It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

page: 4
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

It is true, your subconscious is aware of everything before you are. Be no car wrecks...that makes absolutely no sense at all. How can you be consciously aware of something by your subconscious? You must think we control 100% of our brain...sorry dude but its more like 15%.


If I told you to pick the red pill or the blue pill...your subconscious already knows what your going to pick before you pick it. You don't have to sit there and think about what one to pick, you just pick it. Just like I can't control what my next thought is going to be. As far as we know this all comes out of nowhere. It all comes from your subconscious every decision you make is already made before you make it.

That's what Neo was trying to relay to people on the Matrix...there is no choice.
edit on 15-5-2014 by Evanzsayz because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

People form a bell curve.... car accidents.... other end of the distribution



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

Good find and many of these things are well known. The main problem is the materialist strain in science wants to treat consciousness as an emergent property of the material brain. This way they can just bury their heads in the sand because they don't have a physical explanation for consciousness. So if it's a emerges from the material brain, then it's really not important. It's a byproduct of materialism.

Sadly for them, there's zero evidence to support this notion.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Interesting topic, hits close to home for many reasons, as well as to see how it plays out under more research.

Speaking of the car accident example to this-which is a weak way to dismiss it, many times these reactions beforehand saved me from a wreck. Not to say my experience is proof but there's more to look at than just one stopping the accident. Have to keep in mind there's only so much you can do yourself to thwart a vehicle from hitting you, but if anything at all make it less damaging.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   
The OP Misrepresents the Research

Just in case no-one else has pointed it out yet: what the study shows is not that we perceive events before they happen (sorry, kiddies) but that we perceive and respond to events unconsciously before we become conscious of making any decision. This applies to all decisions, not just to important ones.

This suggests that free will — or at least conscious free choice — is an illusion. But then, we sort of knew that already.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

The Cornell study ascertained a biological response up to 5 seconds before the image was shown. I believe that is what the OP is referencing.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Hey "kiddies", don't listen to condescending fools. People can perceive events months or years before they happen because materialism is flawed, consciousness transcends time and space, and we are luminous beings not this crude matter.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

This isn't about decision. This is about reaction. They are measuring physiological REACTION to images that haven't even been shown yet. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the goddamn articles around here, let alone all the posts in a topic. The paper below goes over the "delayed reaction" hypothesis, as well as other possible explanations.

Just read this: journal.frontiersin.org...




Although PAA may seem like a sensory counterpart to the predictive coding observed in the motor system, it differs in terms of the order of events and by not involving inferred events or making a decision. In PAA experiments, the physiological and stimulus events are in the wrong order to be explained causally, and they are time-stamped by a computer (not subjectively reported by research participants). Regardless of the absolute times when these events occur, a physiological reaction occurs before the stimulus to which it seems to be linked. Thus PAA neither supports nor refutes the delayed conscious experience hypothesis, but this hypothesis is not a viable explanation for PAA.

edit on 15-5-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I wholeheartedly agree this occurs. The UK is not known for its Earthquakes whilst rare they do happen as one did on the night of 3 January 2011.

Earthquake - Yorkshire UK

I was speaking with my then GF on ICQ when the air in the house went dead silent and I mean pin drop silent, I froze in my seat but looked around and then there was a sudden rush of something approaching and house started shaking and within a few seconds it was gone.

A moment later a message appeared on screen "the whole house just shook"



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 03:19 PM
link   
This speaks to our Quantum Mind or it could go even deeper to a river or flow of consciousness. We saw this with the works of Sheldrake, Radin, Pear labs and Bem with feeling the future. This is most likely connected to quantum mechanics because there seems to be no classical time separation between us and major events that can occur in the future like 9-11.

This could also speak to Psychics and especially Empaths. It's yet another blow to the notion of materialism whic never made any sense to begin with.

It almost sounds like Star Wars when they talked about a disturbance in the Force. Look at this part of the article:


A metaphor may help to provide an intuitive feel for this effect – watching a river move past a stick. The metaphor works as follows: Imagine that the direction of the water’s current is the conscious experience of the flow of time (temporal flow), and imagine that an intrusion in the flow (the stick) is an emotional, arousing, or otherwise important event. The largest disturbance in the water made by the intrusion is downstream (in the “forward” time direction), which is analogous to our conscious reaction to experiencing the important event. But if one examines the flow of water near the stick, one will also see a small perturbation upstream, anticipating the intrusion in the water downstream due to the back pressure. Similar to PAA, this upstream perturbation is a hint of things to come. It is not normally part of our conscious awareness and, as with disturbances in a flow of water, the majority of the effect of an intrusion is downstream of the intrusion.


I mean, Obi Wan Kenobi couldn't have said this any better when describing the Force. So there's this temperal flow of time and when an INTRUSION occurs in this flow that's emotional or important we anticipate this intrusion. It's like a disturbance in the Force so to speak. This has been seen in Psi for years and I'm just glad more people are realizing that materialism has become the new flat earth.
edit on 15-5-2014 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2014 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax There is a technology in development by some DOD contractors I know of that uses this ability to speed up targeting response. The human brain can perceive potential targets faster than the machines can but the electronics can detect this recognition and relay the perception to targeting controls faster than the body can respond to these same brain triggered signals. This augmentation for targeting is of keen interest by DOD for the development of machine assisted targeting in weapons systems.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

There are random number generators all over the world that become non-random just before major world happenings. Death of the beloved princess Diana, for instance. Collective consciousness? Are we co-creators? Has the scene already been played out in an astral plane and we just playing the parts that we agreed to?



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: sourcecontroller
a reply to: Astyanax There is a technology in development by some DOD contractors I know of that uses this ability to speed up targeting response. The human brain can perceive potential targets faster than the machines can but the electronics can detect this recognition and relay the perception to targeting controls faster than the body can respond to these same brain triggered signals. This augmentation for targeting is of keen interest by DOD for the development of machine assisted targeting in weapons systems.



Was this the one where satellite images were being looked at for potential targets. Where a grid was flashed on the screen for a few seconds, the viewers physiological (non conscious)was analysed when a grid with interesting features came up and then was revisited, as it cut the time of analysis down considerably?



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

I think this is due to the fact that we can anticipate and sometimes we anticipate for the worst and then it happens and we are in disbelief because we anticipated that worst thing. Happens quite often no big deal.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: LeatherNLace
Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

What is missing from this title? The word Credible.

If the title read: Credible Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

I read the article and saw nothing credible about it.

Like the poster said above, if this were true, then we would not have traffic accidents...or any accidents for that matter.


I went and found the original article. I'm a open-minded skeptic. I find a certain entertainment in pursuing odd curious story threads and wait for them to fall apart somewhere. However, the original article stands on very solid ground. Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis
I am finishing a masters in statistics at Penn State, and just had a class that covered meta-analysis. Meta-analysis takes the evidence from multiple papers on a topic, and if the research methods were similar enough, evaluates them as a whole. Sometimes one can tease subtle effects out of a larger body of evidence, or find that publication bias (negative results are thrown away and not published) explain the results. In this case, 26 published reports are summarized on the topic and it passes statistical rigor clearly. The authors state that they are at a loss to explain the phenomenon. As a skeptic, I am a bit shocked by the conclusion of this meta-analysis. However, I cannot ignore the result. This is a large body of evidence accumulated at this point.

The paper says nothing about predicting the future. It measures a physiological response before the stimulus, and the difference is very small. This has nothing to do with consciously knowing anything that's about to happen. So, the counter argument that no one would have traffic accidents if this were true is a gross distortion of what is claimed by the paper.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: bitsforbytes

These are people who have careers in scientific studies. Do you not think that they'd have considered that possibility? What you describe is called confirmation bias, and it's one of the first things that is looked for in studies like this... and it actually was considered by the authors. Had you actually read the #ing article you would know that.

Read the papers. Actually gain an understanding of how they came to these results and what the results mean. It is really frustrating that people will comment on something that they haven't even bothered giving a cursory review of.

It should be a rule on ATS that the original post and any articles within it are mandatory reading before posting a reply.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: LeviWardrobe
a reply to: bitsforbytesWhat you describe is called confirmation bias, and it's one of the first things that is looked for in studies like this...


See Figure 5 in the paper, and the paragraph under it. It wasn't the first thing, but it would be next to impossible to publish without this check.

www.frontiersin.org...

For interpretation see en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Oops. Accidental post.
edit on 16-5-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: accidental post

edit on 16-5-2014 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: anonentity

This was not some remote viewing type of technology. It is an optical relay that uses eye position and retina response along with some cortical squib data to determine that the brain had picked up on a potential threat. It is part of the instinctive human ability that makes us great hunters. It also happens to be rather quantifiable and exploitable for this technology application.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: charlyv
If we believe in the multiverse theories, perhaps what ever is about to happen causes a shift into another parallel universe.
If that universe were say a few seconds behind, you get this instant "deja-vu"?


Everything is connected.
Holographic Universe Principle provides a theory for ALL currently inexplicable phenomenon.,presentiment, clairvoyance, teleportation, the afterlife and even extraterrestrials.
The Large Hadron Collider could eventually confirm the possibility for the existence of such a multiverse.
In an infinite universe, all things are possible.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join