Meredith wrote:Hi all. A quick introduction...
In real life I'm a science/maths geek and professional spreadsheet wrestler. I'm a skeptical atheist - no belief in a world beyond the world, or any form of disembodied mind/soul, or "energy" other than the 1/2mv2 variety.
(That said, I'm very open to being shown the error of my ways. If you think you can consistently get results that cannot be explained by confirmation bias and placebo effect, let me know and we'll try for the Randi prize.)
Right now, though, I'm mostly curious how much practical value I can get from occult/mystical/religious techniques without needing to believe in them. I'm trying to learn to meditate, and have started to play around with Tarot as a way of focusing my mind on important questions. Any suggestions for other stuff to look at would be much appreciated.
The Randi prize is a joke. They get donations from people religiously believe nothing exists and the continually select frauds for testing for the purpose of entertaining and reinforcing the belief of the "skeptics" in order for them to keep donating money. Randi organization has no desire for actually finding the phenomenon, only maintaining an image that nothing exists because there is no prize, so they can keep raking in the money. They will also not allow for independent testing by a neutral 3d party, instead they are the test administrators, the judges, and the one who gives the award - when they have an interest to not give away the money.
Would really be nice if the "skeptics" applied their own level of skeptics towards the Randi organization. I am a skeptic myself, as no one should think something true without verification for themselves, I also don't hold a strong belief in things other than ideals/values (truth, liberty, integrity, etc), instead remain open to the idea that anything is possible and only recognize the possibilities in varying degrees of probability.
The Randi organization members are as fervorous as other religious zealots. If they pulled their mind out of the closed-minded shell that other zealots have had for centuries, they would see peer-reviewed research articles that show that human beings are able to predict future outcomes (one showed that people were able to predict which computer screen would pop up with porn before it was shown/randomized on the screens, the other showed you have better test results if you study for the test after the test - with a statistical signification as strong as we use for heart disease medication approval by the FDA). The world is a big place and people always jump to a conclusion that isn't supported by the data and instead of calling it a hypothesis, they believe it as strong fact.
There is also research going on NDE in hospitals by people say they can see themselves from above. They are putting images on the tops of counters where no one can see unless you are above your body, and recording the results.
I can tell you from my experiences and knowledge that certain things exists and unless there is a way to measure it in the physical world you aren't going to see good scientific data on it, to be perfectly honest, the methodology needs addressed by the community, as most testing in this field will either show a rough "x happens when y", without any explanation, or other tests that only rules out what isn't happening. Science can't prove these things exist, only disprove what they aren't, until the only explanation is left.