Ted:

If the experiment was just for intent to choose which set was the one with the best results, the whole experiment is meaningless. Then there is no evidence of any improvement on the patients, therefore, what's the point of talking about it in a workshop about Consciousness?

Again, if the original data does not change, then nothing has changed and the whole analysis was all a waste of time.

Your description, Tom's and the paper cited by Seven about these experiments don't make sense, IMO.

Why do you keep locking threads Ted? Why don't you just only post yourself, then, and all the rest can read what you post?

Claudio

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

It's just data.

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Claudio,

Tom did not propose these experiments. I did not propose these experiments. Why can you not see what is in front of your nose? Those who did these experiments were attempting to demonstrate backwards causation, changing the past. Where is your mind that you cannot understand the words that are written there. They thought that they were changing the health of patients by praying for them. That somehow they were in fact changing what had happened in the past. Perhaps they thought that they were in fact changing the data that was recorded originally on the hard drive as you keep ranting on about. Tom is describing what they did instead of what they thought they did. Wake up and understand. Tom is describing what could have happened instead of what the experimenters thought happened. We have no way of looking at specific data points and demonstrating how they were changed by intent. But we can say in general what happened. They did not change the past as they intended by their prayer, which they could not do. They changed the future which has been demonstrated to be possible in many experimental set ups. Rolling dice and such where deviations from the expected chance results are regularly produced, by the application of intent to modify the normally random effect. Are you deliberately being so obtuse for some reason related to me? Is your anger, ego or something so overwhelming in its control over you that it prevents you from seeing such things demonstrably based upon elementary logic?

Those threads are locked as a record, a monument, to Brandon's obtuseness and other silliness. You contributed your own share. Brandon is also locked out from posting on the forums. He can enter and read but not post. He is not banned. He is on vacation until when and if he seriously promises to do better and asks to be let back in, if ever. I expect that he will stalk off in a huff and tell his 'friends' all about his mistreatment. I doubt if he will ask to be allowed back. He has been daring me to ban him for some time. The absurdity just finally reached a point where I pulled the plug. He had more than a fair share of second chances. You read all of his posts. He feels that we are all deluded fools, that he is just as he says, wonderful and marvelous and possessed of marvelous knowledge beyond the capabilities or mere normal humans. He in his own words knows more than most practicing physicists with degrees despite the fact that he has not yet completed his first undergraduate degree and that not even in the field of physics. He clearly, although not in so many words, admitted that he had lied. He in his own words considers 89% of humans to be idiots, his own specific words. He came back later and tried to weasel out from under the idiocies by saying, of course I consider myself to be among the 89%, but that is a mere afterthought when he realized just what he was revealing about his thought processes. Wake up from the dream. Snap out of it.

Ted

I have yet to see some actual thinking from you.

http://familiartofew.files.wordpress.co ... cepalm.jpg


Edit: http://www.imglols.com/wp-content/main/ ... e-door.jpg

_________________
Is time the wheel that turns, or the track it leaves behind? - Kelstar's Riddle
Adam was a rough draft.

To whom are you referring JINKIES? Ambiguity got us here. If you are referring to Ted, and considering that Ted is the moderator on this board, your thinking seems odd, or maybe you just get off on insulting the moderator on the boards you frequent. Who knows? You are a troll, no?

If you are referring to Claudio it is still disrespectful so I ask you to go back under they rock yee wandered out from.

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

I have to admit that I did not fully grasp what Tom was pointing to in that study. That isn't to say that it was not described well, I just had not spent much time with it. I get it now though. It relates to the notion that if I find a lump in my side... at that point, before it has been examined or biopsied, it could be cancerous or it could be a benign tumor (or some other cause). At that stage, intent has the potential to alter the outcome.

So if before going to have the lump looked at, I spend a week healing myself via intent... or perhaps as the focus of the the healing swat team for example; then the outcome might more easily be altered. This would still allow for some uncertainty. Was I actually healed? Was there ever any cancer in the first place? It is not possible to prove either way and thus it remains uncertain. That is the point.

However, if I was to go to the doctor right away and then find out that the lump was in fact cancerous, then the data would have already been read. In that case it is less likely that intent will alter the outcome. It could happen and there are reports of such cases, but they remain rare and unprovable.... thus still allowing for uncertainty. Focusing time and energy to study such "miracle" cases or to conduct some type of controlled study would prove futile in terms of uncovering any solid proof. There might be a few interesting findings, but nothing solid or substantial. It would remain as interesting, but in the "fringe" no doubt... thus allowing for uncertainty.

This is also true in terms of the hospital stay study. There is just enough about it that one cannot say with certainty that the intent altered the coin toss. We can formulate ideas and theories, but because of the rule set and the necessity for uncertainty, no solid evidence will be uncovered. This is why the paranormal remains outside of the norm. It is just enough to work as nudges here and there, but never enough to violate the PMR rule set. This all allows for a seemingly solid and stable "physical" learning environment. Too much paranormal and the unique advantages and learning opportunities of PMR would be lost. Just like kindergartners; they get a few short recesses, but the trick is to keep them focused on what is going on in the classroom (that is the reason they are at school after all).


Claudio,
I can only see your (and Brandon's) search(es) leading to one of two things: a finding that might support a PMR centric view (normal remains normal and fringe remains fringe), or just more uncertainty. This is the very process that the MBT model describes.

Consider Uri Geller. There is some evidence to support the idea that he had paranormal abilities when he was first working with Targ and Puthoff. However, later he was exposed as a fraud. It is a possibility that he did in fact have paranormal abilities for a time, but when he attempted to show the world or when too many started hearing about it... his abilities vanished or faded. Mention the name Uri Geller now and the normal reaction is, "oh, he was exposed as a fraud years ago." So in this way, a large nudge occurred, but there remains no proof. A nice LCS cover up in the name of growth. This is the reason that James Randi will mostly like never have to give his one million dollars away. How is what you or Brandon are trying to do any different than Randi? In all cases, truth and proof are being sought outside of self.

There is no logic is saying that the MBT model which predicts these types of uncertain outcomes is wrong because there are some uncertain outcomes regarding the cited studies. That is a key point in the MBT model. Do you see that the MBT model says that the MBT model will not be able to be proven because of the MBT model. Figure that one out. It could be seen as a circular agreement, but again... it allows for uncertainty. The point.

This type of search will not (as I see it) lead you to any real proof, truth, or understanding. Truth and understanding must begin with self... not some hospital study, or idea, or theory, or QM, or MBT. It all occurs with self. It is the only way. I tried in vain to point this out to Brandon. Yes, it is true that information along the way can be helpful, but those bits of information are just guideposts along our path. They are not facts to hold tightly. They should be set down and the focus should be returned to self.

This of course is my humble opinion, and is based on my own limited understanding.

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

Ted. Let me know when you lift Brandon's lock to post. I am not posting in the board till you lift that, independent on if Brandon would like to post again or not. Once you restate him, I'll post again.

In those threads who should have been banned was Bette. She started to screw it up with your full support (how convenient).

The problems that this Ted-Bette combination creates won't be solved by just removing Claudio and Brandon, IMO.

Later (may be). I will email Tom in the meantime, till I am told when Brandon's lock is release.

Claudio

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

Claudio

For the first time I think you are completely missing the point. Ted is 100% correct here. Read the "backward causation" thread again, it was all hashed out there, also to much confusion.
In Tom's view stats were shuffled by intent, period, not the outcomes.

Seven

Claudio,

Are you sure that you don't want to rethink that? I stated that Brandon is locked out from posting until he asks to be let back in. I do not intend to change that. He has had way more second chances than he deserves. Was Bette right when she asked to be invited to your wedding to Brandon? I missed the comment you made about Bette and I getting married and wondered what in the hell she meant when I first saw that. Ever heard the phrase, 'hoist by your own petard'? That applies here in two ways. You made a joke about Bette and I. She turned it around on you. Now you are locking yourself to Brandon's decision as to whether to ask to be let in to post again. Brandon is out until he so asks. Are you sure that you wish to be 'hoist by your own petard' for the second time by locking your future on the board to Brandon's. Will Brandon ask to be allowed to post again? That is his key to be let back in, although the lock will be slow to turn as well. If he rants on elsewhere about how he was treated here and continues to insult Tom, that lock will not turn. Your leaving is not any threat to induce me to let Brandon in without his asking and without his good behavior demonstrated elsewhere as well. It is your choice. It is my opinion that you have attached yourself entirely too much already to Brandon and his thinking. It has not been good for you. You both could gain a lot and learn a lot by interacting here on the board although you have shown precious little sign of it so far. That is my sincere regret out of all of this, the potential loss to you and Brandon of what you might learn here, presuming that you could learn here.

Ted

Claudio, something to consider is that with you and Brandon not posting, the forum may likely settle and return to more respectful interaction. I don't mean this to be an insult or to place blame on you or Brandon only. It is just an observation and surly something worth considering if your ultimate goal is growth. There would seem to be a great deal of feedback in this. Despite what my good intentions are and regardless of how polite my words might be... If I walk into a room and the mood of the room shifts in a negative direction, then I must consider this feedback yes?

The key limiting factor in understanding and uncovering of truth is self, but self is the only way through which truth and knowing can be found. It is our ego, fears, and beliefs that prevent us from seeing the truth... and our ego, fears, and beliefs that also prevent us from seeing our ego, fears, and beliefs. The burden of proof (truth) is on self in this way. As I see it, it is not even a matter of uncovering truth so much. The truth is not hiding really... it is more that our limitations prevent us from seeing and understanding it properly. I would say though that it is no accident that we have these limitations, but the fact remains that the burden is on self to deal with and grow out of these limitations. Do you see that this makes the correctness of Tom's model, the hospital study, and the double slit experiment less relevant to finding your personal truths? These things can only serve as guidepost but not the actual foundation. That foundation is built up through self and your direct experience.

I can say "look, Tom's model does not line up with mine, or study X is meaningless". This is to put the burden of truth on other as apposed to self. It will only lead in circles it seems.

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

Within a big picture one's presence or absence can make a difference for oneself only. This is one of the biggest mistakes to assume, that a particular person is a driven force behind development of others.

Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.

This is NOT what I said, I said "invite me (or us) to your wedding, or yours." I never said Cluadio were marrying Brandon, I said invite me to the wedding you (Claudio) aren't having too, basically, because I'm not the marrying kind, and will not be getting married.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Bette,

Sorry for the misunderstanding. It seemed like such a natural, 'made in heaven', as they have been working so closely together that the concept just swept me away. I knew you didn't say that. I just thought that was what you were hinting at.

Ted

Claudio, I understand that you are not directly posting to the forum until Brandon's return, but I think that it is important to keep this conversation in the open. I trust that you are comfortable with me adding your PM here.



Claudio,

Maybe you are misunderstanding what I mean. Think about it, I am the only one that is in charge of my own growth. It does not make sense to look to other. I am no better or worse than you. We all make choices and we get feedback from those choices. Why turn your back on the feedback? I'm not talking about feedback as in what I am writing or what somebody else might post to you. I'm talking about the current situation you are in with regards to the forum. Is it not because of other, is is because of self... no matter how to look at it. You are the common denominator in every one or your situations, in the same way that I am the common denominator in every one of my situations. If I am angry, depressed, sad, mad, jealous, it is self, not other.

To focus on self is not to be self centered. It is to say with humility:
"I am not perfect and have many limitations (such as ego and fear).. some of those limitations I can see but have yet to overcome. Many limitations I have yet to even consider. For this reason, I must assume that my perspective of truth and all things is skewed based on these limitations. Therefor to see things more as they actually are, I must work on self."

This is why truth and experience are so subjective. This is why we must taste the pudding ourselves. This is why the double slit and hospital stay study are not all that important in the big picture. Are either one going to change who you are at the being level? Will either one help you to let go of some ego? On the other hand, will honest introspection as to the why of your actions and reactions create being level changes or support removal of some ego. Yes, it is much more likely this way. This is what I mean when I say that we must look to self to find truth.

The beauty is that as we peel away some of those layers of ego and fear, we begin to see that we are in fact our higher self, our higher self's higher self... we are AUO, we are all that is... we are already what which we are growing toward. You, me, Brandon, Ted, Tom, Bette, Frank, Jill, Sally, Bernard, Joe, everybody... we are all the same. The difference is that we each have a unique set of limitations from which to grow. The process of growing back to that state (so to speak) is the evolutionary experience that causes all to grow. In this way each of our paths is unique, but each leads to the same place. So to turn to self is to admit our limitations and then focus our attention on growing out of those limitations (that is why we exist as Claudio and Justin!). In this way we are not being self centered, but are growing to become better, more loving, more caring, more compassionate. One cannot set out to be more loving and then expect to grow as a result. It happens the other way around. We grow by working on our own limitations and then by default become a little bit better, more loving, more compassionate, etc. And so on...

I truly mean no harm Claudio. I claim to be no better or worse. The homeless drunk on the street corner may be 1000 times wiser than any of us here. There is no way to know for sure. It is irrelevant to my or your growth. Many, many, many times I have been standing in a thick fog and the system through various means lets me know this. Maybe it is through a post from Ted or you. Maybe it is a song on the radio, a dream, a book, a NPMR experience. The point is that, from my current perspective, you are standing in a patch of fog. Again my own perspective is skewed by my limitations, but I don't now Claudio... you are sure getting a lot of the same feedback. The only way to know for sure is to turn to self... listen to your thoughts honestly and with a great deal of humility. This is what I mean when I say truth is found through self.

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

I'm sensing a lot of tension here today, but I'm noticing it everywhere I look, lately. I have been doing very well (I thought) spreading love and joy, being mindfull of my thoughts and intentions, using all of my tools (right thinking, right action, right speech, mindfullness...) to reduce fear and entropy and to become a (loving) force for good. When suddenly I wanted to fight someone who tried to cut me off while I was driving. lol, I've been trying to figure out what the cause of this is in my consciousness when I noticed three different arguments broke out in my office today. Then I started thinking about all the tensions in egypt, and around the world. Finally, I see conflict here too. The place where I found the most highly evolved beings I've ever found in one group. My point is, I guess I am just wondering if there is some negative energy influencing us at this time. I never hear any talk in this forum about 2012, but I have some theories that chaos might be getting ready to peak before order and a new paradigm can be firmly established. Now some of you might find this amusing but, we should be especially carefull to gaurd our thoughts (against negativity, fear, and hate) in these coming days. and remember , we cannot defeat anger with anger, we cannot defeat evil with evil, and in the immortal words of Marvin Gaye "only love can conquer hate"


peace
patrick

_________________
LOVE is the answer

peace
patrick