Can Telepathy aid belief in a god?

[barfbag]

@ Moontanman,

 

You are indeed completely correct, nonetheless the burden of proof weighs on your shoulders not mine. I have asked several times for something to back up your horse feathers with something beside i believe so it must be true.

 

 

Why do I care if you believe or not? I must admit I do feel sorry for those who lack experience in PSI fields because they must only believe what they read in Nature Magazine.

 

However...

 

A person professing radio waves existed 1000 years ago would have faced the exact same burden of proof, and in my position the opinions would alter as much.

 

Without physical tools to measure psychic phenomenon there can be no proof other than percentages and odds which are normally dismissed by anyone familiar with the Scientific method which assumes results must be replicable.

 

So. As happy as I am to have the Burden of Proof shifted to me, I could care less. Believe what you want, there is no skin off my nose.

 

Instead I think the burden of proof is upon anyone who wants to understand our reality. I think there are good reasons to want to know if death is the end or a beginning. But I am curious that way. Your scientific curiosity has obviously brought you somewhere else.

 

Telepathic subjects have already been deemed by a moderator here to be unrelated to mass consciousness or god so I cannot express my views again without going off topic, but if you accept the later then the former becomes a higher probability.

[John Cuthber]

@ Moontanman,

 

 

A person professing radio waves existed 1000 years ago would have faced the exact same burden of proof, and in my position the opinions would alter as much.

 

Without physical tools to measure psychic phenomenon there can be no proof other than percentages and odds which are normally dismissed by anyone familiar with the Scientific method which assumes results must be replicable.

 

A person 1000 years ago could, in principle, have shown that you can transmit a signal across the room using bits of metal and static electricity.

(He wouldn't have known it was radio but then again, nor did Hertz when he noticed the phenomenon)

The burden of proof would be easy for him.

He could show someone how to do the "experiment" and they could repeat it.

 

 

Now, today we have psychologists (among others) whose research depends entirely on statistically valid differences in outcome from the outcome that would be predicted in the absence of some effect.

Those differences are real and can be shown to be repeatable.

The point is that, while any given observation might not be repeatable, the pattern of observations is repeatable when analysed statistically.

 

 

So, If I ask a psychologist to explain some effect they may not have a definitive explanation.

But they can prove that the effect is real.

 

You can not do that for the effects you assert.

 

The burden of proof has not been "shifted onto" you.

You took it on as soon as you made a claim.

You can believe it as you wish, but don't expect to be taken seriously unless you can support it.

 

You say "I think there are good reasons to want to know if death is the end or a beginning."

and you are right

You say "But I am curious that way." and I agree with you- I am curious about that too.

But the difference is that I don't dream up some guess and then assume it's right and act as if other people should believe my guess just because I believe it.

[barfbag]

act as if other people should believe my guess just because I believe it.

 

 

The second sentence in my last post covered this,

 

I must admit I do feel sorry for those who lack experience in PSI fields because they must only believe what they read in Nature Magazine.

 

 

Anybody who makes legitimate attempts at telepathy with a friend or associate will soon realize it is possible. It is not hard to do despite whatever anyone can say otherwise. I think that if James Randi himself was willing to really try telepathy with someone on a regular basis he too would be convinced, but his living has been parodying PSI topics, so I doubt that will happen.

 

 

 

 

Now, today we have psychologists (among others) whose research depends entirely on statistically valid differences in outcome from the outcome that would be predicted in the absence of some effect.

Those differences are real and can be shown to be repeatable.

The point is that, while any given observation might not be repeatable, the pattern of observations is repeatable when analysed statistically.

So, If I ask a psychologist to explain some effect they may not have a definitive explanation.

But they can prove that the effect is real.

You can not do that for the effects you assert.

 

 

It is funny that Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung were considered founding fathers of this psychology you speak of, and yet they were both at one point heavy advocates for Telepathy. The term "Synchronicity" in PSI effects was coined by Carl Jung.

 

The first person in modern times to document telepathic dreaming was Sigmund Freud

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

 

 

Freud, who wrote several articles on purported telepathic dreams, was a member of the Society for Psychical Research, founded in London in 1882. This society was the first major organization to assess anomalous experiences scientifically, by collecting case studies, conducting surveys, and applying probability theory to the outcome of "guessing" experiments. Among the topics investigated by the society were hypnosis, multiple personalities, near-death experiences, reincarnation, lucid dreaming, out-of-body experiences, and so-called “psychic phenomena” or "psi" that appeared to transcend the constraints of space, time, and energy. Most of these topics, including lucid dreaming, have passed into the scientific mainstream, even though their explanatory mechanisms are still a matter of conjecture (Krippner, 2005). Psi phenomena remained outside of mainstream science, and became the focus of investigations at a "parapsychology laboratory" at Duke University in North Carolina, bearing that appellation to indicate that these studies were "alongside" (i.e., "para") conventional science rather than opposing it.

 

 

My comment about personal beliefs regarding the Universe (How do you explain The Universe and Matter? were in a context trying to explain why I dislike the use of decrepit old religions to discredit the notion of god. If telepathy is real, then on some level mass consciousness must also be real, and is god much of a stretch from there?

 

I agree god (if it exists) must be a part of our collective unconscious, but disagree that there is a Heaven, Hell, Pearly Gates, and more.

 

I have already said directly that proof can never be attained until we have tools better than people to measure such an energy.

 

This is why I feel no "Burden of Proof" is necessary. I actually think it is your way of thinking that has less basis. I think it is your claim that is outrageous. I think it is silly to ignore PSI fields, but I have been involved with them for many years and have seen much firsthand evidence that would seem impossible to explain by chance. There is NO such thing as a telepathy experiment without at least one witness (It always takes at least two).

 

 

but don't expect to be taken seriously unless you can support it.

 

 

Yes. I think I made this clear now. I don't care if anyone takes this seriously. My position is I dislike the use of decrepit old religions to write of the notion of a god (if a god exists).

Edited July 3, 2014 by barfbag

[Moontanman]

Actually, i was talking about the infinte power/thought/imagination of god.

 

 

You would have to demonstrate a god before you could even ask that question...

[John Cuthber]

 

The second sentence in my last post covered this,

 

Since that seems to have been

"I must admit I do feel sorry for those who lack experience in PSI fields because they must only believe what they read in Nature Magazine."

as a response to my observation

"But the difference is that I don't dream up some guess and then assume it's right and act as if other people should believe my guess just because I believe it."

would you like to expand on that with actual evidence rather than "loud assertion"?

 

"It is funny that Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung were considered founding fathers of this psychology"

And they are both essentially discredited (you can add Burt to the list too if you like) because they couldn't actually do what I said that modern psychology can do- demonstrate reproducible results

[barfbag]

@ John C,

 

would you like to expand on that with actual evidence rather than "loud assertion"?

 

 

First. I have REPEATEDLY said (over and over now),

 

I have already said directly that proof can never be attained until we have tools better than people to measure such an energy.

 

 

So I made it clear that was a personal opinion that was unrelated to the topic when I also said this,

 

I think I made this clear now. I don't care if anyone takes this seriously. My position is I dislike the use of decrepit old religions to write of the notion of a god (if a god exists).

 

 

However since you like to poke fun perhaps you can lend us your notions of how the universe began and if it has boundaries, and what is or is not inside the boundaries?

 

Then I'll take a few shots at your implausible explanations because when faced with questions like the beginning of time there is no real great answers is there? So let's hear your best.

 

This thread is about proof of god. Reality itself is absurd.

Edited July 5, 2014 by barfbag

[MonDie]

Barfbag, a hypothesis is testable if it makes predictions. Your hypothesis, the hypothesis that you can predict the future or others' mental states in the absence of any sensory evidence, clearly makes a prediction. It predicts that you will be right more often than we would expect if you had no sixth sense (the null hypothesis).

Edited July 5, 2014 by MonDie

[barfbag]

It predicts that you will be right more often than we would expect if you had no sixth sense (the null hypothesis).

 

 

So if a telepathy experiment were arranged that defeated the odds that would be ample proof ?

 

This is usually scoffed at and then a few people "test" it. I could also fix up a failed experiment if I chose. Every experiment must have results containing odds against Random Chance.

 

What if I set up several tests and just showed you the results of the group that got luckiest hits?

 

Skeptics will not accept odds as proof. A Hypothesis cannot say "It should work some of the time".

 

A human can not be used as a measurement device using The Scientific Method.

[Moontanman]

So if a telepathy experiment were arranged that defeated the odds that would be ample proof ?

 

This is usually scoffed at and then a few people "test" it. I could also fix up a failed experiment if I chose. Every experiment must have results containing odds against Random Chance.

 

What if I set up several tests and just showed you the results of the group that got luckiest hits?

 

Skeptics will not accept odds as proof. A Hypothesis cannot say "It should work some of the time".

 

A human can not be used as a measurement device using The Scientific Method.

No you are mistaken, at one time lightning had no explanation other than the supernatural, it was investigated and found to have a natural cause. A statistically significant test would give reason to look into it further.

[John Cuthber]

 

So if a telepathy experiment were arranged that defeated the odds that would be ample proof ?

 

This is usually scoffed at and then a few people "test" it. I could also fix up a failed experiment if I chose. Every experiment must have results containing odds against Random Chance.

 

What if I set up several tests and just showed you the results of the group that got luckiest hits?

 

Skeptics will not accept odds as proof. A Hypothesis cannot say "It should work some of the time".

 

A human can not be used as a measurement device using The Scientific Method.

For a start, re.

"A human can not be used as a measurement device using The Scientific Method."

Oh yes it can.

 

And, for a finish, if you (or anyone else) can demonstrate real telepathy,

(as you put it, "if a telepathy experiment were arranged that defeated the odds that would be ample proof ?")

they can win a million dollars here.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

 

The basis of that prize is beating odds of a million to one and he is a skeptic so it's plainly not true to say

" Skeptics will not accept odds as proof."

And the whole nature of quantum mechanics is statistical so it's also plainly not true to say "A Hypothesis cannot say "It should work some of the time"."

 

It seems to me that you should find out something about the subject before you post any more errors about it.

[barfbag]

@ JohnC,

 

Wow!

 

First. I have addressed the James Randi Foundation thing several times already in this thread (you can find them), and explained that it is bogus. Some would call it a fools bet. There is no way to win. Even if you could perform Telepathy to a high degree and got 99% of the questions right it still would not meet the demands of The Scientific Method especially in regards to replication.

 

How would a 99% accurate psychic make it through experimentation; never mind the confirmation aspects of The Scientific Method.

 

You claim humans have been used as measurement tools using the scientific method? I was in a context discussing the nature of god/telepathy energies, but I'd be interested in ANY comparable instance. I suppose you could say some old Chemist was using his finger to determine if the outcome is hot or cold, lol, but I am being serious. I don't think you can rely on the human brain to be accurate 100% of the time, especially with a "voice" that cannot be heard consciously (as far as I know).

 

Now there is a lot of stuff about The James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) you are not aware of so there is no need to quote his odds at me.

 

Despite the website, I think that contest has been mostly closed for some time,but they want us to believe they will open up again for something I know they had closed it or stopped reviewing applications, etc.

 

Even when JREF was running they wanted you to submit your feat on a 20 minute video. Now since I think Telepathy aimed at REM sleep is the most effective way to transmit thoughts clearly I would require a Sleep Lab, volunteers, and send them a video.

 

You say they accept A Million to One odds though? I would like to see that because it seems awfully low. Many psychic experiments easily defeat a million to one odds.

 

They do NOT accept probabilities/odds. If you can prove otherwise I'd be happy to see it actually.

 

Twenty years ago I invented a new method (newest method in 3000 years) of getting ideas, numbers, guidance from our subconscious mind. It involved using subliminal messages only your subconscious could perceive fed to the subject in random order and with high repetition. I determined three methods for hiding subconscious choices within the pictures which were putting message just outside visible spectrum like with UV ink, altering the pigmentation of the message ever so slightly changing the colour an imperceptible amount, or thirdly embedding the choices in an auto-stereo-gram. The third type was most computer friendly.

 

One assumption with the above method is that the subconscious mind is more aware of our surroundings than we might be like when we drive our cars without focusing on driving. Based on that premise and possibility, we made some software available to various others studying PSI. It contains almost 1000 auto-stereo-grams. I am not a programmer for a living, but I picked up PHP in the development and maintenance of that program.

 

Conscious thought is supposed to filter out because of repetition and leave the intuitive choices. This has shown high probabilities of clairvoyance on top of telepathy. I believe our future thoughts can affect our reality partly because of this. It is expectation and belief that determine whether or not Schrodinger's cat will tough it out. If I believe my cat in the box has a 75% survival chance then the cat will have a 75% chance of survival. This idea that belief trumps reality is in a discussion group I belong to and I've considered borrowing Brian Josephson's Random Number Generators.

 

Here is a thought experiment. Imagine belief does influence reality by collapsing the cat in the state we expect. I know Schrodinger and Einstein would also ridicule that notion, but hear me out for a second. So imagine we approach 1000 people in a mall and tell them that they have a 75% chance of producing 1's over 0's with the coin flip type number machine. Now the results might be 75%, but the testers know the machine outputs 50% of both numbers equally. So the opinions of the testers influence the test results because they are "Wigner's Friends". Their opinions are carried into the mass mind. So maybe the results would still be positive. Let's say the testers opinions only knocked down the results to a 60% success rate. Now weigh in the opinion of the entire world as you try to spread the news. The final collapse may never happen.. maybe we are living life as a possibility wave and some future collapse will alter or change this reality.

 

We are in the spooky religion thread and this stuff is all about god/telepathy/ and mass mind.

 

(Oh and i noticed nobody else took me up on the offer to suggest their own beginning of time notions, because trying to explain the dimensions and occurrence of the Universe is stranger than anything I've said)

 

So I am aware of James Randi. I had contacted JREF in the past also. You are sent copy/paste emails and such, and it is hard to get them to talk. The messages I did get were not from J Randi.

 

If your video is accepted you must fly yourself, staff, and your equipment to their offices and demonstrate. They say cost should be nothing if you expect to win $1 million. Did you think they would come to your house in Nebraska?

 

The Maimonides Sleep Telepathy study defied 75 000 000:1 odds. Dr Ullman and Dr. Krippner who authored that book which is a must read. It is too bad the videos are no longer distributed or accessible because they were a lot of fun to watch.

 

JREF wants a short video they can make fun of on Youitube. I cannot recall any odds being mentioned, but I'd be happy to see.

 

..

" Skeptics will not accept odds as proof."

 

 

Okay. So what Quantum Mechanics problems rely on probabilities? I'm curious.

 

Feel free to add your own beginning of time or beginning of the universe notions so I can take a few cheap jabs also. Sorry, but that's about norm response around here.

 

Does Nature Magazine accept Probabilities? lol

 

Even real science is not immediately accepted here in some cases. I will name Cold Fusion/LENR as an example of that, butI can wait a few years for everyone to catch up. I'm addicted to new energy possibilities and LENR has been confirmed too many tiimes by corporations like Toyota/MIT/NASA and so many more, but it might as well be in the god thread also.

[John Cuthber]

"You claim humans have been used as measurement tools using the scientific method? I was in a context discussing the nature of god/telepathy energies, but I'd be interested in ANY comparable instance."

Pretty much the whole of psychology uses humans.

 

And here are some quotes from the JREF's FAQ site

"Has anyone ever gotten past the preliminary test?

No. Some people use this fact as a reason not to apply – and yet the protocol is never altered once the applicant agrees to it. In fact, we ask the applicant to design the test."

 

and

"Protocols must be “mutually agreed upon,” what does that mean?

Neither the Foundation nor the claimant can force a testing procedure without the approval of the other side. The testing procedure is a negotiation, and no one can put their foot down. If at any time it a deadlock is reached, the application process will be terminated, and neither side will be blamed or considered at fault."

 

 

"Okay. So what Quantum Mechanics problems rely on probabilities? I'm curious."

Absolutely all of it.

The wave functions it calculates are the probability distributions of things.

So, if you see an image like the blobby things here

http://www.uiowa.edu/~c004132/ATOMIC_ORBITALS.html

they are contours of probability- the electron has a given (typically 95%- it depends how they are drawn) probability of being within that envelope.

[Ten oz]

I could verify accurate time on a broken clock twice a day. if I did this twice a day everyday at the same times how would I ever know the clock was broken? I would be successfully repeating an expirement daily yet proving nothing.

Point is we have to be careful about what we accept as evidence. Personal experience is not evidence and expirements are worthless when all the variables aren't accounted for and no messurement for success is defined.

[barfbag]

@ JohnC,

 

So if the JREF "contest" (lol) requires something testable beyond chance, and all of our results depend upon odds of....

 

This is easy math. There can be no contest if they both require different things.

 

You claimed he offered money for just producing an easy million to one odds, and I say he won't take odds. They want a video they can poke fun of like,

 

 

 

That's the only way to win his money.

 

 

@ Ophiolite,

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83658-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion-thread-split/

 

One already open. Have at er.

 

@ Ten Oz,

 

There is NO SUCH THING as a telepathy experiment without the involvement of at least two people. Personal experience would not even apply. There must be a sender and receiver in each instance. Imagine trying this with a friend. Do you think you would misinterpret your repeated and extraordinary results? (They always are if you try instead of scoff).

 

 

I suppose I can understand the skeptic views somewhat, but I fail to understand how anyone can lack the curiosity to try telepathy. Dream/Sleep telepathy is very easy as is communicating by mind with a friend at a distance.

 

I am not speaking from a place of guesswork. I have been involved in PSI research as a hobby and have earned money from since I was a teenager. I mentioned one tool I had developed. Unlike some methods people use to access their subconscious mine requires no ideomotor reflexes.

 

I still do not hear any of you rising to the actual topic of this thread and discuss your views on The beginning of time, and what lies beyond it if it is not infinite. No takers? To stay on topic? There are no sane sounding explanations there for you either, so best ignore. The Big Bang Banged into what? From Where?

 

So I feel sorry for those of you who lack the necessary first hand experiences to believe in PSI/Mass Consciousness/God/Whatever, but it really is not hard to do so it becomes harder to empathize.

Edited July 6, 2014 by barfbag

[John Cuthber]

There doesn't seem to be any mention there or telepathy.

[Ten oz]

@ Barfbag, I enjoy your enthusiasm. You once referenced being a novelist. I am sure your enthusiasm serves you very well. Your beliefs have helped you succeed in life. I don't discount that. I also do not doubt that you have found others who share your experiences.

I just don't make the connections between low probability outcomes and evidence of phenomenon. Unlikely things happen all the time. It is unlikely that lightning will hit any one spot and yet it has to hit somewhere. The odds are against anyone winning the lottery but someone does in fact eventually win.

 

As for what came before the big bang, I don't know. Uncertainty of one thing is not evidence for something else. God is an entirely seperate theory/concept than the big bang. The god concept requires its own evidence. Big bang doubt provides zero insight to god. It is just an excuse.

[barfbag]

(For this post pretend for arguments sake you believe in telepathy for some weird reason.

 

If you believed in mass consciousness would it be easier to believe in god?

 

I have suggested that if someone believes in telepathy then the idea that all our minds communicate is true to them.

 

If all our minds communicate what about nature? Would a squirrels perspective be woven into the mass consciousness? What about a tree?

 

If Mass Consciousness existed then would it not be the best argument ever that it helps towards "PROOF OF GOD"

[Ten oz]

It God is defined broadly enough just about anything would lend itself as proof. In your scenario we are asked to accept extra sensor perception and the God you're describing is a form of unified conciousness. You have structured the question so that the answer you desire is the most likely one. It would be like a Christian challanging us to accept, for argument sake, that Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day and then asking us if that would be proof he was the son of god.

 

If telepathy were real it would be a form of communication between people like language is. Communication is not proof of god.

[barfbag]

@ Ten Oz,

 

No. I assure you I am not baiting for an angle. My account now has 2 infraction points for inferring that taking steps to discover telepathy is a step towards proving the possibility of god on a thread entitled "proof of God".

 

The moderator who cannot see the validity of such a viewpoint has instead suggested I open a thread about telepathy, and this is it.

 

The relationship between telepathy and how belief in a god could be related seem very obvious to me, but maybe I've given this more thought than many here. I too often assume the people on the other end are understanding of the subjects.

 

No chance the moderator could be mistaken though.

[Moontanman]

@ Ten Oz,

 

No. I assure you I am not baiting for an angle. My account now has 2 infraction points for inferring that taking steps to discover telepathy is a step towards proving the possibility of god on a thread entitled "proof of God".

 

The moderator who cannot see the validity of such a viewpoint has instead suggested I open a thread about telepathy, and this is it.

 

The relationship between telepathy and how belief in a god could be related seem very obvious to me, but maybe I've given this more thought than many here. I too often assume the people on the other end are understanding of the subjects.

 

No chance the moderator could be mistaken though.

 

 

If may seem obvious to you but it is not to me, I see no reason why discovery of another "sense" would be evidence of god any more than eye sight is evidence of god..

[barfbag]

If may seem obvious to you but it is not to me, I see no reason why discovery of another "sense" would be evidence of god any more than eye sight is evidence of god..

 

 

Yes. I agree. I had said,

 

The relationship between telepathy and how belief in a god could be related seem very obvious to me, but maybe I've given this more thought than many here. I too often assume the people on the other end are understanding of the subjects.

 

 

 

I'll try to simplify it.

 

For the sake of discussion pretend telepathy is possible. This means your brain can send and receive thoughts to everybody. If you walk into work your coworkers know you are in a good mood.

 

Everybody is silently talking to everybody about everything. Thoughts would be out there floating like cell phone signals in the air.

 

This is describing group thinking where a group consensus can be reached unconsciously.

 

If there were a god then would it not seem telepathy would be the vibrational wavelength an entity would use.to communicate to us.

 

When I originally looked for answers as to how telepathy could exist I was not expecting to become religious or also believe in precognition. I was mainly looking at theories that encompassed telepathy and yes that takes you away from Nature Magazine, but how else do you find answers when telepathy works so well.

 

I must either forfeit belief in everything I have seen and done in this PSI field in favour of just accepting what is the common scientific stance, or continue to look for alternate explanations.

 

I like the Walter Russell matter is motion ideas (like if you moved a spiderweb at 20 000/mph you could cut a diamond). He predicted Plutonium must exist in 1926 and his TOE was sound based like octaves which was how the most ancient culture on our planet viewed physics. The Sumerians physics were based upon sound tech.

His version of the Periodic Table is all over the internet, and is interesting.

 

It is easy to simply take a skeptic stance but I won't deny the way I've come to live my life. Everything is connected. We are all pat of god so we are all god. We can create and destroy. Our minds can move mountains. Faith and Expectation trump all.

[Moontanman]

 

Yes. I agree. I had said,

 

 

 

I'll try to simplify it.

 

For the sake of discussion pretend telepathy is possible. This means your brain can send and receive thoughts to everybody. If you walk into work your coworkers know you are in a good mood.

 

Everybody is silently talking to everybody about everything. Thoughts would be out there floating like cell phone signals in the air.

 

This is describing group thinking where a group consensus can be reached unconsciously.

 

If there were a god then would it not seem telepathy would be the vibrational wavelength an entity would use.to communicate to us.

 

When I originally looked for answers as to how telepathy could exist I was not expecting to become religious or also believe in precognition. I was mainly looking at theories that encompassed telepathy and yes that takes you away from Nature Magazine, but how else do you find answers when telepathy works so well.

 

I must either forfeit belief in everything I have seen and done in this PSI field in favour of just accepting what is the common scientific stance, or continue to look for alternate explanations.

 

I like the Walter Russell matter is motion ideas (like if you moved a spiderweb at 20 000/mph you could cut a diamond). He predicted Plutonium must exist in 1926 and his TOE was sound based like octaves which was how the most ancient culture on our planet viewed physics. The Sumerians physics were based upon sound tech.

His version of the Periodic Table is all over the internet, and is interesting.

 

It is easy to simply take a skeptic stance but I won't deny the way I've come to live my life. Everything is connected. We are all pat of god so we are all god. We can create and destroy. Our minds can move mountains. Faith and Expectation trump all.

 

 

Can you give any evidence to confirm any of this?

[Ten oz]

 

If there were a god then would it not seem telepathy would be the vibrational wavelength an entity would use.to communicate to us.

 

 

If telepathy is real and if god is real than it makes sense that telepathy is how god would communicate. I don't understand how you turn that into evidence that god exists?

If telepathy did not exist but god did doesn't it make sense that god would communicate with us by way of spoken language? Is that proof of anything?

I am missing the connection.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

barfbag, please note that the rules of this forum require that you cite real evidence for your claims. You cannot make your argument under the pretence that telepathy exists without first making a solid scientific argument for its existence. Failure to comply with this will result in thread closure. Note also that anecdotes =/= evidence.

 

Edit: since this is identical to a split thread, I have merged the two. Sorry for any confusion.

[barfbag]

@ Hypervalent_Iodine,

 

You cannot make your argument under the pretence that telepathy exists without first making a solid scientific argument for its existence.

 

 

The Opening post was citing Bar Codes as proof of gods existence. This is (It was) a religion thread. How much proof do religious discussions normally merit in your opinion?

 

@ Ten Oz,

 

If telepathy is real and if god is real than it makes sense that telepathy is how god would communicate.

 

 

 

The point is that everyone and everything could be connected and act telepathically as one, where god would be the sum of all parts plus perhaps a bit more.

 

Just knowing we were all connected would heighten belief.

 

However even though I think we communicate telepathically in the same wavelengths we pray or talk to god. Even though this is my religion even if not Judea-Christian. In spite of my firm belief that whatever connects us psychically is also connecting god. In spite of all of this I am not allowqed to bring my religious beliefs into an argument about god.

 

The only person who should even be allowed to comment really is the moderators. I mean if you cannot raise a valid argument without biased moderators making dumb judgements. I won't apologize for that. It is very idiotic to think my argument for god was off topic. I realize I am smarter than most of you by the looks of things and the way the moderators behave here.

 

I tried to dumb the concept down, but I think the mods are too dimwitted to see what is plain as day.

 

Anyone who cannot equate the psychic realm to a realm where a god could exist is either a total idiot or just lying.

 

Is this blunt enough?

 

My god. I thought this science site might actually have a few smart people, but this is like being surrounded by morons.