Psychokinesis: Airflow, heat or psi?

So, it seems I can spin a psi wheel with the power of my mind (see previous post). Or am I being fooled by subtle drafts of air flowing through the room? Or is it perhaps the heat from my hands generating a convection current? Let’s test these theories …

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

48 thoughts on “Psychokinesis: Airflow, heat or psi?

  1. mike q says:

    You’ve done a good job of showing how little effect exterior influences have on the wheel. But the one for me still remains; your breath. If you drop into a slightly medetive state your breathing would become regular, and provide a flow of air in the general direction of the wheel, I’m not saying that this is what’s causing it to move, just that is what others could say, maybe one of those face masks to hold back your breath would help, or anything to block your breathing in the general direction of the wheel.

  2. Darryl Sloan says:

    Hi, Mike.

    To my own satisfaction, I’ve established that breath is not an issue. In fact, I felt that was the easiest one to debunk. In the first set of videos, you can clearly see the psi wheel continue to spin uniformly, in a self-perpetuating way, while I turn my head away from it and talk. I also place it on my knee and hold it up to my forehead. During the period where the wheel is on the table and I’m using my hands, my head is much higher up. In all of these varied circumstances, with no care taken about where my mouth is in relation to the wheel, it’s not reasonably possible that I could consistently produce uni-directional, horizontal movements with my breath.

  3. Ralph says:

    I never considered breath to have an influence since sometimes I hold my breath and the motion continues indefinetely. As for the video I think it shows that yes, it is influenced by other forces but they really move it in a different manner, kind of shaky and vertically.

    I think I will try and do one of these videos myself tomorrow and see if I can rule certain things out.

  4. Paulie says:

    Interesting, the movement is definitely different, more stable and relaxed, while you’re doing it, rather than external forces.
    I still think the breathing could be an issue, not because you’re breathing ‘on’ it, but more because your breathing will have slowed and become relaxed (as you mentioned yourself, it works better when relaxed), and as a result the air will be less jumpy, more constant and stable, which could cause a difference in the general air currents in the room, even if you’re breathing in another direction.

    I’d imagine the fan from the fire would be more powerful than breath, causing a jumpy flow of air, more forced, again a big difference from a slow, relaxed breathing while you meditate.

  5. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    All I can do is encourage you to watch the other videos again carefully, particularly in part 2, where I’m standing at the cooker and I turn my head away and talk; also the tail end of part 2 and its continuation in part 3, where I do some more talking.

    What you’re saying about breathing just doesn’t fit the results I’m getting.

    The only reasonable explanations I’m left with are:
    (a) something about the body, other than heat, that we’re not taking into account;
    (b) genuine psi power (whatever that is).

  6. Stacey says:

    Darryl,

    A better way of eliminating environmental effects as a cause is to set up two wheels next to each other and leave one as a control while you’re trying to move the other.

    I think the real point here is that you can’t really know or prove that it’s your mind moving the wheel when it can move without your intent. Nobody’s saying you aren’t moving it, and it’s obvious you are wholeheartedly convinced.

    But what’s the big deal? Isn’t what you were looking for here a proof of the soul? I think proof, as I’ve said before and others have said as well, isn’t going to happen here. If the wheel moves you can easily say “I did that!” and if not then you can say “I wasn’t concentrating enough” or “I was concentrating too much!” But the wheel may or may not move without your will. So the most you can do is give people good reasons to believe you moved it with your mind. But then, aren’t we back to square one? People choose to believe in the psi-wheel, just as they must choose to believe in a soul.

    So why waste our time on such a triviality? Amusing or interesting as it may be, wouldn’t you rather get to the material points of life and reality and spirituality? I’d like to see some more blog posts and discussions on such matters, like your post about the problems you saw with Christianity. I think it’s really good to address those issues, or we’ll never better understand anything or get any closer to the truth. Anyways, Chris and Isabel are calling me for a walk.

    Have you gotten any pictures of Jr.?

  7. Darryl Sloan says:

    Stacey,

    Cue heavy breathing: “I find your lack of faith disturbing,” said Lord Vader. 😉

    I’m trying hard to understand why you’re so dismissive. Firstly, I don’t think it’s fair to say that my test doesn’t constitute evidence (personal evidence for me, at least; as for those watching, well, there’s nothing to say I wasn’t blowing air through a straw off-camera). Drafts and heat simply are not responsible for my wheel moving. I don’t assume this. By any reasonable standard of rational thinking, I know it.

    You call it a triviality. This kind of thing has the potential to fundamentally change our view of what a human being is, and may have major implications for medical science. What I’m getting at is: Beyond the physical, are we made up of energy? If so, how do electro-magnetic influences affect us? Do imbalances in our energy fields cause illnesses? Is psychic healing a reality? Medical science treats human beings on the basis that we are solely biological entities. But if we’re more than that, then it’s possible that medical science is treating symptoms rather than causes.

    Working towards an understanding of how our energy works might also have a dramatic effect on how we view reality. Is it as solid as we think it is, or is it possibly a collective illusion, and one that can to some degree be programmed by our subconscious? Who knows. The point is, isn’t it better to investigate than ignore these things?

    It’s like you expect me to say, “I’ve just discovered something amazing not acknowledged by mainstream science! Ho-hum. Never mind.”

    How did you ever become so uncurious? I have to wonder, is your attitude maybe still overshadowed by an inclination to view psychokinesis in demonic terms? I saw that as unlikely to begin with, and increasingly so since making the videos and hearing of the attempts of others.

    Don’t worry, I will definitely be posting more material on wider spiritual matters. I don’t expect my blog to become “Darryl’s Psychic Investigations. Your first reading free.” 😉

    “Have you gotten any pictures of Jr.?”

    No, and I’ve asked your hubby twice already. I also want to see Isabel one year on, and your new house. Please send.

  8. Paulie says:

    Psychic healing is already a reality for anyone receiving it, as is the laying on of hands, prayer, the death and resurrection of Christ, among a whole bunch of other things, for anyone that believes.
    Seeing it happen to others, has never really been enough to sway consensus, or shift the mindset of the onlookers.
    Hell, i’ve seen things happen with my own eyes and had personal, first hand experience of healing, the power of prayer and a few other things, yet i still don’t believe now, instead trying to make sense of what happened, through my now agnostic mind.

    What’s important here is that you are posting your results on this website so that people can see it, and discuss it, they are. And a lot of the ideas they are coming up with are at least partly responsible for the events taking place.
    In my own personal opinion, you may well be moving the object with your mind, but after my own experimentation and seeing how it can move of it’s own accord, even when i’m not near it, and also witnessing it still moving in your videos, while you’re not “concentrating”, i just can’t draw the line, as to where it stops being background interference and psychic ability.

    If you start flying it around the living room, doing loop-de-loops, i’d be impressed, even if you were able to make it spin so fast it’s momentum made it airbourne, i’d be excited. But for now, the movement you are getting is too close to that i’ve seen with my own eyes, when i wasn’t even trying to do anything. Yes it is moving a little different, and it’s certainly a lot different to your experiments with heat and a fan, but not different enough to make it significant.

    Maybe if i knew more about thermodynamics, i’d know more about it’s limitations and be more impressed, i’d also be a little perturbed, in all honesty, seeing as my results were similar to yours when i wasn’t even trying and at one point, was stood at the other end of the room. .

    For your own personal belief and faith, this is probably great, it does seem you’ve gone from being a cynic, to wanting this to be real, which i’m not comfortable with, as it can play it’s part in your reading the findings, leading you to conclusions that you might not have had, without that desire, but if it is real for you, then i guess that doesn’t really matter.

    But for others, i don’t think you’ll ever be able to get any real changes in thought, unless you really do provide some impressive footage.
    Even then, while footage of one thing might impress me, it might not impress others, and vice-versa.

    You can please some of the people, some of the time, as the saying goes. 😀

  9. Stacey says:

    Darryl,

    Dramatic screaming ensues… “I’ll never join you!!”

    It’s not that I’m uncurious Darryl, it’s that I’m already convinced a soul exists. I don’t need your kind of proof for such a thing. I think that there’s just as much proof of a soul as you have given for a silly psi-wheel. No roundabouts needed. I already live my life accordingly.

    It’s like you expect me to say, “I’ve just discovered something amazing not acknowledged by mainstream science! Ho-hum. Never mind.”

    It’s like you think this is something new. So it’s not acknowleged by mainstream science. Who cares? There’s plenty of things they don’t acknowledge because their sphere is limited… Christianity is one. Are you going to try to prove that to them? You can’t ever prove you are moving a psi-wheel by your mind to the satisfaction of “science”. But if you’re looking for alternatives to “medical science” then that abounds. I don’t know if you guys have a yellow book in the UK, but there’s plenty of numbers for Hindu gurus, psychic healers, even charasmatic renewal type Christian healing rooms. These things exist. They shouldn’t exist in a hospital.

    What I don’t understand is why, if you’re so eager to think outside the box of science, you’re so desperate to get the approval of science for your conclusions. Who are they? Who cares what they think? Why do you need tangible proof to believe something, and why do you focus more on the proof than the something?

    You’re not going to change the world with proof. You can only change yourself with belief. So the question is… what do you believe? Are you going to become a new-ager? Power of the mind? The words we speak have power over our lives? Moses was the most powerful power-tapper in history? We are all Christ and divine? Or will you become comfortable holding beliefs that you can’t know are true for sure?

    You can be convinced with supporting evidence, but you cannot prove it to another person that what you believe is rational. Why does that bother you? I can only think it has to do with Icke and his lensing that you’re afraid to believe yourself without proof. So investigate new claims and re-examine old claims without fear, but people can’t become like leaves being blown about by every new idea, especially when there’s so many people out there trying to deceive us.

    I’ll end this reiterative ramble. I look forward to your future posts.

  10. Darryl Sloan says:

    Stacey,

    I’m trying to figure out where all this negativity is coming from, and I think it’s because your opinions about my attitude and motivations are wrong – or at least inaccurate.

    We could go through this step by step, but we’ve been here before, haven’t we? 🙂

    Suffice it to say, I’m not thinking about this in quite the way you think I’m thinking about this … if that makes sense.

    Hey, thanks for sending me the photos. Love the one with Isabel and Chris in the driveway.

  11. Paulie says:

    I had actually typed out a rather long message, which pretty much was along the lines of what Stacey wrote, but it didn’t post, for some reason. She probably covered it more eloquently than me anyway. lol. 😀

    One point i made though, which i don’t think she covered was, i think you’ve changed from trying to look at it cynically and trying to prove your assumptions and/or beliefs right, rather than looking for the truth.

    As Stacey said, you seem to think you can convince others of what you have found, rather than actually enjoying what you’ve found and accepting that as the important issue.
    The only way this experiment will serve to convince others, is if you genuinely do something fantastic, like make the wheel spin so fast it becomes airbourne, or manage to fly it around the room, doing loop-de-loops.

    Even then, most people will think you faked it anyway.

    On the level of what you’re actually doing though, it’s just not clear enough, to you or anyone else, in all honesty, as you still aren’t sure what’s doing it.

    Truth is only truth in the mind of the person who perceives it that way.

    At one point in my life, i was seeing healing, wonders, the power of prayer on a daily basis, but now, looking back i explain it in different ways, from the point of view of an agnostic. So even when you do find a truth, chances are, a few years later you’ll have moved onto something else and the truth will be something new.
    You’d be better off enjoying it for what it means to you now, rather than trying to convince others, which promises to be a rather difficult and unrewarding path. 😀

    On a side note though, and i ask this as an honest question, not in a negative manner at all, are you trying to convince others, to convince yourself? If other people start believing, will it help you to believe yourself?

  12. Darryl Sloan says:

    Hi, Paul.

    I know full well these videos of mine aren’t going to prove anything to skeptics. That said, I do care about encouraging people to be open-minded about this information, which is why I included a ten-minute talk before the actual demonstration, so that people can see the real me, body language included. This is also why I chose not to chop the boring bits out of my video, in the interests of credibility (however partial that credibility may be). Let’s face it, with fakes like this …

    … the modern proverb “The camera never lies” is dead and gone. I’m never going to convince anybody with a video. My attitude has always been: If you’re open to the possibility of this being real, try it for yourself.

    The test video came about because some of you made reasonable objections, regarding airflow and heat. I wanted to test these matters objectively for myself and share the results with the interested parties on my blog. Once again, the video proves nothing to you – only to me. But I’m assuming that most of you are open-minded enough not to think I’m playing a massive prank on you.

    I hope that clarifies why the video is online. It’s there to encourage open-mindedness and enquiry, not to assert some kind of incontrovertible evidence to the world. It’s also there because it’s fun to share this journey with others.

    What the video does specifically reveal (to me) is that the “heat from hands” theory is bogus. And look how willingly people will latch onto it without even testing it, just because it sounds feasible and fits within the parameters of our narrow view of possibility.

    “Are you trying to convince others, to convince yourself? If other people start believing, will it help you to believe yourself?”

    No. I form my own opinions irrespective of what others think. I am guilty at times of expressing a little frustration when I fail to get people to see things my way. This isn’t because I need their support, but because I could be an intellectual bully, if I let myself. I need to take a deep breath, step back, and remember that everyone has the right to think for themselves and form their own conclusions.

  13. Chris says:

    Hi Darryl,

    I’ve found all your videos to be very interesting. I’d like to contribute more to the comments, but I find myself strapped for time recently. Still, your last clip is quite convincing that something beyond mere physical phenomena is causing the wheel to move.

    This kind of thing has the potential to fundamentally change our view of what a human being is, and may have major implications for medical science. What I’m getting at is: Beyond the physical, are we made up of energy? If so, how do electro-magnetic influences affect us? Do imbalances in our energy fields cause illnesses? Is psychic healing a reality?

    I guess I find myself tending toward a position of “So what?” about all of this for a number of reasons. Firstly, I already believe there is more to the universe, to human beings, than mere physical matter. So, your experiments, and the things you’re trying trying to conclude from them, aren’t ground-breaking for me.

    Secondly, and to embellish the point I think Stacey was trying to make, all of this stuff — the psi-wheel, psychokinesis, chakra, energies, healing, third-eye pineal gland, whatever — strikes me as trivial because it’s never going to provide an answer for the questions about life which really concern me. Where did I come from? What am I doing here? What is the purpose of my existence? What happens to me when I die?

    Thirdly, as a corollary to point two, my life right now…. I have become a servant for many. There are days when I feel like I’m being poured out for my masters, that too much is being asked of me, and I almost want to give up and quit. There are many burdens and responsibilities I have to carry, and sometimes I barely have the time to poop. Effectively, my life is no longer my own.

    Many of these burdens will become lighter as time progresses, and things will be easier, but then I think of what’s coming: my body will age, my health will decline, and I will become as helpless and dependent as the little ones I tend to now. Death will be calling for me, and I will have to face the end of my life, the ineffable moment when my body returns to dust.

    Psi-wheels, psychokinesis, how does any of that make my day-to-day responsibilities easier to bear? When my toddler screams from 2am to 4am, and I have to go put in a day’s work where my employer has me doing a million boring things at once, will knowledge that I am able to move a tinfoil wheel with my mind help me make it through the day without giving up? When my body fails me and I’m reduced to wearing diapers and can’t feed or wash myself… Psychokinesis? So what? When my life, when your life, has to feel the refiner’s fire, all of that stuff will cease to matter.

  14. Darryl Sloan says:

    Hi, Chris.

    I’m sitting here pretty much stunned by your comment as a whole, trying to figure out what I should say.

    Your entire outlook is just so drastically different from mine, due mainly to your circumstances, I suppose. All I can say is I hope you can find a way to escape some of the pressures that are on you, because you sound like you drastically need to. Life was not meant to be lived like this. Find a way somehow to make time for more trivial fun in your life, for your own sanity’s sake.

    As for me, let me clear up some misunderstandings about the psi wheel business. Yes, I did phrase my initial post on the subject in terms of “evidence for a soul.” But this was not because I personally need proof of a soul. I am/was a Christian, after all, and haven’t suddenly reverted to athiesm. I just thought it would be useful to present the information in that context for the benefit of others who deny the existence of a non-material aspect to human consciousness.

    Psychokinesis, to me, is a very small part of a larger spiritual reality that I think I am gradually awakening to. In fact, it’s not strictly part of it at all (and was never mentioned by Icke, in case you’re wondering). It’s just an aspect of consciousness that I recently became curious about, as a result of seeing it done by a friend in my teens.

    I intend to pursue it further because I’m excited by it, I have the time, and I see a practical side to it that you are dismissive of. I see it as no small thing to be able to demonstrate physically that the current scientific view of man is fundamentally flawed. Oh, I know you’ll say something about how nobody can ever prove anything, etc. I don’t agree.

    What’s interesting is that I can spend hundreds of hours writing a novel or making a movie, and you don’t leap down my throat and say, “All that stuff will cease to matter.” But for some reason, on this particular issue, you and Stacey both feel as if you have to go out of your way to become quite negative and assert that this is all a load of time-wasting.

    I don’t get it. Other than you’re maybe trying to steer me away from something you perceive as forbidden. If that’s the case, just say so. Because other than that, I don’t understand the negativity. You present life as if it’s all work, work, work, and all triviality is to be avoided. I sure hope this isn’t the way you truly think.

    Psychokinesis aside, you’ll be hearing more about my changed spiritual outlook in the blog soon, once I’ve decided whether or not I’ve made a monumental mistake. All I can tell you at the moment is I’ve never felt more positive in my life.

    Take care.

  15. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    All I can say is I hope you can find a way to escape some of the pressures that are on you, because you sound like you drastically need to.

    Not at all. My burdens are willingly assumed, and I find great joy in them. I would never want to escape the wonderful opportunities I find in my present circumstances to serve Christ and learn what it means to deny myself, take up my cross, and follow him. And that’s not just a bunch of pious hand wringing.

    But for some reason, on this particular issue, you and Stacey both feel as if you have to go out of your way to become quite negative and assert that this is all a load of time-wasting.

    Because we don’t see much merit in it (I’d be saying the exact same thing if you spent hundreds of hours writing books and movies about death and gore for the sake of death and gore). What does it prove? What insight does it offer? In what way is it better or more convincing than the miracles of Christ and the saints?

    You present life as if it’s all work, work, work, and all triviality is to be avoided. I sure hope this isn’t the way you truly think.

    Not at all. Trivialities are useful for relaxing (and I engage in them all the time, by the way), but not all trivialities are beneficial. I don’t see much benefit, spiritually or scientifically, in your current pursuits, for you or for people in general, based on my own present circumstances and the circumstances of others I’ve witnessed.

    Look, the point of my last comment was not some exposition of how woeful my life is, or how my view sees life as a series of heavy burdens with no room for relaxation. I really hoped you would see that I was trying to say, simply, that I think you are looking in the wrong direction. There are more important questions to ask about our existence, and psychokinesis doesn’t really offer any answers. It is a prominent thought in my mind that I will grow old, my body will fail, and I will die. Psychokinesis, nor any other New Age beliefs I’ve encountered, offers little to adequately prepare for life and its end.

  16. Paulie says:

    It’s exactly the same as the merits of Christ and the saints. It starts with faith and ends with faith. There is a little bit of evidence, but nothing worth much, and certainly not enough to prove things scientifically, but there’s understanding, a belief, a ‘feeling’, a ‘knowing’, and the rest gets drawn in to fill the gap.

    It’s probably even the same reward, at the end of the day, if you believe it.
    For a Christian, they believe that when they die they go somewhere better, to spend eternity in heaven with their Lord, for Darryl, the proof of the soul and the fact we are made of energy, and there’s more to it than just flesh and blood, is similar, in that it proves to him when he dies, he won’t just rot into the ground and get eaten by worms, because there’s more to his existence than the outer body.

    Personally, i think it’s meaningless and even if we can fly cars around the world with only the power of our mind, using nothing more than a simple thought process, it wouldn’t mean anything to me with regards to the soul and/or the afterlife.

    I do personally believe that there are people in the world who can do very magnificent things with their mind, i do believe some people have the gift of knowing something that will happen in the future, and some have the gift of reading the minds of others, some can attain truly stunning states of mind, where they reduce their heartbeat to a beat so slow they are clinically dead, then bring it back to normal.
    None of the above, although fantastic, means anything to me, with regards to the soul or what will happen when i die.

    But, just like your belief in Christ gets you through the difficult times Chris, and might seem trivial to people like myself, who think Christianity is nothing more than faith + chemical reactions based on need and desires = religious ecstacy, Darryl is gaining something special from his line of thinking and growing faith in telekinesis.

    As an agnostic looking in, i see you both in the same light, you’re basing your faith in something without scientific evidence, but that gives you your own proof, however small it might be, enough to make it seem very real and influential both in your life and in your thinking.

    I would even say i’m slightly envious, that you both have this contentment and happiness, compared to my own “shit happens” mentality. But, thems the breaks. 😛

    I’d still really like to see a better experiment though, like the one i pointed out using a ping pong ball. 😀

  17. Darryl Sloan says:

    Between Chris, Stacey and Paul, I’m just about ready to pull my hair out. 🙂

    You’re just not seeing this the way I’m seeing it, and you’re also thinking I’m seeing it in a certain way, when I’m not. I’m going to try real hard to spell it out:

    I do not, and never have, needed PK in order to believe in a soul. The soul and the afterlife were big topics in my blog long before PK came along. PK is only confirmation (and partial confirmation at that).

    Now, the real meat and potatoes …

    PK is important in the same way that the discovery of anything about the nature of man is important. All knowledge about us has the potential to benefit us. How do you know that a better understanding of PK won’t help us understand why we get ill from electro-magnetic influences? You don’t.

    Stacey says that psychic healing and such things should stay separate from “proper” medicine, even though the current scientific model of man as a purely biological being is flawed. On the biological level, we know that stress causes illness. Yet we don’t know why it happens. You don’t suspect that maybe a better understanding of what we are, on a level beyond the biological, might help us better understand illness?

    Perhaps you are thinking that the biological is the biological, the spiritual is the spiritual, and the two are entirely separate and have no bearing on each other. The very idea that emotional imbalances cause illness is testament to the connection.

    PK is a staggering discovery and who knows where a better understanding of it will lead. But you guys just want to throw it in the bin as unimportant. That’s your right. I’ve stated my own defence as best I can. The excitement I feel comes from having a different mindset on the topic.

    What’s really interesting is why something that was relatively easy for me to develop hasn’t been better documented by mainstream science. That’s a very good question indeed. The typical answer to jump to would be that mainstream science is right and I’m wrong. But looking at this from where I’m sitting, I have to wonder.

  18. Paulie says:

    I think the main reason for it’s lack in mainstream science is because it’s difficult for people to reproduce their “breakthrough” under laboratory conditions.
    There have been a few quite popular cases of well known faces offering up however much money to the first person who can do it in the laboratory, and the few that have tried end up failing, the rest not even willing to try.

    If there are thousands of people claming to be able to do this, on Youtube, and via sites like David Icke and Fortean Times, etc, then how come none of them can do it for science? That’s the important question here.

    Just to bring some balance to the argument, i personally think PK could be better used, and would be better used for negative uses. Think how criminals could put it to use. 😀
    If it was ever mainstream, could you imagine it? Aleister Crowley Psych Wars 2008. 😀

  19. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    What’s really interesting is why something that was relatively easy for me to develop hasn’t been better documented by mainstream science. That’s a very good question indeed.

    Quite frankly, that’s only an interesting question if you misunderstand the philosophy of science, which I think you do.

    Stacey has tried to point this out to you many times, but science is, necessarily, by definition, restricted to what can be observed, repeated, and deduced from physical reality.

    If mainstream scientists were to start paying more attention to PK, then, as Stacey also pointed out, the very definition of “science” that they adhere to would have to change.

    I agree that your PK experiments are interesting and there seems to be something to them, but the reason mainstream science isn’t interested is because, scientifically speaking, there is no real way to nail down and measure the elements of cause and effect here, or reason about it all from first principles. I don’t know what else to tell you…

  20. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    “If there are thousands of people claming to be able to do this, on Youtube, and via sites like David Icke and Fortean Times, etc, then how come none of them can do it for science? That’s the important question here.”

    That needs looked into. I know about Jame Randi’s One Million Dollar Challenge. Skeptics are quick to mention it in their defence. As for me, having experienced psychokinesis for real and ruled out the natural explanations, I have to suspect foul play on the part of the organisation. Let’s face it. Anybody can claim anything. Anybody can lie about having a psychic ability, and anybody can set up a website and tell lies about the reality of psychic abilities.

    I have to wonder is there more going on behind the scenes. Is this information being deliberately suppressed and kept out of the public arena, because the global elite don’t want humanity to realise its true potential? Uh-oh. I realise how that sounds. But I wouldn’t necessarily rule a scenario like that out.

  21. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    “science is, necessarily, by definition, restricted to what can be observed, repeated, and deduced from physical reality.”

    The results of the experiment were physical results. The cause is also part of physical reality. We eliminated some causes, such as airflow and heat, leaving us with an unknown cause. How can you make the determination that this unknown cause lies outside of scientific investigation? Even if we end up naming it “psi,” just to stick a label on it, it’s still part of physical reality. How do you make the detemination that it can’t be quantified, measured, manipulated? I mean, nobody would ever say that radio waves are outside the scope of science, just because we can’t see or feel them with the human body. How can you categorise “psi” in this way without really knowing what it is?

    “If mainstream scientists were to start paying more attention to PK, then, as Stacey also pointed out, the very definition of “science” that they adhere to would have to change.”

    Maybe that would be a change for the better, if it means we stop ignoring certain things that are very real.

  22. Paulie says:

    Getting into the world of ‘conspiracy’ theories, is dangerous grounds, and it’s one of the reasons i mistrust David Icke, he relies too much on blaming everyone else for anything he can’t back up, they hid it, they don’t want you to know, without actually giving anything to push WHY it is so. It’s no better than the US claming Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, to manipulate people into supporting a war.

    If you want to get into what ifs, and maybe that, then we could easily say you are doing this experiment to push your own agenda, ie. have people believe in something you believe in, and your results are faked with fans, hosepipes and clever layouts of cabling and whatever else.

    As i’ve already said, i tried the experiment myself and got similar results to you, without even focusing or trying to do anything, my results were caused by heat/air/something, if i took that into the laboratory i’d expect them to see i couldnt’ actually do it, the same, i believe, would be true of you.

    If i was a scientist, i’d be looking at a lot more than a single aspect of heating and air flow, which you covered, ie. a fire and fan, or 2 glasses of hot water. I would want to test the airflow for the whole room, each dynamic flow, where it’s from, where it’s going, and how it gets there, i’d want to find out how heat affects that airflow, as well as the tin foil, in every little detail, i’d want to make sure there were sensors everywhere, to find out exactly where the motion is coming from, where the motion is connecting with the wheel from, how it got there, why it is and why it got there, etc.

    This is why your experiment won’t impress anyone, other than yourself. In order to impress science, your test would have to be so much more rigorous, and this seems to be where people fail.

    I’ve had a bit of a look around the internet about the topic, and pretty much everywhere it’s being discussed, the conclusion seems to be thermodynamics. Some have complicated scientific explanations, etc. I really don’t know enough about thermodynamics (I didn’t even do Physics at school), to understand it fully, but it makes the most sense to me, especially because of my own results after trying this experiment.

    Imagine this now, Darryl, if there were people out there who could genuinely do PK, to any decent level (if you can do it after a little while of trying, and after working on it some more, improve those skills, imagine what kind of energies someone who’s been doing it for years could muster), do you really think anyone COULD stop the world from seeing it?

    If a man can get on the houses of parliament wearing a batman costume, and immediately being surrounded by the media, live on most shows, do you really think it would be difficult for some nutter levitating tinfoil wheels around his head, while humming in monotone and sitting in the lotus position, to get recognition? 😀

    I wanted to go back to the ‘stress’ thing too, being someone who has suffered from it to a great extent, in the past year or so (thankfully over the most of it now).

    Stress does actually have a physical cause and reaction, it isn’t really a mystery. It causes the heart beat to rise, and the blood pressure with it, which makes the heart work harder and faster to keep up, thus causing problems, like exhaustion, breathing problems, etc. Even a panic attack is physical, where as a natural response to fear, the spleen (i believe?) sends out extra blood for “fight or flight”, so if you’re suddenly attacked by a lion, the extra blood rush gives you the chance to run away, with extra speed, or to stand and fight, with extra strength. Mind you, against a lion, those aren’t going to do you much good. 😀

  23. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    How do you make the detemination that it can’t be quantified, measured, manipulated? I mean, nobody would ever say that radio waves are outside the scope of science, just because we can’t see or feel them with the human body. How can you categorise “psi” in this way without really knowing what it is?

    Mainstream science deals with objective physical phenomena, not phenomena that are subjectively dependent on a human being’s thought processes.

    At best, the abilities that you are demonstrating perhaps fall within the realms of psychology, which is a “soft science”, but physicists, chemists, biologists, and mathematicians do not deal with such things. What you’re asking for is like trying to mix oil with water — they’re just two very different entities.

    I’m not denying any possible reality of this phenomenon, but you will never be able to eliminate its subjective nature. That is why I can tell you that it can’t be quantified, measured, and manipulated in a scientifically satisfactory manner, according to the canonical definition of science.

    Maybe that would be a change for the better, if it means we stop ignoring certain things that are very real.

    No, it would not be a change for the better. It would be an admission of any old subjective nonsense into canonical authority.

    Darryl, I’m not trying to be argumentative or judgmental here, but I do have some cause for concern that you are not keeping a rational mind about all of this. Investigating the psi-wheel is one thing, but thinking that mainstream science is ignoring this phenomenon without reason, demanding that they open the doors to what you term as “other possibilities”, and suggesting conspiracy theories about the “global elite” keeping this knowledge deliberately suppressed, is starting to push the bounds of reason and reality.

    Are you really trying to be open-minded and seek the truth with honesty, or are you warping everything to fit whatever appeals to your convicted imagination?

  24. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    Regarding thermodynamics: Are we placing credence based on strength of numbers now? Please. I don’t know very much about thermodynamics, but on a very simple level, if I place an object that is generating much, much more heat than my hand next to the psi wheel and it produces zero movement, it stands to reason that the lesser heat energy from my hand is not responsible for the movement.

    By all means, teach me something I don’t know about thermodynamics that can explain the movement. But until that happens, it ain’t thermodynamics.

    I’m confident that I’m doing real psychokinesis. I could set up all kinds of elaborate tests, but I prefer the simpler approach of developing the ability and seeing what level I can take it to. I guess we’ll see where this goes.

  25. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    You’ve heard of auras, right? Kirlian photography is supposedly a means of producing images of auras. Let’s assume for a moment that it’s the real deal. I don’t know, because I haven’t researched it, but let’s assume.

    If I take your attitude to auras, then they are dismissed as soon as we’re out of the starting gate. “Auras? That’s a purely subjective experience of seeing something that you have no means of verifying exists.” So we dismiss the whole thing. It doesn’t belong in the realm of science, says you.

    But Kirlian decided to investigate it, and he may have gotten somewhere with it.

    I don’t share your narrow view, Chris. You seem to be suggesting that science should steer clear of investigating anything that involves the study of human thought and its effects, because nothing useful can ever be learned.

    You can keep beating the crap out of this argument, but if you’re going to continually assert that this PK stuff is pointless, you’re going to have to give me a better reason.

  26. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    “Auras? That’s a purely subjective experience of seeing something that you have no means of verifying exists.” So we dismiss the whole thing. It doesn’t belong in the realm of science, says you.

    Either you’ve misunderstood my comment, or are unintentionally twisting its meaning, but that’s not what I said. What I’m saying is that science, by definition, is not set up to study such things, and it is an error to think that it should be changed. I can’t make it any simpler for you than that.

    But Kirlian decided to investigate it, and he may have gotten somewhere with it.

    As I understand it, Kirlian photography and “aura photography” are completely different. The physics behind Kirlian photographs is apparently well understood.

    I don’t share your narrow view, Chris. You seem to be suggesting that science should steer clear of investigating anything that involves the study of human thought and its effects, because nothing useful can ever be learned.

    No, what I’m saying is that science is not setup to study phenomena which have subjective causes.

    You can keep beating the crap out of this argument, but if you’re going to continually assert that this PK stuff is pointless, you’re going to have to give me a better reason.

    I have given you many reasons why I think PK is pointless, and why it’s outside the realms of mainstream science, but you seem strangely impervious to anything which doesn’t agree with your point of view.

  27. Paulie says:

    Darryl:I’m confident that I’m doing real psychokinesis. I could set up all kinds of elaborate tests, but I prefer the simpler approach of developing the ability and seeing what level I can take it to. I guess we’ll see where this goes.

    This, i’m afraid is the mantra of many, many people online, who also claim to be able to do this, and many other wonderful things. Including people like Uri Gellar, in a real life capacity.

    I could test it, and prove it, and do this and that, but i won’t. Hence so few people actually try and win the money and recognition, on offer, for proving such things.

    It’s also why mainstream science are unable to accept it, the people most vocal in their abilities, are often least likely to try and prove it and back up their claims, by putting it under serious scrutiny.

    I know you didn’t quite mean it that way, but it illustrates one of the main problems with getting something like this recognized. The main being that anyone who does put themself under the microscope, fails.

  28. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    “What I’m saying is that science, by definition, is not set up to study such things, and it is an error to think that it should be changed.”

    That is exactly how I understood you, and it’s exactly what I disagree with.

    I mean, let’s say I can get to the stage where I can seal off a psi wheel from external influences under a glass bowl, sit several feet from it, and make it move in the direction that someone else in the room specifies, changing the direction when directed to do so by the observer.

    You don’t think that science would be, or should be, interested in something like that?

    Let’s remember that it’s science that has given us the rather shaky foundations of the big bang theory and evolution. Would investigating paranormal phenomena taint some kind of perceived scientific purity? I have to say, I don’t see that purity.

    The psi wheel is providing information. Science can either ignore the information because it’s outside the goalposts, or it can move the goalposts to try and glean something useful from the information.

    “I have given you many reasons why I think PK is pointless, and why it’s outside the realms of mainstream science, but you seem strangely impervious to anything which doesn’t agree with your point of view.”

    It’s fine with me that you think it’s pointless. What’s not fine with me is that you insist that I agree with you that it’s pointless. My mindset is clearly a very different one than yours. You can see me as obstinate, if you want. The truth is, I’m a reasonable guy and you just haven’t convinced me.

    On the flipside, I’ve notice that you disregard any remarks I made about the possible practical implications of a scientific view that embraces investigation of these psychic matters. It’s just as valid for me to say to you that you seem strangely impervious to my views, but I don’t. Oops. I just did. 😉

    Chris, we’re both individuals, and pretty smart individuals, and we’re viewing life from differing perspectives. That’s all this is. We can still learn from each other without demanding agreement. In the past, we had to respect each other’s differing religious perspectives, and we did.

    Maybe I’m being equally assertive and pushy. But you have me on the defensive … as usual. 🙂

  29. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    “I know you didn’t quite mean it that way,”

    I sure didn’t.

  30. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    You don’t think that science would be, or should be, interested in something like that? … Would investigating paranormal phenomena taint some kind of perceived scientific purity? I have to say, I don’t see that purity. … Science can either ignore the information because it’s outside the goalposts, or it can move the goalposts to try and glean something useful from the information.

    Darryl, what, exactly, do you think that “science” is?

    This is not a matter of interest. What you are asking is for is like demanding a straight edge become flimsy because you think it would draw more straighter lines that way.

    I’ve notice that you disregard any remarks I made about the possible practical implications of a scientific view that embraces investigation of these psychic matters.

    And I’ve been trying to tell you that the view which embraces investigation of these psychic matters cannot, by definition, be one of science.

    Just because these phenomena can be investigated in a scientific way doesn’t necessarily make it science. And just because science can investigate such things and find nothing doesn’t necessarily mean that there is nothing going on.

  31. Debunker says:

    Uri,

    As a matter of interest, what is the origin of the psi wheel; for what purpose was it initially designed? Since this gizmo features so much in your experiments, it may be worth trying to find out – to place things in their full context.

    That aside, before discounting all other externals as causing the revolving, you should do more tests, that is if you really want to eliminate them as possible reasons for the movement of the wheel. For instance, with regard to heat, why not try cooking a large steak (organic in nature) and place it in an upright position on a plate next to the wheel, and see if this causes anything to happen. Alternatively, you could heat organic and non-organic things in the microwave and do likewise to see if this produces the copter-like effect. Being creative, I’m sure you could conceive other such ways of testing the effects of convectional, radiated, and conductive heat, though the last one may be irrelevant. And with relation to the reason listed for the experiment, why not coax a living, breathing non-soul to sit next to the wheel, and then video the effect while you are out of the room. The non-soul should be large, and not a vicious breed. Place some food beside the table and it might work. Lastly, before a session of wheel staring, do some vigorous exercise so that you are warm and see how this affects things.

    Briefly, and with regard to static electricity, you should rub your feet or trail them on a nearby carpet before commencing, or, conversely, touch a radiator to discharge the static, and then observe what happens during a session.

  32. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    I hear exactly what you’re saying. I know your view of science is the commonly held one. I don’t agree that it is the right one. I think science is in need of a transformation.

    Consider Gabriele Amorth and his exorcism book. Think of the people who seek medical help because of problems that are actually spiritual, but they are so in the dark that they have no idea this is the case – anything from demon possession misdiagnosed as schizophenia, to curses that no amount of medicine seems to cure.

    Conventional science doesn’t merely have no opinion about this kind of thing because it’s outside of some perceived sphere of investigation. It laughs in the face of such things as total horseshit. Things that you and I have quite rational reasons for believing in.

    The current model of science operates on a flawed perspective of reality, the idea that this world is all there is. You can argue that it should stay that way, but I think that is to the detriment of the human race. I think all you’re doing is towing the line of convention and repeatedly shoving it in my face like it’s inspired by God.

    You wonder why you’re not getting through to me. I don’t count number, Chris. I don’t care if your view reflects the way most others think. And I would be surprised if your view was reflected at the cutting edge of science, away from convention and away from the public eye.

  33. Darryl Sloan says:

    Hi, Debunker.

    “Uri.” Puh-leeease. 🙂

    All good tests you mention. But I’m inclined to think bigger. Let’s get PK to work effectively from a distance. And let’s get it to work in a sealed enviroment such as under a glass bowl. If/when these are achieved, there will be no need for many of the tests you mention.

    I’ve no idea how the psi wheel originated, but the idea behind its design is simply to minimise weight and friction, thus enabling the observing of the minutest quantity of pschokinetic energy … as well as a lot of unfortunate trickery and even some self deception.

  34. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    The current model of science operates on a flawed perspective of reality, the idea that this world is all there is.

    Look, science is about studying objective physical phenomena, and deducing universal laws of nature from them. It is a tool for examining the physical universe — in science, by definition, the material, visible, physical world IS all there is. Science is not an all-encompassing explanation of reality. Scientists who believe that it is able to be an all-encompassing explanation of reality are in error. Similarly, for you to insist that the tool should be able to be an all-encompassing explanation of reality is also an error.

    You can argue that it should stay that way, but I think that is to the detriment of the human race. I think all you’re doing is towing the line of convention and repeatedly shoving it in my face like it’s inspired by God.

    If I was to subscribe to your point of view, I’d be up in arms that science should also acknowledge the reality of Jesus Christ, the miracles of the saints, and the real presence of Christ in the eucharist, etc.. But I’m not because I realize that science is just a tool to learn more about the physical, material universe through observation and logical deduction. Science does not contradict my religious beliefs about reality, and I don’t expect that it should be able to explain the miraculous things in which I believe. It is merely a tool for a specific endeavor, and I have no problem with that, nor with the assholes who incorrectly think it contradicts the other parts of reality in which I believe.

    Is it to the detriment of the human race that science doesn’t acknowledge the claims of Christianity (or PK, etc.)? Not at all, no more so than it is to the detriment of my house that my hammer is unable to tighten pipe fittings.

    Like the scientists who erroneously assert that the big bang theory and Darwinian evolution adequately explain everything about the universe and humanity, I think you’re trying to make science be something that it is not.

    You wonder why you’re not getting through to me. I don’t count number, Chris. I don’t care if your view reflects the way most others think.

    I don’t care if my view reflects the way most others think either. What I do care about is the truth, and seeing things how they truly are. I’m not trying to shove anything in your face, I’m trying to help you get things straight.

  35. Stacey says:

    Darryl!

    Dah! I think we’re trying to nail down a wet fish here, but I really just want to beat you with it. Out of brotherly love, of course 😉 Take comfort in that I feel like pulling my hair out as well.

    Useful things can be learned from unscientific things. The point is just that non-physical things are not in the jurisdiction of science. Why is that so difficult?

    You have said:

    consciousness (the core of ourselves), including our self-awareness and possibly our memories, lies somewhere beyond physical matter
    and
    What I’m getting at is: Beyond the physical, are we made up of energy? If so, how do electro-magnetic influences affect us?

    When you say that you think something beyond the physical is happening here, what do you think is happening? If it’s energy/electro-magnetic forces, as you seem to be implying, that’s physical and can be measured by simply setting up a gauss-meter over the thing. In such a case, nothing could be said about our consciousness being more than just a brain.

    If it’s not energy, if it’s something else, beyond the physical, then what do you want from the personified “science”? What can they do or say to comment on it when they can’t even take readings, measurements, etc.? They may be able to do empirical corrolation studies, which you have seen they’ve already done. What more do you want from them?

    I, like Chris, am confused on exactly what you think “mainstream science” is. It seems like you think it is the world’s authority on what should be accepted as truth by the general public. It’s not, although some people like Dawkins use it that way.

    If you think the government or whoever is intentionally suppressing such discoveries, then go take a gander at the new age section of your local bookstore. There numerous books with ideas along these lines. These phenomena are of interest to many, many people. It just so happens that most of the world rolls their eyes and moves on with their lives because the thing itself is so ethereal with little payoff. I guess my point here is that you’re not alone beating down a path of exploration that the world hasn’t heard of before. Most of the time they just don’t care.

    I think a lot of our frustration here has to do with differing definitions of words. Answers to the following questions may help:

    1) What do you think mainstream science is?
    2) What do you more do you want them to do that they haven’t done?
    3) Why suggest government conspiracies, etc. for the reason that psychokinesis isn’t bigger when far simpler suggestions (like people just don’t care or nobody’s really that good at it) will do?

    Baby’s crying. Can’t make this more readable 🙂 Sorry.

  36. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris & Stacey,

    I think we’re finally starting to get to why we’re not in agreement. I understand that you guys class certain things as “supernatural,” especially in a religious sense. And I understand how this puts them beyond the reach of scientific analysis. I would have thought the same thing not so long ago.

    But I’ve changed my thinking greatly, in ways that I haven’t yet fully expressed, and that’s why you feel like your hitting your head against a brick wall. To me, “supernatural” or “paranormal” is a very unfortunate word because it instantly classifies certain things, like psychokinesis, into an unreachable area. So, like Chris says, whether it’s the Eucharist, miracles, or psychokinesis, it all belongs in a realm that is beyond examination. Beyond science. I get it.

    However, this is not how I see the world. I think classing something as “paranormal” is sometimes unfortunate because you then instantly decide to forego any further scientific study, without really knowing whether you will get anywhere. Do we really know that we’ll never find a means of detecting psi energy with some kind of machinery? No. This is why I brought up Kirlian photography. And the very fact that something as yet undetected is moving the psi wheel is all the justification you need to continue probing the matter on a scientific basis.

    I think this whole debate is because you guys are filing PK into a category that I haven’t filed it.

    Also, take acupuncture. I don’t know a great deal about it, but I hear it’s based around the idea that we possess these chakras that I’ve talked about, and when the chakras are spinning as they should, it maintains our health properly. Bunk? I don’t know. But it’s an idea with structure, something you can look into and consider, unlike a miracle or the Eucharist.

    So, if I don’t assume that PK belongs to some impenetrable supernatural or spiritual category, surely I should have the freedom to investigate it on a scientific basis. That’s all I’m asking for, and it doesn’t seem unreasonable, despite everything you guys have said.

    And Chris, I need to say this, you are making it increasingly hard for me to continue this discussion, because I feel kind of bullied by your attitude. Like I said before: we don’t agree on this issue because we have a different point of view at a much deeper level. You see the physical and the spiritual as distinct categories, each with their own place, whereas to me there is a great deal of overlap.

  37. Paulie says:

    I think the one thing you’re ruling out, Darryl, which is quite an important thing, is that these ideas are not new, none of them, they’ve been around for centuries if not longer, and they’ve been tested, maybe not in the full out way you’d like, but certainly on some levels, and if those results had been positive we’d know more about it, as they’d already be a part of mainstream science.

    If something can be proven, in any way, whether it has a full explanation or not, it will become science.

    For example, although you can’t really prove if God is real or not, if someone steps up to the plate in the name of Christ, lays hands on a child born without arms and legs, and before the eyes of all on-lookers, those limbs miraculously grow back, in real time, although science would be unable to box it and tell what actually caused it to happen, they’d certainly have to accept it happened, if there was proof.

    For all the people on the internet claiming to have powers of TK/PK, there just isn’t the actual physical proof to back it up.

    Although i wouldn’t be interested in a soul/afterlife manner, as it wouldn’t prove anything to me about either of those things, one way or the other, i would certainly be interested in a ‘wow, that’s really cool’ way. Most people would, it would sell in a major way.

    Can you even begin to imagine the kind of money something like that would be worth? Can you imagine if you, yourself, managed to take this experiment further, to a point where you could move various objects with only the power of your mind, and agreed to scientific testing, where you were able to replicate your results and get media exposure? You’d be worth a fortune, an absolute fortune.

    In my opinion, it’s too easy to say that the reason this hasn’t happened is because of some global conspiracy, especially in light of how other things get into the media eye, things the governments, religious institutions, and the like don’t want to get into the public eye.

    If there are people who can genuinely reproduce this on a regular basis, making things move with the power of their minds, and are willing to show the world, why aren’t they doing it? Let’s see them on chat shows, talk shows, and the like. Much like the 80s when Uri Gellar was earning a fortune from doing just that.

    Funny thing is, when Uri was asked to undergo scientific testing, it was always beneath him, like his gift was worth more than that, yet he was more than willing to do it on terrestrial TV in front of a gasping audience.

    What you need to do, Darryl, is be the man to set things right. Build on your new found talent, to a point where it’s more impressive and easier controlled, etc, then go public. Put the theories to the test and find out for yourself, how such a thing is dealt with by the media and establishment. 😀

  38. Stacey says:

    Darryl,

    Fair enough. Science should use all of the tools at its disposal to investigate such things. But if we are in fact able to use a machine to detect such things, wouldn’t that just show it was some here-to-fore unknown physical phenomenon? Then the assertion that the consciousness is more than just brain-based would become erroneous.

    Yes, we are classifying the psi-wheel as paranormal, because as of yet it cannot be explained physically. Like Paulie says, if it can be proven, then it will become a science. But isn’t the paranormal and non-physical aspect of this what really interests you? We are not saying that it should not or cannot be investigated and examined, just that if it is what you say it is then it cannot be explained scientifically. Here’s some Mirriam-Webster definitions of those words to spare you the time looking them up and spare us all some misunderstanding.

    paranormal
    not scientifically explainable

    supernatural
    1: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil2 a: departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature b: attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)

    science
    a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena

    scientific method
    principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses

    I really think it would help clear things up a bit if you answered at least my first two questions above. And, btw, have you tried the two wheel thing?

    Don’t give up on talking to Chris. Believe me I know first-hand how very frustrating and appalling it can be to talk to him about things he thinks or knows he’s right about. But he is reasonable, and a lot can be learned from him if you can get past wanting to strangle him.

  39. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    “In my opinion, it’s too easy to say that the reason this hasn’t happened is because of some global conspiracy, especially in light of how other things get into the media eye, things the governments, religious institutions, and the like don’t want to get into the public eye.”

    If I should suddenly disappear without a trace, never to be seen again … well, you know where this is going. 😉

    “What you need to do, Darryl, is be the man to set things right. Build on your new found talent, to a point where it’s more impressive and easier controlled, etc, then go public. Put the theories to the test and find out for yourself, how such a thing is dealt with by the media and establishment.”

    Wouldn’t that be something. Well, with continued practice, I guess we’ll see how far this does go.

  40. Darryl Sloan says:

    Stacey,

    “But if we are in fact able to use a machine to detect such things, wouldn’t that just show it was some here-to-fore unknown physical phenomenon? Then the assertion that the consciousness is more than just brain-based would become erroneous.”

    I don’t think so. Again, this comes from the perspective of seeing the physical and spiritual realms as interweaving parts of reality, relating very much to each other and affecting each other. This perspective is vastly different from the Christian one, which sees the two as separate spheres of investigation.

    Consider this hypothesis (and for now it is just a hypothesis). Reality is made of up a series of frequencies (like the physical and spiritual, but many more) all of which occupy the same physical space. Think of it like channels on a television. The frequencies for all the channels broadcasting to my area are right now occupying this room and passing through my body. All I need is the right equipment to tune into them: a TV set. The body is like that. It is designed to tune into what we experience as physical reality. There is much more going on around us than what we see. On a simple level, dogs experience a wonderful world of smells that we humans know nothing about. Cats and lizard, with their weird eyes, see reality quite differently from us. Birds sense something that allows them to migrate. Ants are somehow able to work together to a common goal without speaking to each other. All around us are things we can’t see. On a deeper level, you might imagine angels and demons residing on a spiritual plane. All it is is a frequency, one quite close to ours, and allowing a degree of cross-over given certain conditions – like the interference on two close channels on a TV. This is how we explain such things as visitations by angels, demon possession, ghost sightings, the abilities of mediums, etc.

    To class all this as “supernatural” is simply to put a label on it that says “out of investigative bounds.” And my suggestions is that the label is incorrect.

    After a lot of heavy reading, the spiritual doesn’t seem quite so “out there” and impenetrable to me anymore. I can’t defend that right now on any other level than the intuitive, which you might see as a cop out. But you’ll have to let me work it out.

    To get back to what you were saying: Do I think the ability for a machine to detect psi energy would render psi energy as non-supernatural? Yes, but remember I never thought of it as supernatural in the sense that you do in the first place. 🙂 There is no real division. It’s a smokescreen. Discovering the human soul under a microscope, so to speak (if such a thing were possible), wouldn’t make consciousness brain based, and wouldn’t debunk the eternal nature of the human soul. It would merely allow us to observe and better understand it what we already believed to be there.

    “Like Paulie says, if it can be proven, then it will become a science. But isn’t the paranormal and non-physical aspect of this what really interests you?

    It doesn’t interest me specifically because it’s paranormal, but because it’s real.

  41. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    So, if I don’t assume that PK belongs to some impenetrable supernatural or spiritual category

    By the definition of the term “supernatural”, which Stacey posted, that does seem to be the appropriate category for PK.

    surely I should have the freedom to investigate it on a scientific basis. That’s all I’m asking for, and it doesn’t seem unreasonable, despite everything you guys have said.

    Darryl, you’re free to do and believe whatever it is you want to do and believe. That’s not the issue here.

    And Chris, I need to say this, you are making it increasingly hard for me to continue this discussion, because I feel kind of bullied by your attitude.

    Why? I’m certainly not trying to bully you. My intent has merely been to try to correct some misconceptions you seem to have. Am I being unreasonable in any of my arguments? If brevity and reiteration bother you, well… what do you want me to do? If I were to belabor the point, and embellish my arguments with all the pathetic literary skills I possess, you’d still be telling me you feel bullied because I
    wouldn’t be agreeing with you, or agreeing to disagree, or cheering you on.

    Like I said before: we don’t agree on this issue because we have a different point of view at a much deeper level. You see the physical and the spiritual as distinct categories, each with their own place,
    whereas to me there is a great deal of overlap.

    What are you talking about? I’m a devout Catholic — I believe wholeheartedly I’m consuming Jesus Christ, body, blood, soul, and divinity, under the form of a wafer every Sunday morning at church.
    How much more overlap between the physical and the spiritual can you get in Western society without seeking out New Agers? (And, before you bring it up, I do not subscribe to Gould’s NOMA theory either.)

    Look: Notice that our lack of agreement on this matter does not center around whether or not you are actually able to move the psi-wheel with your mind? Notice that I haven’t disagreed with you about what you think the potential applications of this ability might be? What I am in disagreement with you about is your approach to the whole thing. There is something about it which leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

    I don’t know if you’re aware of it, but since you started proclaiming “open-mindedness” from the roof tops, you’ve been exhibiting a certain degree of arrogance and self-righteousness in your arguments. Of course, you’re convinced of your position, and that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that. What bothers me is that, at the same time, you are operating under misconceptions (e.g., the scope and purpose of science), and admit to having pretty large knowledge gaps with respect to science and history. Don’t get me wrong — by no stretch of the imagination am I trying to say that you need to go get a PhD in theoretical physics to validate your opinions. I believe opinions must be evaluated in their own right according to their own merits, irrespective of the one who voices them — do they stand up under scrutiny or not?

    However, myself and others have been trying to help balance out the picture for you in the areas where your knowledge is admittedly thin. But, for some reason, you keep insisting that we’re in the “closed-minded” camp, that somehow you’re seeing things a lot more clearly than everyone else, and our voices are just too easily dismissed before you continue on, reasoning from ignorance.

    Paulie has pointed out already that you’re not some lone wolf, blazing a trail that nobody’s looked at before — people have looked at this stuff, PK has been scientifically studied, and it’s on the shelf for a good reason (even though you may not like it). To that end, I don’t have a problem if you insist on investigating this stuff despite my strong recommendations to divert your focus elsewhere. My problem is that you think you’re being “open-minded” by asserting that everyone else is living in the dark, despite admitting, and demonstrating, that your arguments are from a skewed perspective. And then you all too easily dismiss anyone who might know more about certain matters than yourself.

    This is not being open-minded, Darryl, and it’s not trying to see things how they really are. People like David Icke may have some interesting things to say, but they do not live in the real world. They live in a world where their imagination and paranoia are unconstrained. Like Paulie said, they blame other entities for things they can’t back up. Instead of being truly open-minded, they’re more closed-minded than ever because they don’t even see reality around them as it actually is, all they see is whatever appeals to their imagination and ego.

    I’m trying to urge you not to be like that. If you want to investigate PK, then do so as it stands on its own merits. Don’t allow yourself to go off into an Ickean LaLa Land where you’re the only one who is awake, everyday concrete realities no longer matter so much, and anything you want to believe is not only possible but actually real. If you don’t think you’re being like that, then ok. But your “I must be the only one seeing things right” attitude should probably be toned down a bit — you could very well be the only one seeing things right, but you’re presently lacking a firm argument to support that view.

  42. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    Some of what you say above lets me see that you still haven’t understood where I’m coming from. But I can’t go on, because I’m not going to get anywhere. You see your own point of view and you wonder why I can’t see it your way when it seems so plain to you. And when all your efforts fail, you see me as obstinate, and call me arrogant and self-righteous. And you wonder why I feel bullied.

    Here’s a guy whose spirituality is going through profound change. And one of the many good changes I’m experiencing is that I’ve learned to speak what I believe without fear of what anyone thinks. So I share what I’m going through with others. And it’s viewed as arrogance and self-righteousness.

    Ask yourself this: Why do you get so worked up when someone holds to a different point of view? I’ve had many a productive conversation with people who differ from me in their beliefs. And at the end of the conversation we respect each other’s individuality. I have no power or desire to coerce anybody; all I want to do is express my view.

    You haven’t convinced me. That’s all this amounts to. Live with it. Anyone who reads these comments is free to side with your perspective or mine. That’s their choice.

  43. Chris says:

    Darryl,

    Ask yourself this: Why do you get so worked up when someone holds to a different point of view? …

    Maybe because I’m not just some passer-by, and I actually care about my friend’s well-being.

    You haven’t convinced me. That’s all this amounts to. Live with it.

    Ok, I understand.

  44. Paulie says:

    Chris makes some good points, Darryl, i don’t fully agree with everything he said, but on the major issue, i’m with him 110%.
    Not just about you, though, i might add. The people who are often shouting loudest that they are open-minded, are often the people who are most closed-minded.

    You only have to look to science to see this, especially in strands like Big Bang Theory, etc.

    As part of my own journey, spiritual in nature i guess, i went through a phase of needing something more in my life, i was in a low place, i had no hope, no reason to get up in the mornings, and i knew i was in danger, if i didn’t sort something out.

    I started reading various books, i tried some Stephen Hawking, some Wicca, the Satanic Bible, and various other tomes.

    The one thing i realised was just how closed minded each of these were, yet followers of each of these beliefs, are first to scream that they are the open minded ones, and organized religion is closed-minded and constraining, etc.

    You can’t be open minded and have a belief in something, because that open-mindedness would go against your belief.

    I did this myself, when i was Christian, i really thought i was open-minded, i’d take on board other peoples arguments, try and think them through rationally, and try and answer the points they raised. But, the very fact i believed in Christ, his death on the cross and forgiveness of my sins through the blood he shed, meant that any answer i could ever give, would be biased. Any thinking i did as a part of that, would be biased too.

    I’m still not open-minded now, even as an Agnostic. If i’m walking down the street and i’m faced with a strange light in the sky, i’m thinking it’s a reflection off an aircraft, a shooting star, maybe even a UFO, if i’m stretched to explain it, due to some magnificence. But, i wouldn’t think it was an angel, because i don’t believe in them in any way.

    You have to ask yourself though, Darryl, how many times did David Koresh tell his followers that the government and the establishment were covering up his truths, how many times did he preach conspiracy theories to them?

    The psi-wheel is a non-issue for me, a fun experiment, with maybe a spiritual reward at the end of it, if it goes right, but as soon as you started giving conspiracy theories and thinking that somehow you’d stumbled into a great truth of the universe, that needed to become a part of mainstream science, regardless of it’s opressors, warning bells did go off in my head.

    It’s a dangerous game to play, when the first rule is Us Vs. Them.

  45. Darryl Sloan says:

    Chris,

    Where the hell do you think you’re going, mon ami? I’m not finished with you! Come back here till I give you a big French kiss … er, as in the way French men kiss each other in greeting, not as in … ah, forget it. 😉

  46. Darryl Sloan says:

    Paul,

    “As soon as you started giving conspiracy theories and thinking that somehow you’d stumbled into a great truth of the universe, the needed to become a part of mainstream science, regardless of it’s opporessors, warning bells did go off in my head. It’s a dangerous game to play, when the first rule is Us Vs. Them.”

    I don’t know that there’s a conspiracy going on. I don’t deny or ridicule the idea by reflex, either. If anything, over recent years I’ve been gradually waking up to many things that are wrong with the world and with how we live. There are so many things we think are normal that are completely abnormal. We are an uninspired, numbed, tired, medicated and directionless population that acts like a plague upon the world. Easily demonstratable. Whether this situation has been orchestrated by a small elite or whether it’s just society’s natural “progress,” I’m not sure. But I’ll keep an open mind.

  47. Paulie says:

    My own personal opinion is that the worlds problems stem from a lack of responsibility, be it moral, or otherwise.
    It’s easy for us all to put the responsibility into the hands of a doctor now, handing out prozac like they’re sweets, in a priest who forgives our sins, regardless of what we do through the week, as long as we sit in a little box and tell him about it every now and then, or just plain selfishness, ie. the God of self.

    The family unit has been breaking for many, many years, due to a lack of moralistic responsibility, husbands and wives going off to play hide the sausage for a quick buzz, getting caught out and ending up with children playing the parents off each other, to earn love.
    We have children not being punished, because it’s better to talk with them rationally, like little adults, not actually seeing that the more they get off with, the more they want to push the boundaries, until we’re faced with a culture where stabbing is perfectly normal, chavs rule most housing estates and make it so that OAPs can’t even leave their houses in the day, never mind at night.
    Even education is suffering at its hands, with kids who don’t try or aren’t gifted immediately being given excuses for their lack, be it dyslexia, ADHD, or the various other labels.
    Criminals face much less time in prisons, for their crimes.

    Complacency is the road to hell, and right about now, complacency is the God of the masses.

    The likes of David Icke is just as bad though, with his constant accusations of people being paedophiles guilty of ritualistic child abuse, just because they are an icon of power. And there’s no responsibility in his words, nor consequences.
    The more he gets off with, the more he pushes, and anyone who steps in his way is a conspirator, part of the elitist machine that works against humanity and his teachings and beliefs. A hypocricy of great magnitude.

  48. kalvin says:

    It doesn’t matter how tiny an impact, when you find something you believe is true, you open the door to a room with many other doors connected to that room(school of thought). Doesn’t matter if the findings are “useless” because the path goes much further. So what if two metallic rocks can be attracted to each other, trivial right? Just look at what we have now because that path was walked. There is always a follow up question. e.g. the double slit experiment. So what if electrons can behave as a particle and a wave(seemingly trivial). Many follow up questions may result in significant findings, making the trivial discovery not so trivial after all. That trivial experiment has given rise to a some extremely crazy worldviews, which give rise to a lot of technology. The truth is never trivial. Nor is something that isn’t true. I think for the most part, we all have questions about the nature of reality, if the psi wheel turns out not to be true, we can cross that off the list of things to investigate, making us that much wiser, that much closer to the truth. I do believe the psi wheel to be true however. I’m making assumptions, so be it. What if I make the right one? I don’t think making an assumption, alone, is a bad idea. I think it’s when people don’t investigate their assumptions that we can become thrown off course.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: