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.

 

Scientists are convinced that man can see the future

page: 1
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Scientists are conviced that man can see the future


www.redorbit.com

Precognition (seeing the future) has been scientifically verified.
(visit the link for the full news article)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edit for title spelling



[edit on 7/5/07 by masqua]




posted on May, 6 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Has anyone experienced this phenomenon?

www.redorbit.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Interesting.

Here is the original Daily Mail article; some may consider it a better source.


Professor Brian Josephson, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist from Cambridge University, says: "So far, the evidence seems compelling. What seems to be happening is that information is coming from the future.

[...]

Dr Jessica Utts at the University of California, who has worked for the US military and CIA as an independent auditor of its paranormal research, believes we are constantly sampling the future and using the knowledge to help us make better decisions.

"I think we're doing it all the time," she says. "We've looked at the data and it does seem to happen."


Very interesting.

I have heard, and read numerous accounts that bare a resounding resemblance to some of those listed throughout the above mentioned article. The incredulous among you will horn at this... but I believe I have even experienced varying degrees of the phenomenon first hand. Nothing serious, yet, just precognition waves of various personal catastrophes that happen to my insignificant self from time to time. Strange, but welcome forewarnings of either my own, or someone else's stupidity -- or treachery.

I have determined no cause. Is it due to advanced trickery of the mind? Some kind of drink and drug fueled time disorientation, perhaps? A memory disorder? Insanity? Or is it something else?

The most 'sane' answer is probably not that information is some how coming from a time not yet arrived at, yet I have always had a sneaking suspicion that that might actually be what is happening -- and this thread bolsters that suspicion somewhat, so thank you for bringing the article to my (and everyone else's) attention, j_kalin.

Miniature non-linear time Helicopters... to the rescue?
Certainly more preferable than NHS mental health treatment!



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Great article.


I have read some of Dean Radins works (he is one of the people sited in the article). Conscious Universe and Entangled Minds. What I find fascinating is there are more and more of these discoveries being made everyday. A few weeks ago there was another thread started here on ATS on the recent scientific experiment on reality. The results of the experiment show that reality does not exist until it is observed.

I think we are truly entering a new paradigm.

physicsweb.org...



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   
I am almost certain its true and that almost every can do it because even I sometimes have weird feelings of something and then exactly that thing will happen. I play a lot of poker and I see the cards get drawn in my head and a lot of the time I get it right but that could all be coincidence but stuff like knowing what song is going to come on the radio. I also have a weird occurance where someones name will pop into my head and then the phone will ring and blamo its them! lol I am not even the only person I know who says this happens and it is not something that I think many people could control its more of a reactive response but still pretty cool.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Very cool article. Based of the recent findings that things only become "real" when observed, maybe people aren't "predicting" as much as they are creating the future in realtime and on the fly. Interesting find for sure.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Hmm..

I personally have experienced deja-vu multiple times throughout my life.. But I do not believe it is entirely possible to "predict" the future, to know what is going to happen because that would inflict upon freewill..

I believe we all have a destiny, a basic goal to reach.. but I don't think it is possible to predict individual incidents that are going to happen.. if you can understand what I am trying to say.

Does anyone have any information on CIA investigating or even using "see the future" methods?

I know in the Cold War both sides had a small "army" of psychics to spy on each other lol.. from the stories if they are to be believed, it was not very effective.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
It's the spatial extent of worldlines bumping and intersecting into other dimensional worldlines that is being picked up by our brainwave receptors. I thought everyone knew this? lol..

It's the divergence thing from other worldlines (each world-line delays each other from a particular instance ,) The other you that's already experienced something before is leaking into this world into your cerebral cortex.

IF something in this timeline is experienced for the 1st time, you may pick it up the 2nd time around in another worldline.... unfortunately you can't pick up your 1st experience, and some experience's get repeated over and over like a loop function, one could say.... worldlines is like infinite array's inside a loop....
END IF;
END LOOP;
END LOOP;
END


Morpheus: The Matrix is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.



[edit on 6-5-2007 by XPhiles]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   
I dont thnk it can happen.
If someone can see the future or predict the future it menas i have no choice.

IE, he see's the future of some regular joe walking around a street...
this means i do not have the choice today to kill that man.


to see the future means we are not in control of our own decisions.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Well I'm glad to see that (real) scientists have actually put research
into this.

Honestly this is no surprise to me, as I can do it myself, to a very
low extent.


Personally though I don't think that you're actually seeing the future as
it will be 100%, but rather you are seeing the most probable future,
say 90+% of happening.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Our brains are computers. As computers, what do they do? They compute. What do they compute? Many things, and one of them is probability. How probable is one thing or another? The mind may see the probability of some event as very high and makes you aware of it.

In other words, you aren't seeing the future, but the most probable of futures. The brain provides you with this information because it felt that this information was important enough for you to be aware of it for whatever reason. It calculated something that would happen that was of high probability of happening, made you aware of it, with the intention you would influence the event. Why? Well that is for YOU to figure out.

edit: so me and iori agree with the idea, I just didn't read his post until I had posted haha.

[edit on 6-5-2007 by grimreaper797]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Perhaps our future and past selves are linked as one continuous stream with information moving back and forth between the infite number of "us's". So, we are not predicitng the future as much as remembering it. In quantum physics, time is just another dimension. Perhaps we don't cease to exist every second and somehow reincarnate the next; rather we smoothly slide through time like an earthworm. So, maybe the earthworm snout is communicating with it's middle(us). I imagine that if one c ould step out of time, anything that exists would look like a continuous stream stretching back to the big bang and possibly forward to the end of time. As for free choice, that is an illusion. So is the conscious mind. It has been proven that all our thoughts exist BEFORE we are consciously aware of them. The role of our cortex is just to veto or allow the thought to pass through into the rest of the body. This has been shown by functional MRI and PET scanning.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797

In other words, you aren't seeing the future, but the most probable of futures. The brain provides you with this information because it felt that this information was important enough for you to be aware of it for whatever reason. It calculated something that would happen that was of high probability of happening, made you aware of it, with the intention you would influence the event.


This may hold true for some reported cases, but certainly not all. What about -- for instance; when an event is predicted that had a very low probability range? Something similar, but in no way limited to a case such as this (from source article):


The problem with presentiment is that it appears so nebulous that you can't rely on it to make reliable decisions. That may be the case, but there are plenty of instances where people wished they had listened to their premonitions or feelings of presentiment.

One of the saddest involves the Aberfan disaster. This occurred in 1966 when a coal tip collapsed and swept through a Welsh school killing 144 people, including 116 children. It turned out that 24 people had received premonitions of the tragedy.

One involved a little girl who was killed. She told her mother shortly before she was taken to school: "I dreamed I went to school and there was no school there. Something black had come down all over it."


One could argue that the persons who received precognition could have seen the coal tip on numerous occasions well before the accident and subconsciously contemplated the odds of some kind of disaster occurring, but it would be a hell of a coincidence if 24 people in the same area all calculated the odds of a disaster happening in roughly the same fashion, at roughly the same time, just days before such an event actually takes place. Some of these people could be lying, of course, but like I said, such phenomenon is in no way limited to this tragedy alone.

Read through the report again, Grimreaper797. I would be very surprised if all the Scientists currently working on this subject hadn't already taken your explanation of subconscious calculation into account, and rejected it -- especially for their own test subjects. Think about it; would various Professors and Nobel prize-winning Physicists make such bold statements about their data if it could be explained away with such ease by some poster on a message board, such as yourself? Reputations are at stake.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I unlike the scientists, don't have the means to prove the theory. Before they can come out and go "I think this is why" they must have some sort of evidence to back it up. That takes years of research. me hypothesizing takes as much time as it does to think it up.

If my theory were true, and they believed it to be true, they would not say so till they could prove it when challanged on the idea. They don't currently have the research data avalible to prove it though.


Now, as for the example. I don't see why it is not possible. The event is a very broad disaster. It is not 24 people having a premonitions about a senior government official working in the military department to be assassinated at their local town square on may 24, 2007.

They also did not act on it. If 24 people calculated this tragedy to be a high possibility of happening, it was obviously very high probability to happen. That was proven when it did happen. 24 people just means 24 brains calculating the most probable outcome given the information they had all came up with the same result. That just means it was very high chance of it happening.

I don't believe you have shown me any reason not to believe my theory. Just because 24 people saw something happen, and did not act on it, does not mean they were not made aware of it because their brain saw it as an immediate threat. It was their conscious choice to not act on it, and the result is a tragedy.



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   

If someone can see the future or predict the future it menas i have no choice.


i've seen some of your threads before and some of them are damn good in this instance here you are jumping to unnecessary conclusions based on abstractions

you can still have control of your life (be in charge of your life) and see the future (which in actuality is actually like looking at* multiple possible futures *of carrying out different option (activities) which you may engage in for instance.

basically think of it like this (at least this is how it can make sense to me)


many options. well precogniton may come into play when a few of these options lead you into strong emotional responses such as pain, suffering, death, this leaves such a strong emotional imprint in your future parrallel options/lives that parts of your higher self try to make you aware of the danger (kind of like a protection mechanism)

HOW this occurs? not sure have theories but not sure and the bottom line is WE dont' have to know HOW it works for it to be REAL! but i think i have a good idea

i think if someone else has a premeditated idea to harm someone or cause danger to a group of people that this thought enters some kind of consciousness with the location and place of danger being somehow passed thru a consciousness on higher dimensions of our selves and that as a protection mechanism we find a way to try to warn ourselves to keep us from harm


you know about 30 people had such violent nightmares before there trip on the titanic that most did not board it, that my frined is a premontion

my theory is the stronger emotional imprint the better your conscious may be able to read it especially if the act is premeditated by others this would leave you in charge of your life, however the acts may not have to be premeditated how that would work i'm not sure but don't discount it



[edit on 6-5-2007 by cpdaman]

[edit on 6-5-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   
black box random number generators and the future

www.redorbit.com...



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I dont thnk it can happen.
If someone can see the future or predict the future it menas i have no choice.

IE, he see's the future of some regular joe walking around a street...
this means i do not have the choice today to kill that man.


to see the future means we are not in control of our own decisions.


I believe it does happen, i have had many experience myself with this ablility, from knowing wat people are thinking before they say things, to reading the weather for the next day, even thinking about someone or just their name and then they ring or knock on the door, and i believe you do have a choice wat you see in the future is only from one parallel universe based upon your choice you made, if u made an opposite choice you would experience the opposite parallel outcome. Don't limit your thinking to just conventional methods of thinking use your sub conscious.

The moden term for this ability is called 'REMOTE VIEWING' as seen in the movie 'DE JA VU'.

While it was secretly employed for many years as a military 'combat multiplier,' Remote Viewing also demonstrated its effectiveness as a predictive intelligence tool. Major Ed Dames, former head of training and operations for the remote viewing unit, has shown RV to be just as effective as an over-the-time-horizon 'radar.'

Him and his team of remote viewers predicts a catastrophic event - now dubbed 'The Killshot' - actually a series of powerful, deadly solar flares which will be impacting the Earth in the near future!


www.thekillshot.com...

HERES THE FULL KILLSHOT VIDEO


Google Video Link






[edit on 6/5/07 by free_spirit_earth]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
I unlike the scientists, don't have the means to prove the theory. Before they can come out and go "I think this is why" they must have some sort of evidence to back it up. That takes years of research. me hypothesizing takes as much time as it does to think it up.


That's exactly my point. They have the means to prove the theory, unlike you, or me. Don't you think over their years of research they would have already considered your theory somewhere along the way -- considering, by your own admission, that your hypothesizing took you a matter of minutes? It would be pretty pointless them continuing their experiments if they found that what you're saying is correct wouldn't it?



If my theory were true, and they believed it to be true, they would not say so till they could prove it when challanged on the idea. They don't currently have the research data avalible to prove it though.


I don't understand what you mean.



Now, as for the example. I don't see why it is not possible. The event is a very broad disaster. It is not 24 people having a premonitions about a senior government official working in the military department to be assassinated at their local town square on may 24, 2007.


I have not said that it was impossible. I said "it would be a hell of a coincidence if..." You can argue that the example I provided was not specific enough, perhaps it wasn't. This part certainly was, though:



One involved a little girl who was killed. She told her mother shortly before she was taken to school: "I dreamed I went to school and there was no school there. Something black had come down all over it."


An accurate description of a School being submerged by Coal, wouldn't you say? Remember the Girl supposedly said this on the very morning of the disaster.

I am in no way basing my entire argument for the subject in question on the supposed dreams of an unfortunate girl who's been dead since 1966. There are literally hundreds of millions of similar accounts, all varying in specifics, credibility and severity. Look some of them up for yourself, if you have not already.



They also did not act on it.


What were they supposed to say? "Oh my [EXPLICIT] God. I had a terrible nightmare and the School was swept away by an avalanche of Coal! We must act immediately. Close down the School! Evacuate the Town!"

Yeah, yeah right.

I've already posted this once for your viewing, but you seem to have ignored it and carried on with your hypothesizing, so I will post it again. This should help you to further understand:


(From thread source article)
The problem with presentiment is that it appears so nebulous that you can't rely on it to make reliable decisions. That may be the case, but there are plenty of instances where people wished they had listened to their premonitions or feelings of presentiment.


Alright?



If 24 people calculated this tragedy to be a high possibility of happening, it was obviously very high probability to happen. That was proven when it did happen. 24 people just means 24 brains calculating the most probable outcome given the information they had all came up with the same result. That just means it was very high chance of it happening.


No. Just because it happened, that doesn't mean there was a very high probability of it happening. Improbable things happen often. How was the Coal tip engulfing the School "the most probable outcome given the information?" Given what information... that there was a Coal tip nearby? How is the engulfing of a School "the most probable outcome" of that? I think I can see what you're trying to say, but to me it really makes no sense whatsoever when you actually think about it -- especially when applied to all cases.

4000 character limitation approached...



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 09:03 PM
link   


I don't believe you have shown me any reason not to believe my theory. Just because 24 people saw something happen, and did not act on it, does not mean they were not made aware of it because their brain saw it as an immediate threat.


I'm not basing my entire argument on the Aberfan disaster, though. It's not me who has given you a reason to disbelieve your own theory, the Scientists have. As you stated in your opening line, it's the Scientists who have the means to prove a theory or disprove it, not you, or I.

Good day.




[edit on 6-5-2007 by Nobusuke Tagomi]



posted on May, 6 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nobusuke Tagomi
That's exactly my point. They have the means to prove the theory, unlike you, or me. Don't you think over their years of research they would have already considered your theory somewhere along the way -- considering, by your own admission, that your hypothesizing took you a matter of minutes? It would be pretty pointless them continuing their experiments if they found that what you're saying is correct wouldn't it?


I am sure they have considered it recently. We are being made aware of what they have come to so far. That is what is happening. They have yet to research with any detail how it is happening, or why it is happening, which is what I am talking about. They have come to the conclusion as to the fact that it is happening. Now they must research how, then after that, why. I am hypothesizing on what they have yet to research.



I don't understand what you mean.


What I meant was the sciencists, however sure of some theory, must provide a great deal of research before they can commit themselves to it.



I have not said that it was impossible. I said "it would be a hell of a coincidence if..." You can argue that the example I provided was not specific enough, perhaps it wasn't. This part certainly was, though:



One involved a little girl who was killed. She told her mother shortly before she was taken to school: "I dreamed I went to school and there was no school there. Something black had come down all over it."


An accurate description of a School being submerged by Coal, wouldn't you say? Remember the Girl supposedly said this on the very morning of the disaster.


What is your point? It was not a very detailed dream obviously. Some one could have said "I had a dream that this darkness engulfed the town last night" and I wouldn't consider that a detailed dream. A detailed dream would have just that, details. Many of them, no just vauge visuals.



What were they supposed to say? "Oh my [EXPLICIT] God. I had a terrible nightmare and the School was swept away by an avalanche of Coal! We must act immediately. Close down the School! Evacuate the Town!"

Yeah, yeah right.


Ive had dreams of something horrible happening, like getting into a fatal car accident, or something of those sorts, and just avoid the area, or don't drive that day. I had a dream I would have a head on collision going over a hill on the road because some driver crossed into my lane but I couldn't see over the hill. I just didn't travel on that road, and took a back road.



I've already posted this once for your viewing, but you seem to have ignored it and carried on with your hypothesizing, so I will post it again. This should help you to further understand:


(From thread source article)
The problem with presentiment is that it appears so nebulous that you can't rely on it to make reliable decisions. That may be the case, but there are plenty of instances where people wished they had listened to their premonitions or feelings of presentiment.


Alright?


Probability. It is a probable event, but not a definate one. Any series of small actions, however minute, can completely change a worldline. I could decide to stay home from work cause I feel off about it, and save many lives without even realizing it. Every detail counts, however small it may be. Something may have happened on a small scale that we weren't even aware of which changed the event. The more time difference between now and the said event, the less probability it has to happen, and the more chances are your brains calculations are unreliable.

If I have a premonition about what will happen tomorrow, and what will happen a year from now, the one about tomorrow is much more likely to occur because the probability is much higher. It is much higher because there is much less chance of different worldlines. Probability and time difference are connected.



No. Just because it happened, that doesn't mean there was a very high probability of it happening. Improbable things happen often.

Improbable or an unseen certainty? Just because you don't see it coming doesn't mean it wasn't the most probable thing to happen.



How was the Coal tip engulfing the School "the most probable outcome given the information?" Given what information... that there was a Coal tip nearby? How is the engulfing of a School "the most probable outcome" of that? I think I can see what you're trying to say, but to me it really makes no sense whatsoever when you actually think about it -- especially when applied to all cases.


Your brain is a calculator. Consciously you may not take into account the details, but your subconscious takes in much more detail. It analyses the information it sees. You glance at a whether forecast, or your daily planner, etc. and your brain takes it into consideration subconsciously.

I had a dream that I was going to get a speeding ticket when going down this hill. I had seen that it would be a cloudy day, I would be on my way to work, and my cellphone would be ringing, as I heard the ringtone of my friend. That following saturday I was approaching that hill, it was cloudy, on my way to work. As I approached the top of the hill my phone started to ring. Rather then look to answer it, the vision came to mind, and I checked my speed. I was already 10 miles over the speedlimit, and on the downhill that would have increased. At the bottom of that hill, was a cop. A common hang out place for cops, and I knew that.

My hypothesis. I took into account the fact cops often hang out there, that work causes me to drive a bit faster to ensure arriving on time, and that my friend would call me. The details I am consciously unaware of are things my brain calculated without me being aware of it. I do believe that it was not a definate scenario, but a likely one, as the forecast the day before said it would be cloudy.

Smaller details may have been off, as they usually are. But I saw very probable scenario before it happened, and was lucky enough to have acted upon it. I connected 4 major details of the vision, to four things that I was currently seeing, and acted upon it. The location, the weather, the phone call, and where I was going. That was enough for me to act upon it, and it probably got me out of a ticket.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join