Ingo Swann-Penetration The moon remotely viewed

page: 7
123
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


Good lord, read it or not. I am not trying to convince you. You stated that you had an area of ignorance, i provided information to alleviate it. If you want to argue about it, I will wait until you have actually read the information.

You HAVE heard of Hal Puthoff, right? If not, then you should start there. He is no charlatan, and is among the most reputed scientists working for our beloved government currently (right now he is making HFGW generators for China on behalf of the USA).




posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dna42



Remote viewing, like other forms of extra-sensory perception, is generally considered as pseudoscience [8] due to the lack of replicable results, and of a positive theory that explains the outcomes of experiments




Pseudoscience is a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific, or that is made to appear to be scientific, but which does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology,[1][2][3][4] lacks supporting evidence or plausibility,[5] or otherwise lacks scientific status.


en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

There you have it. If you think Wikipedia is unreliable follow the sources.


Each and every source has already been refuted by Ingo. But until you choose to drink, your thirst will remain unquenched.

If you are going to argue about something, at least inform yourself. That is all i am asking you to do. If you read the information and come to a different conclusion, then that is what it is all about. But to dismiss it out of hand smacks of embracing ignorance.

I will tell you, if you think that a 10 minute search is going to suffice to overturn thousands of pages of research, you are mistaken. Wiki is great and all....but you cannot use it to refute any claims until you have read on exactly what those claims are.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Each and every source has already been refuted by Ingo. But until you choose to drink, your thirst will remain unquenched.

If you are going to argue about something, at least inform yourself. That is all i am asking you to do. If you read the information and come to a different conclusion, then that is what it is all about. But to dismiss it out of hand smacks of embracing ignorance.

I will tell you, if you think that a 10 minute search is going to suffice to overturn thousands of pages of research, you are mistaken. Wiki is great and all....but you cannot use it to refute any claims until you have read on exactly what those claims are.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]


I understand where you are coming from and I understand the points you are trying to make. However, I simply refuse to read this rubbish because it is a waste of my time. Now why do I think that? Easy. Because others have already looked into it. Into the whole pseudoscience thing. It is called that for a reason. I don't care if one is wording his phrases more convincing or not. He is still talking about stuff that is simply outrageously science fiction.

Now you can of course ask me why I do hold this (from your point of view ignorant) perspective. Fair enough. I'll give you another example, maybe that analogy will help you understand why I said so: Religion.

You do know that there are thousands and thousands of (dare I say) respectable creationists who insist a God would exist and that all atheists would be ignorant, arrogant and close-minded? Same thing here. Just because people can be convincing while they speak doesn't make their claims true.

I am not a person who dismisses anything right from the start just because I want to. I just dismiss stuff that doesn't have any hard evidence to go along with it. That's what I call a clear-thinking mind. I don't get fooled by fairytales such as remote viewing and the likes.

And about the ignorance part. Of course I am. So are you on many other things as well. That's part of being a human. We choose what we want to know and we filter what we consider to be a waste of time. I consider this a waste of time. You can call me ignorant for not reading though all these papers, fine. So I am ignorant considering the content of what he has written. Maybe he was so deluted as to think what he is writing is the truth. And just because the CIA funds research in some questionable fields doesn't make it any more true also.

I do however still state that ANY pseudoscience has no scientifically proven evidence going along with it. That is the Status Quo. With the first evidence showing up I will change my mind.

Ever heard of James Randi? Wouldn't anyone on this planet want that 1 million showing off their supernatural abilities? Interesting... so far noone has managed to prove their claims.

Maybe you all want this to be true so badly for whatever reasons.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


you are dismissing something that has evidence supporting it. evidence that withstands scrutiny, evidence that follows strict scientific controls. It even goes further to explain several of the organ systems that are at work in many "PSI" cases. Yes, it is biological in origin.

You may continue to dismiss it out of hand. It will not benefit you, but even Ingo describes the intellectual mechanism that drives your behavior: you have no Mental Information Processing Grid that would support PSI as a reality, so you dismiss it to prevent a breakdown in information processing.

The people who have looked into this and dismissed it (the ones you are citing) often didn't even look at the info (and openly admit it). So you are going to base your ignorance on their ignorance. That is a shame. You say, "When the first evidence shows up i will believe", yet you willfully ignore the evidence that has shown up. It only leads me to believe that you either wish to not know, or wish to spread disinformation.

But i think the work here is done. For those reading this thread that are after the truth (and not just the "comfortable truth") will largely ignore your argument. In that respect, i can only hope that ignorance will be denied.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   



Ever heard of James Randi? Wouldn't anyone on this planet want that 1 million showing off their supernatural abilities? Interesting... so far noone has managed to prove their claims.

Maybe you all want this to be true so badly for whatever reasons.


Devil's advocate here but a way to "disprove" it is by not testing it properly.

Example if your trying to test meds and yet your patient is going out with wet into 32F and is hanging around people that are sick, if he doesn't get better can you really say the testing worked properly.

I would have to look more into how the tests are done. But if we don't understand something in the first place how are we suppose to measure it qualitatively?



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


You don't get it, do you? Well as long as you don't harm anyone and try to get this misguided paranormal idiocy into classes it is fine by me. Believe what you want.

I rely on science and the scientific community. Science is trying to understand the beauty that is existence and life. So yes, I base my knowledge on their understanding much rather than some sci fi freak who writes book about spiritual stuff and tries to win a buck on gullible people.

I know this is a board based on analyzing the UFO phenomena but this is just getting rediculous. So you judge over science... really sad so many people waste so much time in believing they are something better because they believe that their knowledge would surpass the very elite of the science community. I try to raise awareness about deluted people like you.
Certainly nothing to be ashamed of. So thanks for your rebuke



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


I appreciate that you do not want to read the book but then you have no usefullness to the thread.

If you had bothered to waste your time as you say, in the 3rd part where he discussed the faculties, of, the mind and the thinking processes you see that possibly you are phase locked.

In that you serve a purpose it takes all types and if you find nothing in a fairy tale but a cute story, you are missing some valuable insights.

Peace!



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ed Dames?

I found a RV class here in Australia which like most items of interest these days seems to be located either in the middle of the country or in this case of the RV class over in Perth which in the usual sense terms people seem to think is all we have at disposal is well... a long way away from where I live


I mention Ed Dames as the person running the class in Perth has been taught by Ed. Having said that, on their website they mention Ingo and some others which I have read in this very thread.

Of interest, in their forum a member who seems to be from the RV unit posted a video about a civilisation on Mars from the Mars anomaly group... which might indicate this rv group seem interested in being sent on a mission


They can be found here:

www.remoteviewingunit.org...



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


Hal Puthoff is as legitimate as it comes. If you are questioning the science behind the SRI experiments, then you not only question Hal Puthoff, but also question Stanford Research Institute.

Is that what you are saying? That you will discount these two because you don't like what it was they were researching?



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


We get it, then don't read it and move along. Why are you wasting your time in this thread with people that clearly don't see it the same way as you.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by cindymars
 


Oh ok, so just because I don't buy into his story means I am no use to this thread? And you are the one to judge then?

I've jumped a bit in the text but I haven't read it in great detail, like every word literally. He could claim that he'd know how to turn iron into gold but wouldn't support it with his formula. You see? Just talk. Talk nobody can check on its validity.

Ok fine. Let's assume it is all true? Everything he claims to know and would have done? So what? Why do these stories always come up on ATS?

Why do I never ever hear some ground-breaking news?

Now please don't tell me they are all controlled by some NWO organization. Every single reporter would eat me alive to get a story like this.

Any little scientific breakthrough gets reported. Why nothing like this? Certainly some mysterious mind powers would hit the news SOMWHERE, don't you think?

@mods
Feel free to delete any of my posts in this thread if you wish to do so.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by dna42]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by cindymars
 


Although Ingo makes some interesting points, he also makes some that prove his intentions, IMO.

One thing is to debate a subject, present arguments, etc, searching for truth and inlightment.

...another completly different thing is to come to public, saying "I have all this knowledge, you pathetic húmanes", and to rulle out any argument to the contrary, it's simply stated (and, IMO, this is hilarious):

"you have no Mental Information Processing Grid that would support PSI as a reality, so you dismiss it to prevent a breakdown in information processing.".

Honestly, and with all due respect, but this is the kind of attitude I would expect from a 5 year old kid, but with a lot of difficult words.

It's like a kid not having a toy, and all the other groups, or the "leader" pointing down on him using that to rulle him out of the group, making him think he is inferior, fighting for being accepted. The ones that have, feel special, that they belong to the group, that they are "better".

To me this is just manipulation of information, claiming that one has all the knowledge, and the others who simply don't agree, or are looking deeper will never understand it because they don't have something made up like the "Mental Information Processing Grid".

...btw, you know who also uses this "technique"? Cult leaders.

[edit on 1/10/09 by Tifozi]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Digital_Reality
reply to post by dna42
 


We get it, then don't read it and move along. Why are you wasting your time in this thread with people that clearly don't see it the same way as you.


Yes. You are right actually. You know what, I will just sign off and never return to this board. I thought there was some serious research going on here but it seems like this is not the case.

Fair enough, you'll all be happier all along to not have me in here any further, interesting that people are not allowed to raise their opinion just because it is different to the majority here. Yes, I reckon this is a board full with people who pass the ball to each other, so maybe that's no surprise.

In any case, I now know perfectly well why this whole topic is getting the giggle factor from the outside. Rightfully so. Better you have a place like this to than running around knocking on people's doors trying to brainwash them with your fiction. It is all good.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by dna42]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
One interesting point to make concerning people that should really be posting on Dailytech is Ingo's book "Psychic Sexuality"

I have not read that book properly yet but from the glance over I can see how its a great intro to the other senses we have and use everyday in that form.

Meh scientists and their pheromones



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


I'm trying to say no one cares if you don't buy it. It is still interesting to others in here and your not going to argue them into a corner and force them to submit to your skepticism.

I think it is a wonderful story and I try to keep an open mind on most things. If it does not appeal to you then pass the thread up.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


You have to have an open mind bro, Your not going to get definitive proof from something like this. Hell he even says in the Youtube video that there is no guarantee or proof of any of this and it could have been a figment of his imagination.

Money was spent and tests were done and in the end the possibility seems to be in the favor of it actually being something real in a sense. The rest is up to you to believe or not.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


Rubbish, you say.......

I say your keyboard spews rubbish, uncontrolably.

I have been doing that for years, only recently finding out what it was that I was doing. That made things much more easily understood.

Actually, it is not that difficult... well, it might take a bit of work the first few times. In time it becomes as normal as walking.

I have tried loto numbers, with not much luck, and did not keep trying. I did get a few #'s right. Now, that type of performance has no appeal to me.

It is not fun to keep on getting sand kicked in your face. I keep things on a more personal basis, using discretion about what topics to work with information about. The more you work on a topic, the more clear things become.

Yes, it does work. Your tax dollars have not been squandered on this project. I am gratefull for the valuable research that has been done, making me aware that I am not psycho.... just psy ready...



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by dna42
 


With all due respect, I did not say that I believed everything in the book.
What I am saying is that this thread is about a book and if you did not read it, it is like going to a book club meeting and you didn't read the book.

That is all.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tifozi

"you have no Mental Information Processing Grid that would support PSI as a reality, so you dismiss it to prevent a breakdown in information processing.".

Honestly, and with all due respect, but this is the kind of attitude I would expect from a 5 year old kid, but with a lot of difficult words.

It's like a kid not having a toy, and all the other groups, or the "leader" pointing down on him using that to rulle him out of the group, making him think he is inferior, fighting for being accepted. The ones that have, feel special, that they belong to the group, that they are "better".

To me this is just manipulation of information, claiming that one has all the knowledge, and the others who simply don't agree, or are looking deeper will never understand it because they don't have something made up like the "Mental Information Processing Grid".

...btw, you know who also uses this "technique"? Cult leaders.

[edit on 1/10/09 by Tifozi]


since you quoted me, i will answer.

When i say that he lacks the mental information processing grid, i am using Ingo's words. To state more simply, you lack the context with which to frame the discussion. No "cult leader" tactics there. Just a simple request that before he decides to pass judgement and discuss a book, he should likely read the book. Before passing judgement on an experiment, he should likely read the published papers.

Yes, you are right...it is something so simple even a 5 year old can understand it.

It would seem that Ingo isn't the only one with obvious motives for his writings. You apparently haven't read the book, either, or you would be familiar with the phrase "Mental information processing grid", and would understand what i was saying.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I know that it is something made up by Ingo.

That's actually my point. The grid thing seems to be something to refute all the people who don't agree with him... "I'm right, you are just stupid".





top topics
 
123
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join