seems to be".

Let's not fall into the trap of "LCS wouldn't allow that!" because he is making money!

In the parallel thread, there is yet another link that shows materialization of water. I had an interesting reply to that post: "He is just an illusionist, and he doesn't claim to be anything else."

Do you see a pattern in the replies?

I see the pattern that no rational explanation satisfies or is acceptable you. I see the pattern that explaining teleportation as being no problem in a VR but that it requires conditions to be met, as we understand things per Toms model and books makes no difference to you. I see the pattern that you ignore reasonable and rational questions in favor of obfuscation. A pattern observed here before. To repeat: Ted

Advancing and evolving is my purpose. I came across an interesting book and theory (MBT) and just exploring things that always puzzled me using this new instrument. Also, I hope to find individuals that perhaps can point things out for me, so that I can try to focus better when I come to the appropriate chapters in the books.

Teleportation, telekinesis, materialization are amongst things that I am looking to understand. Remote viewing, OBE, etc. are too of great interest.

So far, I am having no success, but I am hoping to find my answers anyways.

I hope this answers your question.

саша,

Searching for the things that you ask about with Tom Campbell (twcjr) as author on the board produces the following results.

Teleportation: nothing.

Telekinesis: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2726&p=3548&hilit=telekinesis#p3548 There are 2 other posts and you may search for them yourself. This post tells the most and basically tells what I said previously.

Materialization: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2723&p=3512&hilit=materialization#p3512 The only post found. It has a lot else on other subjects and there is more 'upstream' about materialization within the thread that Tom referred to as answering that persons question but you may not be interested since I was the one that provided the answer.

I will leave it to you to go to the online complete posting of Tom's books and search for these words within the books. Here is the link: http://books.google.com/books?id=RYHtBP ... &q&f=false

You might also look at the model write up on the Wiki: http://wiki.my-big-toe.com/index.php/Th ... _Link_Page It might help get you oriented.

Ted

cawa,

Illusions are fun and they do exist... as tricks of our perception.

Anomalies, and various psi phenomenon also exist within the limitations of the PUP.

Copperfield could be teleporting. Most would think it is an illusion, so the PUP would not be violated per say. However, because he is a known, professional illusionist; it is most likely that it is just an illusion (masterfully done). Still though, it is within the realm of possibility that he is actually teleporting. The best you can do is make a logical guess and carry on. It is not wise to hold any potential answer too tightly. Most of us will not likely ever know for certain what Copperfield is doing. Latching onto one answer is like pouring concrete around your feet and trying to connivence others to join you. This is the danger of being a believer of anything be it religion, MBT, or elfs.



The problem is that you are seeking answers from books and videos. Such things can provide nudges, guideposts, and hints, but not answers. Real answers come from experience, not analysis. If you find interest in psi topics, then set down your ego, loosen your grip on Copperfield, set your intent on evolving the quality of your consciousness, and follow that drive to explore such things through personal experience.



P.S. open-mindedness does not equate to people agreeing with you :)

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Sasha,
(latin writing for "саша" in cyrillic)

take a step or two backwards from yours to get a broader view.

Consider Tom Campells model of reality - and things like this might still appear to be "myserious" as neighter you nor anyone else can provide a valid explanation from whithin this (our) physical reality - except some kind of elaborate deception, which you will not by into,
while there are other valid explanations apart from eighter deception or the "reality" of "telekinesis" / "teleportation" to be the only options available.

All the best!

I find this series of videos from Derren Brown to just completely baffle me....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElGynnts7Ps

I was only able to figure out how he did one of the many tricks in that evening.

There are many tricks that I would just swear are psi phenomena/crazy intuition but he claims that there's nothing supernatural to what he's doing. Open-minded scepticism and all that...

The Copperfield trick was good and if you liked it try Derren Brown.

_________________
Mike

I love illusionists, David Copperfield included.

Back in the day, in my twenties I worked in Las Vegas as a casino cocktail waitress.. At one point I was working the stage show of an up and coming illusionist named Steve Wyrick. His grand finale at the time was making a plane, the size of his entire stage disappear. We'd be in there setting up for the show and he and his assistants would be practicing. I got to see how everything was done. It's interesting, because knowing did not make the illusions less interesting, but rather the reverse. I watched the Copperfield video linked in the original thread. I saw the same set of 'gadgets and tricks' being used. His teleporting is most definitely an illusion. But a very enjoyable, and skillful one. This said, I do feel teleporting within this PMR is possible. I even suspect it is on my docket. Off to watch the Derren Brown video now!, fun fun.


Casey

back when medium John Edward was on the tele I had the opportunity to ask a distant relative, who is a stage manager for a famous NYC based show, about Crossing Over, Edward's now cancelled TV show.

The stage crew on the Broadway based shows know each other and move around jobwise. The relative is not spiritual or religious, and I saw an opportunity to gather some unbiased data regarding the validity of his apparently astonishing readings.

His response was that it was accepted knowledge that there were no tricks being employed, and that basically the crew community found it all a bit spooky.

John Edward was sort of my gateway drug before investigating Spiritualism, which is likely the closest legacy model that exists to MBTOE.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?