Solar storm watch

[AndyH]

It's science and it works - often very well.

Extraordinary claims i.e. things that contradict physics as we know it today need extraordinary proofs.

Let us just say I don't agree with it - and leave it at that.

Science only knows what it knows - and some of that is proven wrong from time to time. "Newton's Laws" for example, aren't laws any longer.

The point of science it to explore and expand the knowns in a methodical way. A scientist with a closed mind is worthless, yes? Science has been exploring other parts of the human condition for a very long time - and within the last 10 or so years quantum physicists have come half way around to meeting parapsychologists coming the other way.

Sign up for a Gateway Voyage at TMI in Virginia, or at IONS in California. It'll either change your view of life - or you'll leave very relaxed -- either way it's a plus! :lol:

 

[AndyH]

Quantum Physics is part of Physics.

Here is something interesting to read about ...

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

You did not just whip-out a strawman, did you?

Because this beer glass is clear absolutely means that all beer glasses are clear - therefore there can be no blue or green beer glass. Ever.
:lol:

 

[evnow]

The point of science it to explore and expand the knowns in a methodical way. A scientist with a closed mind is worthless, yes? Science has been exploring other parts of the human condition for a very long time - and within the last 10 or so years quantum physicists have come half way around to meeting parapsychologists coming the other way.

If & when they meet - and we have established science, I'll change my view.

The basic way science works is by being sceptical about claims not yet proven.

 

[AndyH]

The point of science it to explore and expand the knowns in a methodical way. A scientist with a closed mind is worthless, yes? Science has been exploring other parts of the human condition for a very long time - and within the last 10 or so years quantum physicists have come half way around to meeting parapsychologists coming the other way.

If & when they meet - and we have established science, I'll change my view.

The basic way science works is by being sceptical about claims not yet proven.

Proven to whom? The folks doing this work aren't skeptical about it.

Folks tend to say "I'll believe it when I see it" - and yet their belief creates mental blocks that keep them from seeing the mustard even when it's right in front of their faces. In reality, we won't see it until we believe it's possible.

 

[evnow]

Proven to whom?

There are well established ways of proving things - peer reviewed articles in science journals giving details of controlled, repeatable experiments.

 

[AndyH]

Proven to whom?

There are well established ways of proving things - peer reviewed articles in science journals giving details of controlled, repeatable experiments.

(this is light - no harassment intended! )
Yes? Continue! Are you suggesting that these might not exist for some topics? Is there a specific topic that might interest you?

Have you ever been in a car crash that you saw coming?

edit

http://irva.org/remote-viewing/definition.html

Most reports of paranormal events come from outside the science lab, and when research is done on these cousins of RV, it is somewhat like examining the natural history of some specimen brought in from the wild. When clairvoyance (RV's closest relative) was done under controlled conditions for research purposes, it was generally targeted at such things as cards or colors, since these sorts of targets allowed easy scoring of experimental results. Remote viewing, on the other hand, was actually developed and first explored in a research setting (more about this in the history section). And the sorts of targets used for RV research differed from those typically used in other psi research. Targets chosen for "viewing" include geographic locations, hidden objects, and even such things as archaeological sites and space objects about which it was expected that ground truth would eventually become known, so that the viewer's accuracy could be checked.

INFORMATION TRANSMISSION UNDER CONDITIONS OF SENSORY SHIELDING
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...s6DrCw&usg=AFQjCNGRSIpClXF9gBIQsPwaCXHgS7N4_Q

(One of many published by the IEEE...)
A PERCEPTUAL CHANNEL FOR INFORMATION TRANSFER OVER KILOMETER DISTANCES: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND RECENT RESEARCH
http://www.espresearch.com/espgeneral/IEEE-printC.html

Information transmission in remote viewing experiments
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v284/n5752/abs/284191a0.html

CIA-Initiated Remote Viewing at Stanford Research Institute
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html

Regardless of one's a priori position, however, an unimpassioned observer cannot help but attest to the following fact. Despite the ambiguities inherent in the type of exploration covered in these programs, the integrated results appear to provide unequivocal evidence of a human capacity to access events remote in space and time, however falteringly, by some cognitive process not yet understood. My years of involvement as a research manager in these programs have left me with the conviction that this fact must be taken into account in any attempt to develop an unbiased picture of the structure of reality.

 

[LakeLeaf]

Not to frighten anyone, but Gordon Michael Scallion, a well-known futurist, and another futurist who lives in the White Mountains of AZ, made a map of what the U.S. will look like after 2012. He renamed CA as the Isles of California.

At 6300 feet - I think I'm safe! But maybe I'll have both lake views and ocean views.

 

[AndyH]

Not to frighten anyone, but Gordon Michael Scallion, a well-known futurist, and another futurist who lives in the White Mountains of AZ, made a map of what the U.S. will look like after 2012. He renamed CA as the Isles of California.

At 6300 feet - I think I'm safe! But maybe I'll have both lake views and ocean views.

How long can you tread water?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0KHt8xrQkk[/youtube]

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The movie 2012 Is for entertainment purposes only.

Anyone who views it as anything other Then that should be
... then again, they probly could not understand what i am saying right now anyway so i will stop

 

[AndyH]

The movie 2012 Is for entertainment purposes only.

Anyone who views it as anything other Then that should be
... then again, they probly could not understand what i am saying right now anyway so i will stop

Anyone think it's about cashing in on people's fear?

 

[AndyH]

The point of science it to explore and expand the knowns in a methodical way. A scientist with a closed mind is worthless, yes? Science has been exploring other parts of the human condition for a very long time - and within the last 10 or so years quantum physicists have come half way around to meeting parapsychologists coming the other way.

If & when they meet - and we have established science, I'll change my view.

The basic way science works is by being sceptical about claims not yet proven.

Found this item this evening. It (among other papers and experiences) makes me think that we'll not have 'established science' until well after there's a critical mass of people laughing at the deniers. (That's not correct, though, as there's plenty of science.)

Here's an example of the damage perpetuated by closed minds. This doesn't bode well for 'science'...

Blackburn (1) recently noted that many of our most talented young people are "turned off" to science: as a solution, he proposed that we recognize the validity of a more sensuous-intuitive approach to nature, treating it as complementary to the classical intellectual approach.

I have seen the same rejection of science by many of the brightest students in California, and the problem is indeed serious. Blackburn's analysis is valid, but not deep enough. A more fundamental source of alienation is the widespread experience of altered states of consciousness (ASC's) by the young, coupled with the almost total rejection of the knowledge gained during the experiencing of ASC's by the scientific establishment. Blackburn himself exemplifies this rejection when he says: "Perhaps science has much to learn along this line from the disciplines, as distinct from the content, of Oriental religions" (my italics).

States of Consciousness and State-Specific Sciences, Charles Tart, Published in Science, 1972, Vol. 176, 1203-1210.
http://www.paradigm-sys.com/ctt_articles2.cfm?id=53

Let me know if you'd like to be a target for a remote viewing experiment.