It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Opening the eyes of skeptics

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 08:57 PM
In my opinion, many of the so called "Paranormal" (not really the appropriate term, as it suggests that they are unusual, but familiar to most so I will continue with it) abilities that people have require a certain state of mind to achieve. If this is the case, an important factor in being able to reach this mind state is belief. Now this may not seem to difficult for those that believe in the Paranormal. However for the skeptics, belief is something that is sorely lacking. Therefore how can the eyes of a skeptic be opened when one of the core ingerdients used for the task is missing?

I personally, have not had too many experiences with paranormal abilities, but have no doubt that we all possess them. Obviously belief is not a problem for me. One of the few things that I am able to do is lucidly dream. I never considered this to be paranormal, and still don't, but I notice on ATS, that a lot of others do. This being the case, I think I may have a way that will enable skeptics to have their eyes opened to the paranormal world.

Everyone, I'm sure has had a dream that they can recall. Dreams are one of the few things that don't require belief to experience. Therefore it is quite possible that skeptics could become aware that they are dreaming without any belief at all. If this was to happen, I think it would unlock the gateway which seperates the paranormal world from existing in their minds. From lucid dreaming they could then realise they have the ability to change their dreams and eventually remove the subjective elements to experience the Astral Plane. From here, the eyes of the skeptic, I believe would be opened, and the potential to untap the other paranormal abilities within could be accessed.

Do others think this is a realistic possibility to open the eyes of skeptics? What are methods exist that may be able to achieve this task? All thoughts are welcome.

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:13 PM
The problem is that the skeptics want replicatable evidence, and experiments conducted under such a way that there's no possibility of fraud.

This is why they want professional stage magicians to be present and to examine the setups to any experiment. That's why they want described a process that works for everyone (or even one person) under that controlled setting for more than 75% of the time.

Have you looked at some of the tests that HAVE been done under these condtions? The magician, James Randi, has a foundation that tests these and they do have psychics that set up the experiment under the above conditions -- and fail to get results that are anything other than chance.

You can see the current round of applicants here:

(I think this gives you the list for the past year):

Note that the psychics set up the experiments themselves. For example, here's the one for Prophet Yahweh (remember him, here on the boards?):

I hope this will give you some insight about the conditions that would satisfy scientists and skeptics.

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:22 PM
I don't feel there is anything paranormal about dreaming, everyone accepts that you can dream. So I don't think that's a good place to start. And although I have tried to have a lucid dream, I have yet to ever have a dream that was so real I couldn't tell it from reality. It is still always 'playing in my head' rather than being immersed in it. Or at least those that I remember, anyway.

I believe that it needs to be an ability that is scientifically proven in a controlled environment, but I also think James Randi is full of ****. The rules of his contest are so filled with legal jargon and stuff that it makes it nearly impossible to claim the prize, even if you do actually have an ability. Just a look at the first link Byrd posted shows how they are so picky that people can't even APPLY without them saying no. They're so cynical and closed-minded about the whole thing that they don't even put any effort to try and test for validity.

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:25 PM
fyi, here's a typical negotiation with someone who claims paranormal powers and the JREF testers who are trying to get them to set up a simple test of ONE paranormal action:

We could do the same thing here. I think you'd find out pretty quickly how hard it is to get people to design a simple experiment where trickery and coincidence are eliminated and where "well, that's SORT OF similar so it counts" counts as a "hit."

[edit on 7-3-2006 by Byrd]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:24 AM
I think there is a difference between what skeptics require to believe without personal experience, and what they require with it. I'm suggesting that the skeptics themselves may be able to get a taste for the paranormal through the lucid dreaming path, thus would no longer require the proof the once might have had they not had any first hand experience.

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:14 AM
I'm pretty sure that one of the major requirements of skepticism eyes!
lol Your solution is that skeptics forego their requirement for verifiable information and adopt the substitute for thinking we call..."faith"!?

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:27 AM
Don't confuse Skeptics with Scientists.

Scientists indeed keep an open mind, well most of em. They don't think "oh it's not proven so it can't be". No they will form theories and ideas about a posibility that it could be true or not and then investigate. Their findings will then be presented to a form of tribunal where they can present their findings. If other scientists can confirm it all then it is accepted as being proven to be or not to be.

Sceptics say before hand "It's not proven so therefore it isn't so". Sceptics are nothing more then science wanna-be's. No matter what proof you present they will always find means with equally invalid views and standpoints to proof their own point. So it is usually a "your word vs mine"-argument. Depending on how open both sides for another standpoint determines the amount of flaming/mudslinging taking place between them. Both the sceptic and believer will rationalize an idea to be "right" in their point of view. Anyone who disagrees is seen as making an attack on their point and thus their ego feels attacked. Heated discussions over nothing.

A scientist would come in between the 2 groups and say. It is Not proven to be nor is it proven to be. But I shall investigate and share my findings with you. A scientist and Occultist are very similar...both seek evidence and do research and try to find balance in almost anything.

I too do research and try to proof certain aspects. But for who are you doing the research? For yourself? Or to better mandkind and give them more insight? I personally don't care for sceptics and having to deliver proof to them. It's not my problem they can't see more then there is nor does it bother me in the slightest

[edit on 8-3-2006 by Enyalius]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 11:30 AM
If ever I have a skeptic on my hands I feel like im talking to a wall.Though I am good at talking to walls,it does get tiresome.Usually I dont really ever talk to people about this stuff in real life and on the board,well I dont really try to prove anything to anyone,aswell i have a hard time believing in these things myself.

All my life I have been part of an ever changing world of majic and mystery.Where as it is easy for people to stand there and listen to someone say something and go well i dont believe it.Don't mind me but I get really tired when it comes to dealing with what i call primitive thinkers,I also have many names for people,though I know that this myself comes out as being shallow and not recieving and open to others.I have dealt with too many damaging minds which usually coincide with people who are more apt to watch endless amounts of television.

I even find it hard to deal with science oriented people.Those who have not thought of ones exsistence but mainly the scientific description of laws of physics and bull#$@#.

In a universe of endless possible outcomes and variants of different elements I find that science something that is a few thousand years old at best (on this planet).Could not possibly be concrete enough for people to base any kind of real law on anything,now I know others disagree with me so thats okay.If I see a ghost,and tell someone I seen it,they can believe me or not.That is their decision if I want to put my thoughts out there I had better be prepared to back it up if need be.Yet do not really care to do so.
Its kind of a hey thats your deal kind of thing.

Yet usually I dont find myself being contradicted often.Infact the only time I really had a problem was with our friend here Enyalius,whom now I respect.I dont really remember what it was,but it got bad I think,yet in the end It was my own feelings and thoughts that were effecting me about what he/she said.I had to deal with that.

If it wasnt for people putting wrenchs in our ways of thinking.Where would we end up?


[edit on 03/04/2005 by toraylin]

posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:39 PM
It is really hard to open the eyes of another person.While many feel the need to do so,based on any amount of reasoning,this can be damaging to both parties.

Many people who do not believe in something will not even if it is presented to them in physical manifestation.

Where most of the folly lies in this is in the need to show others through communication,such as media.It is all too easy to say something or to fabricate a picture or whatever.

Evidence to show others is neccessarily the problem.
One asks why need to do this?Do you rely so much on others opinions of your life experience that you need someone to believe you.

We know only ourselves and even that is debatable,even through knowing someone else their whole life one cannot understand another persoms point of view.Well this is debatable to,but for this purpose let me say this.

Accept yourself and what you think for yourself and not the benefit of others neccessatily.When to reach out is to feel rejection and pain through
these interaction at what cost is it neccessarily important to tell others?

When it is more easy to have them ask you and seek your knowledge,so here I ask not how do you make skeptics open their eyes,but hgow do skeptics eyes get opened?

posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:53 PM
See, the problem is simple.
James Randi is his own Universe....
the paranormal person is their own universe...

they are both God & creators so when they come together they cancel each other out.
thats why he cant disprove anyone with certainty or they cant prove it.

Think about this, he wont let you conjure up a demon...

If its not possilbe whats the problem

But the point is, he doesnt want to believe, and they want to. Its all realitve, and both are real.
thats about it

Gods Peace

posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 12:35 PM
I don't believe this method requires faith at all, as if that was the case, it would be pretty unlikely to work. It's possibile that there could almost be no involvement on the part of the skeptic at all. The experience of lucid dreaming can come to anyone in any state of mind in my opinion, and therefore through experience, not faith, a skeptic may unwittingly have the door opened to the seemingly unlimited possibilty of true reality. Who knows, if this were to happen, I'm sure the new found realisation would be greatly beneficial to many who don't currently believe.

new topics

top topics


log in