Remote Viewers Predict Catastrophic Meteor Impact Before 2013, page 52

Pages: << 49 50 51 52 53 54 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 56 times

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 11:10 AM by unityemissions

Click here for more information.

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 02:14 PM by anjuna

Originally posted by unityemissions

Originally posted by anjuna

Originally posted by postmeme
Its over. Its done. You guys can stop grasping at straws & stop with this nonsense now

What is this "it" you keep referring to?

Quit the passive aggression.

If you don't know, you're truly an idiot.

Passive aggressiveness? Where do you read into that?

I don't think idiot is the best word to describe such a person posing a decent question. Your concept of "it" may be different from my concept of "it". I want to know if there is an accepted definition of "it" by the mass concensus. Why is that so much to ask?

So, exactly WHAT is "over" and WHAT is "done"? WHAT nonsense are you referring to? What topics are taboo?

And if it's such nonsense, why waste the time to reply? Do you know how much work you have ahead of you if you wish to tell people a certain "something" is over and done and nonsense? Better quit your day job! LOL

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 03:16 PM by stereologist

reply to post by curiouswa

Psychics are well known fakes. The best psychic predictions are the ones made after the fact. Remote viewing is a bust as well. The Farsight group has an abysmal track record of failure after failure. By grouping these 2 groups together you are simply casting shame on both groups. You taint one with the other.

Large objects hit the earth on a regular basis. Were you aware of that? I'm not talking every million years or so either.

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 03:29 PM by anjuna

Um I never said anything about psychics. Maybe you're confusing me with another poster. By lumping the two of us together you are simply casting shame on both. Tainting us.

I only heard of the experiment rather recently. I'm not familiar with any of their other failures or successes. Since June 1013 hasn't happened yet I can't speak for the Farsight Inst. RV experiment's "success" or failure on that one.

I'm not sure what range of "large" you are referring to (on a cosmic scale) but I do know things fall to earth fairly frequently. I'm not sure I'd classify them as "large" as most don't make much of an impact in the way of displacement waves or tsunamis as far as I know. Is that the sort of thing you are talking about? Or do you also mean "frequently" as in millions of years across history, large things like asteroids that could wipe out dinosaurs?

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 03:41 PM by stereologist

reply to post by anjuna

Very interesting about the Binary Research Institute considering Sirius as a candidate for our sun's binary twin.

The two cannot be orbiting each other. There are closer stars.

So all this time we've been using the wrong star charts! Of course our calendars (and extrapolations from ancient calendars) would be off! Quick, everyone re-calculate the REAL doomsday date using Sirius as the central focus! Apparently, whatever's going to happen doesn't revolve around the precession of the equinoxes (as Sirius does not precess)!

Our calendar is not connected to other stars. Our calendar is connected to the path of the Earth around the Sun. Precession of the equinoxes is due to a wobble of the earth. Sirius does change position in the sky as does all other celestial objects as the Earth wobbles.

The issue is about dating events. An ancient description of an event can be dated which is useful in understanding historical events.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 03:48 PM by stereologist

reply to post by anjuna

Um I never said anything about psychics. Maybe you're confusing me with another poster. By lumping the two of us together you are simply casting shame on both. Tainting us.

I was not responding to your post if you check my post you will see that to be the case.

I'm not sure what range of "large" you are referring to (on a cosmic scale) but I do know things fall to earth fairly frequently. I'm not sure I'd classify them as "large" as most don't make much of an impact in the way of displacement waves or tsunamis as far as I know. Is that the sort of thing you are talking about? Or do you also mean "frequently" as in millions of years across history, large things like asteroids that could wipe out dinosaurs?

Every few decades an object hits the Earth that is large. The Tunguska event was not unique. It is the largest recorded, but not the only event of its type.
en.wikipedia.org...

The Farsight group has had many failures including their viewing of the mothership behind Hale-Bopp. That's the same mothership which led the Heaven's Gate group to commit suicide. They viewed an alien mining operation on Mars. The orbital imager tells us that's not true. I've listed other failures in this thread.

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 04:01 PM by anjuna

My bad on the response. I didn't check to see you had responded to another poster. Apologies. Honest mistake.

I was joking about the Sirius / calendar thing. You guys are too sirius around here, geez!

But how do I know that you know better than the Binary Research Institute about the binary twin matter?

EDIT: The Tunguska event was never determined to be from a meteor. There are too many anomalies and not enough -- not any -- evidence of meteorite material there. And as far as I know, there haven't been "frequent" Tunguska-like events in our "recent" history. Thanks for the list of the last eleven in the past 100 years (they don't seem to be comparable to Tunguska though?).

edit on 23-12-2012 by anjuna because: Tunguska commentary

edit on 23-12-2012 by anjuna because: thanks

edit on 23-12-2012 by anjuna because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 06:57 PM by stereologist

reply to post by anjuna

The Tunguska event has been recently studied and long ago studied. There was no impact crate, but studies show that a bolide would shatter high up releasing a large amount of energy in the form of an explosion. Studies of surface material suggest a bolide did explode, but a more gaseous object such as a small comet nucleus cannot be discounted.

These smaller events simply show that a range of objects do hit the Earth. There are an estimated several thousand fireballs a day. Only a few are reported. Tunguska events would not leave a visible trace after a while. They would not leave evidence over the open oceans which cover 69% of the Earth. These other events are similar, but smaller.

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 08:17 PM by nancyliedersdeaddog

Is Ed dames part of the farsight group? I'm not very familiar with the group but I'm going to do some research on them and figure out how reliable they are, I will say I don't trust remote viewing one bit to be honest.

reply posted on 23-12-2012 @ 09:41 PM by Robert80

reply to post by curiouswa

That prediction, i think already happened from what I have read. He said:
■"A visual of mass smoldering smoke covering a massively large area, smoke usually represents destruction.
■The smoke covered a massively large area so much I saw little of anything else.
■One event is expected in December
■The number 22
■An airport where the black smoke blanketed the outside, if it’s a Volcano it could represent a hinderance to air travel."
On December 22nd Volcano Copahue erupted. The Volcano sits around icy mountains. Argentina and Chile are concerned about air travel.

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 08:05 AM by curiouswa

reply to post by stereologist

Veritas project is a scientific study of the after life and mediumship was a small part of their experiments. A handful of psychics were put through studies for a year, what remained was a dozen psychics who were graded as statistically significant. Of the dozen psychics, they rated them on a scale of 2 to 5 with 5 being the best. There are only 2 psychics that ranked as level 5's.

Veritas Project
Windbridge

GARY E. SCHWARTZ, Ph.D., Director of the VERITAS Research Program, is a professor of Psychology, Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Surgery at the University of Arizona and director of its Laboratory for Advances in Consciousness and Health and its Center for Frontier Medicine in Biofield Science. After receiving his doctorate from Harvard University, he served as a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Yale University, director of the Yale Psychophysiology Center, and co-director of the Yale Behavioral Medicine Clinic. Dr. Schwartz has published more than four hundred scientific papers, edited eleven academic books, is the author of The Afterlife Experiments, The G.O.D. Experiments, and The Truth About Medium, and is the co-author of The Living Energy Universe.

I've read a few Gary Schwartz books and they are fascinating!
Publications

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 08:09 AM by Agent_USA_Supporter

reply to post by stereologist

Not all Psychics are known fakes, some are truthful some arent.

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 08:28 AM by stereologist

reply to post by curiouswa

The problem with the Veritas project is the same as the problem with RV. The evaluation are subjective, not objective. They are wishful thinking projects. These are the sorts of experiments that are completely avoided by mainstream science because they lead to the desires of the researcher, not correct results.

There are a few researchers that will do things that grad students learn to avoid such as bad experimental design and incorrect mathematical analysis just to promote their pet ideas that they know they cannot properly demonstrate.

The Veritas project does just that.

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 08:30 AM by stereologist

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

Yes psychics are all fakes. They may even believe they have some sort of abilities, but they are all fakes. The only times psychics get it right is when they:
1. predict after the fact - not uncommon
2. get inside help
3. are in tests where the judge gives them a pass no matter how wrong they are
4. they just get lucky after numerous failures

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 08:56 AM by anjuna

There is no such thing as a 100% objective experience. The observer always will influence the outcome in some way. Quantum physics is recognizing this but having trouble with *measuring* (again, need more advanced tools) just how small or large an impact it is at any given time.

A skeptic is just someone who isn't ready to accept certain evidence into their world according to their rules. Hardly an objective perspective. If we are all to debate this topic, we must agree to have a common denominator. I don't think we've gotten to that point yet. Plenty of evidence is given yet all of it still seems to be rejected. Why?

If you ever personally had an experience that defied your current understanding, would you deny your Self outright and claim you were merely being subjective? All of life is a subjective experience. Once one makes a connection to the very fabric that binds all of reality together, one is then interacting with it at a basic level, the level that enables eliciting a response from that "environment".

Psi and psychic phenomenon in general are well established in science today. Common every day people connect with the cosmic/psychic realm every day, though you may not read about it in a science journal or news story.

reply posted on 24-12-2012 @ 03:16 PM by stereologist

reply to post by anjuna

There is no such thing as a 100% objective experience. The observer always will influence the outcome in some way. Quantum physics is recognizing this but having trouble with *measuring* (again, need more advanced tools) just how small or large an impact it is at any given time.

QM does apply to the macroscopic world. The application of QM to the macroscopic world is done by folks life Deepak that make a mockery of QM. The observer cannot influence the outcome in the macroscopic world as happens in the microscopic world. That is why experiments are blinded. These bad experiments done to study ESP, psychics, or psi or whatever is the nom du jour strip away the standards of the scientific method to produce results. What is odder yet is that when results fail the researchers fall back on silly responses such as the goat-sheep effect.

A skeptic is just someone who isn't ready to accept certain evidence into their world according to their rules. Hardly an objective perspective.

Again, learn what a skeptic is. You are defining a scoffer, not a skeptic. The opposite of a scoffer is a gullible fool.

I don't think we've gotten to that point yet. Plenty of evidence is given yet all of it still seems to be rejected. Why?

No evidence whatsoever has been offered except for clear evidence that RV does not work. There is no supporting evidence.

Psi and psychic phenomenon in general are well established in science today.

A complete falsehood. A few people still dabble in the area and get poor to no results. Some non-scientific efforts by frauds do try to con people into coming into their places to spend money.

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 08:42 AM by curiouswa

reply to post by stereologist

These are only your (minority) opinions and I completely disagree.

Back to the topic of this thread. It's hard to apply "our" science and current 3rd dimensional understanding to what is cataloged as paranormal or outside our scope of understanding.

I don't know if remote viewing is accurate as I've not followed long enough to realize an RV group session outcome event is true until Courtney Brown's RV session comes to fruition (or not) next June.

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 10:04 AM by anjuna

( From ABC News: ) "Forget the Mayans. Here are 5 actual apocalyptic possibilities."

1. Asteroid Collision
2. Solar Flare
3. Super Volcano
4. Killer Contagion
5. Global Warming

abcnews.go.com...

edit on 25-12-2012 by anjuna because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 02:27 PM by stereologist

reply to post by curiouswa

These are only your (minority) opinions and I completely disagree.

Sorry, that is wrong. These are not my opinions, but the statements of scientists across the globe. The QM claims are the minority opinions of a few scientists, usually ex-scientists. You're free disagree. You've been doing that despite the overwhelming evidence against these claims.

Back to the topic of this thread. It's hard to apply "our" science and current 3rd dimensional understanding to what is cataloged as paranormal or outside our scope of understanding.

Is that why paranormal investigations disappear when good scientific methods are applied? They disappear because they do not exist.

I don't know if remote viewing is accurate as I've not followed long enough to realize an RV group session outcome event is true until Courtney Brown's RV session comes to fruition (or not) next June.

Brown and his group has never been right. They've been wrong so many times.

PS If you bothered to check up on them or the comments in this thread you'd know whether or not they consider their work to be paranormal.

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 02:28 PM by stereologist

reply to post by anjuna