So that's what they mean when a project goes 'pear shaped'.....
There is something in this. Remember the Global Conciousness project? This guy sent hundreds of random number generators to people all over the world,
they were connected to the net so he could read them all day & night.
So guess what happened? whenever there was a worldwide crisis or other event (like a new Justin Bieber story) he saw that the generators became a lot
less random, like many of them would generate the number 625 for example. The really big spike was on 9/11. The only conclusion he could reach was
that there were so many minds thinking the same thought or feeling the same emotion at the same time, that they affected the counters in some way.
I believe that project is still going on, interesting stuff indeed.
OK let's try an experiment, everyone think "Impeach the President"
Doesent matter which one, they are all equally bad IMO
Hi there Bedlam;
The function of 'the scientific method', IMHO, is to try to get past our meat limitations by reducing our innate tendencies to falsely
interpret things. And thus do you get math, and statistics, and peer reviewed journals, and gadgets that can emit a single photon on demand or measure
potential differences of millionths of a Volt. And the product of applying all these things is to answer the questions "Did that really happen", "does
it happen a lot", "to what degree did it happen", and "am I just imagining it because I expect/want this to be true". And in the end these things all
work, or at least help, because they don't use the same processing and sensory equipment YOU do, as the experimenter. Even peer review and replication
works because the other guys aren't supposed to have the same confirmation bias, expectation and memories. So their stochasms are running from a
different set of internal node values. If you get the same answers from these different sorts of interpretation and sensing, then maybe it's real.
Exactly, and that system does work to a degree, i have used it with great success among colleagues. The downside is of course 'peer pressure' where it
becomes a trend to follow a theory because it sounds good, and measurements tend to be ignored in favour of (flawed) logic.
Like the speed of light. That guy in the TED talks was of course right, the speed of light is not constant and probably never was, but the
establishment solved that problem by fixing the speed by defenition
in the 90's
There you go, just ignore the problem & it will go away, right?
I guess i'm a champion of fringe science, but i like to keep it real.
It would be reeeely great if not only the scientists, but all those YT experimenters out there, became brutally honest with themselves & with us the
No more faking, no more manipulating results. Just tell it as it is & if you are not sure, say so.
I saw Tesla mentioned, i was looking into his stuff in the late 70's, i still am.
But what he said about the universe being energy & vibration is absolutely correct. I just recieved a hard copy of "The problems of increasing Human
Energy" to add to the collection, in it he outlines the very things we are discussing here, how's that for a coincidence!
You eventually become blind to the deficiencies of your design because you start internally glossing over the bumps. It's not intentional
either. We found that you need to launch off two totally decoupled design teams that meet at the implementation rally point, and examine the
approaches. Usually there's a big catfight, and you end up with a sort of melding of the best parts of both, or one way will be obviously better than
the other, and if it's TOO one-sided, we restart that phase.
True also, i have done this very same thing on projects with 2 groups, eventually we did get on the path , i would have preferred 3 groups but we were
lucky to get that far.
What we tested was the running cars on water stuff, Stan Meyers fuel cell & a cheap homemade alternative. Both systems worked. Other stuff like the
GEET fuel processor gave such mixed results that i decided to shelve it more or less permanently.
You end up with way better products that way. But IMHO you can't get away from doing this. I do it myself. It's an innate behavior to see
something you've invested your time and effort into with rose colored glasses.
Yes that works, certainly because one team will see pitfalls where the other team doesn't.
But this time i acted as a go-between, feeding info & hints from one to the other as needed. Maybe that was wrong of me, had it been otherwise i would
have let them remain autonomous, but i wanted to see the project verified, so there were mods carried out on both sides because of this..however, both
systems did work in the end....and that's all i wanted to achieve at that point.
Saying to yourself one day 'I think it might be possible that there are particles with fractional spin values other than (n)1/2, is there any
evidence for this?' takes less True Believership than does 'I think I can control the value of dimensionless constants with my mind' or 'I think I can
alter probability by really really wanting it to change'.
Funny you should say that, my more recent research asks this of the humble electron, in regards to time travel
You know what really screws up a group? when money is mentioned.
Having survived many false starts since i first raised the question of 'should we sell our inventions' i am still funding my own work, sometimes a
freind helps out, sometimes i help them, it works, but only because it is based on trust, freindship, and mutual respect.
I guess that is exactly why the big institutions are failing, they don't have any of that, it has become a rat race for glory, money or both, and sod
the truth of the actual measurements.
Tesla did warn us of this, and he even warned us that our own personal beliefs & emotions will blind us, and he feared that we would (in terms of
electricity) go off on the wrong track for over a century.
Yet again i can find no fault in his logic, and his worst fear actually beame our reality!
That's not necessarily bad - why would you investigate something you aren't interested in?
I had to, because a dear freind of mine, 1WorldWatcher passed away. His brilliant insight has possibly led to a cure for cancer. No chemo, no hard
radiation, no surgery.
So projects i deemed 'important' back then are still on the shelf & are running 5 years behind schedule, but i am not in the least bothered by it,
this is obviously way more important.
Just 1 terminal patient 100% cured is by no means a success story, but when i got that call i was very happy for Tim anyway. That prototype is still
out there making the rounds, i have lost track of it but no matter: it is doing what it was built to do, cure peeps.
That's my religion of the moment, and i know i need to be able to cure 100 terminal patients before i will even consider it as officialy working.
That's why i built 12 more of these things, they are being tested all over the world, in secret, right now. It's almost impossible to get permission
from peeps, because of family saying no, or the peeps themselves already giving up.
1WW never gave up, we kept working together until he could no longer speak, only type a few words every 5 minutes. yet something has happened because
edit on 14-9-2016 by playswithmachines because: * Sorry half the quote not shown for some reason..that may
edit on 14-9-2016 by playswithmachines because: typo's
edit on 14-9-2016 by playswithmachines because: Except
Lincoln, Roosevelt & JFK.....
edit on 14-9-2016 by playswithmachines because: Edit function no longer works, sorry, it must be an ME moment