Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

If you want something to work so badly for you.You think it does because that is what you want or imagine but you really don't do it.

I know it works, I have been using it since Xmen 1 in the 60's

Rasputin wasn't telepathic - if he lived today he would be making billions of dollars in advertising and public relations. It's called BEING A MANIPULATOR.

He just wouldn't die when they tried to kill him - He had two poison-laced brownie type things, both with enough poison to kill ten men. Then he was stabbed, and shot, and set on fire, but he finally died from drowning.

Oh yeah, and he was a pedophile. "Healing" the youngest grandson of Her Celestial Highness the Tsarina gives you a lot of points, especially if you're given full run of the castle afterward.

The point about James Randi's prize is a good place to start.

If someone could actually do telepathy, for real, the 1 million would be a drop in the bucket compared to what they'd make because of their talents. They would completely revolutionize our understanding of the mind, and introduce forces we're unaware of. Randi's prize is a joke, useful only to show that no one has actually been able to prove such phenomena. Interestingly, Geller and others have been invited to take Randi's test, which Randi himself does not oversee (they outsource the testing to avoid accusations of bias). Geller has refused, as have most high-profile supernaturalists. And the reason is simple: they're already lucrative and don't want to be proven wrong.

As it is, you're absolutely right, no actual evidence exists. I'd recommend Randi's books as a good starting point. Besides being a dogged debunker of Uri Geller (among others) his works explain how we are duped by such phony "psychics" and explains the tactics they use...which is usually a combination of statistical likelihood combined with adept improvisational and deception skills. Hell, or google "how to become a psychic" and you'll probably find instructions on how to employ the same tricks.

Telepathy isn't possible. Appeals to "science doesn't know everything" are in vain here. We've reliably tested thousands of these occurrences to know that it's a hoax. If anything like telepathy were to exist, it is different than how anyone you named is doing it.

So be careful with wording phrases like you did for this thread's title. You're assuming something exists without proper evidence. It should work the other way around.

Originally posted by Digi
...his works explain how we are duped by such phony "psychics" and explains the tactics they use...which is usually a combination of statistical likelihood combined with adept improvisational and deception skills. Hell, or google "how to become a psychic" and you'll probably find instructions on how to employ the same tricks.


Reminds me of the Southpark episode where they made fun of "John Edwards: Crossing Over."


Good times.

Originally posted by Digi
Telepathy isn't possible.

Now now...don't go making such sweeping generalizations. If there's one thing I take from science...it's that "impossible" is the only thing that is routinely proven wrong.

Yesterday's Psionics could be today's wireless data. We may, one day, be able to "read" eachother's thoughts. It would be, for all intents and purposes, telepathy. Just not the magic kind (well...not magic to us).

Originally posted by dadudemon
Now now...don't go making such sweeping generalizations. If there's one thing I take from science...it's that "impossible" is the only thing that is routinely proven wrong.

Yesterday's Psionics could be today's wireless data. We may, one day, be able to "read" eachother's thoughts. It would be, for all intents and purposes, telepathy. Just not the magic kind (well...not magic to us).

"telepathy" is impossible

creating technology that simulates those functions, while still highly improbably, is not the same as telepathy being possible

us building planes makes humans no more capable of flight, in the literal sense. for-all-intents-and-purposes it might be, if, of course, you aren't debating someone in the literal sense. The OP has made it clear we aren't talking about future tech or some type of trans-humanism, they are talking about literal direct "non-local" communication between brains given some type of "natural" or "biological" function that exists today.

Originally posted by inimalist
while still highly improbably,

That statement, to me, is every bit as hokey as what psychics do.

Like....how do you know it's highly improbable? It seems to me to be much more probable than not.

Originally posted by inimalist
is not the same as telepathy being possible

I disagree.

I think it's the same exact thing.

Using your example, "humans flying" was thought impossible.

We still can't fly. We use machines to fly. So that's not what I was talking about.

The equivalent comparison would be gene manipulation or remote "avatars" that look like we do but have additional "goodies" which enable what looks like biological flight.

Meaning, there will be a point when two brains can communicate to each other through thoughts. Sure, there may be some facilitation, but it's every bit "telepathy" as our "magic" use of the term.

I consider the line you're drawing to be meaningless and more of a word game that useful.

If I read your minds correctly you disagree on this ladies.

Oh wise one...how you know our minds.



mind-machine-mind telepathy. Or, synthetic telepathy. It's still telepathy.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That statement, to me, is every bit as hokey as what psychics do.

Like....how do you know it's highly improbable? It seems to me to be much more probable than not.

neuroplasticity and the heterogeneous configurations individual brains suggests otherwise. There are a number of reasons why you should be highly skeptical of this type of technology, if you are really interested I'll see if I can whip something up. Its complicated neuroscience though /shrug

The biggest issues, though, would be that many "regions" of the brain are defined only by function, and much of the processing is not done in structural locations, but in distributive networks based on immediate and task context. You would require a piece of technology more complex than a brain for each individual subject with the communication instrument. Like, be as doe-eyed about future tech as you want, this is not a insignificant task. the fact that "time" will occur does not really suggest this type of thing is possible, as it would represent a milestone in human technology we haven't even begun to approach.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree.

I think it's the same exact thing.

Using your example, "humans flying" was thought impossible.

We still can't fly. We use machines to fly. So that's not what I was talking about.

The equivalent comparison would be gene manipulation or remote "avatars" that look like we do but have additional "goodies" which enable what looks like biological flight.

Meaning, there will be a point when two brains can communicate to each other through thoughts. Sure, there may be some facilitation, but it's every bit "telepathy" as our "magic" use of the term.

I consider the line you're drawing to be meaningless and more of a word game that useful.

ok, but that is entirely irrelevant to the debate. You can call them the same if you want, but the OP is clearly not talking about technologically based telepathy

Originally posted by inimalist
neuroplasticity and the heterogeneous configurations individual brains suggests otherwise.

Now, didn't I bring that up to you in another thread about a year ago?

Originally posted by inimalist
There are a number of reasons why you should be highly skeptical of this type of technology, if you are really interested I'll see if I can whip something up. Its complicated neuroscience though /shrug

It actually does not exist (REAL technologically based telepathy) yet.

We are getting there such as mind controlled machines, measuring brain activity and mapping it to "known" patterns, and so forth.


But that's a far cry from what we need to actually "make" telepathy happen.

Originally posted by inimalist
The biggest issues, though, would be that many "regions" of the brain are defined only by function, and much of the processing is not done in structural locations, but in distributive networks based on immediate and task context. You would require a piece of technology more complex than a brain for each individual subject with the communication instrument.


And not to mention, how "predictive" the brain is. I am not saying that we can predict the brain's actions...but rather, that the brain predicts. That's how it works. We have yet to fully understand that.

The next big hurdle would be actually interfacing with the data stored on our neurons.


Originally posted by inimalist
The fact that "time" will occur does not really suggest this type of thing is possible, as it would represent a milestone in human technology we haven't even begun to approach.

Yeah, that's not true at all. You can stop pretending this is great big mystery that we can't hope to understand, at any time you want. Sure, there's quite a few mysteries about the brain, still. Neuroscience is still quite "new". But don't pretend that this is some giant "unknown" or mystery. That really does insult all the work done in neuroscience and belittles neuro-scientific discovery.

Originally posted by inimalist
Like, be as doe-eyed about future tech as you want, this is not a insignificant task.

Could you possibly be any more irritatingly smug?










Originally posted by inimalist
ok, but that is entirely irrelevant to the debate.

There's a debate?

Did I miss something?

Originally posted by inimalist
You can call them the same if you want, but the OP is clearly not talking about technologically based telepathy


It's definitely not. But go back and read what I quoted and responded to. "impossible" is the idea.

your argument doesn't seem to be anything more than "because time will happen we have to be able to accomplish it"...

what am I missing?

Originally posted by inimalist
your argument doesn't seem to be anything more than "because time will happen we have to be able to accomplish it"...

what am I missing?

More like, "we can't say it's impossible. In fact, it's more than likely to happen."

You must ask yourself why I think it's more than likely to happen?

Because I'm pretty much a giant materialist: there's nothing in the material world save we can know it (context is important).

If you believe in something super-natural about the brain (mind) and how it works, then, sure, we may not ever unlock its secrets because some of it "sits" outside of the natural world making it impossible to touch. But I don't really believe that.




Is that your angle? Do you think we have souls and our brains interface with memories stored on our souls or something? Because I could have sworn you were arguing the opposite a few months back. Again, I don't necessarily believe that. Sure, I believe in a soul...but I don't think memories are the souls' function.

Originally posted by dadudemon
More like, "we can't say it's impossible. In fact, it's more than likely to happen."

You must ask yourself why I think it's more than likely to happen?

Because I'm pretty much a giant materialist: there's nothing in the material world save we can know it (context is important).

If you believe in something super-natural about the brain (mind) and how it works, then, sure, we may not ever unlock its secrets because some of it "sits" outside of the natural world making it impossible to touch. But I don't really believe that.




Is that your angle? Do you think we have souls and our brains interface with memories stored on our souls or something? Because I could have sworn you were arguing the opposite a few months back. Again, I don't necessarily believe that. Sure, I believe in a soul...but I don't think memories are the souls' function.

God... I defend my thesis proposal in an hour... can't get sucked into this...

anyways, no, obviously I'm not saying "the brain can never be known"

but you are adding a layer on top of simply understanding how the brain works. You are talking about something that, for each person no matter how non-typical their neurological structure is, no matter how variant neurological structure is in the first place, no matter how variant neurological function can be for nearly identical tasks given minutia of local context within individuals, etc etc etc, we will, no matter what, be able to design something that can input and output data from this system (which is designed through neuroplasticity and evolution to have incredibly specific inputs and no coherent output), such that we can recreate telepathy. The easiest example I could think of would be an input to the cochlea and an output from M1 going to the muscles of the throat... however, even if that were possible (and it might be, actually), it would be less practical than a smartphone, and we aren't even factoring in things like transmission, selecting recipients and things of that nature.

I don't think appealing to the fact that we will know more about the brain in the future covers those obstacles at all. A lot of what we do know about the brain suggests that this will be a very, very difficult task.

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think appealing to the fact that we will know more about the brain in the future covers those obstacles at all. A lot of what we do know about the brain suggests that this will be a very, very difficult task.


There's nothing to get sucked into.


edit - Meh, deleted everything.


We can talk about it later.

NbNu1kZDdkU

Originally posted by inimalist
God... I defend my thesis proposal in an hour... Talk about good times...

...hope it went well.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Now now...don't go making such sweeping generalizations. If there's one thing I take from science...it's that "impossible" is the only thing that is routinely proven wrong.

Yesterday's Psionics could be today's wireless data. We may, one day, be able to "read" eachother's thoughts. It would be, for all intents and purposes, telepathy. Just not the magic kind (well...not magic to us).

Context and audience. Your rebuttal doesn't take into account my full statement, nor the fact that I was addressing the OP's idea of telepathy, not you.

Originally posted by Digi
Telepathy isn't possible. Appeals to "science doesn't know everything" are in vain here. We've reliably tested thousands of these occurrences to know that it's a hoax. If anything like telepathy were to exist, it is different than how anyone you named is doing it.

I think everything I said is completely justifiable.

As with many of our discussions, if you want to be absolute about it, I'll just go ahead and concede your Kurweilian fancies, because they don't really interest me. I'm much more interested what people believe already exists, not in hypothetical suppositions of what could someday be.

Originally posted by Digi
Context and audience. Your rebuttal doesn't take into account my full statement, nor the fact that I was addressing the OP's idea of telepathy, not you.

I don't consider my statement a rebuttal, at all. More like, "let's avoid extreme language" because of the uncertainty of what we may discover and alternate avenues that "self fulfill".



Originally posted by Digi
I think everything I said is completely justifiable.

As with many of our discussions, if you want to be absolute about it, I'll just go ahead and concede your Kurweilian fancies, because they don't really interest me. I'm much more interested what people believe already exists, not in hypothetical suppositions of what could someday be.

I didn't want a concession at all. Just wanted to be clear that we can't really make absolute statements. Who knows? Maybe magical/psionic telepathy really DOES exist. Extremely unlikely...but making an absolute statement about it either way can't really be done. By our current understanding, it's a safe bet on it NOT existing.

And that would be "Kurzweillian". And Kurzweil isn't the end all be all of the future of technology predictions...but we can be sure that some of his science based predictions will come true. Some were even self-fulfilling. Some were flat out wrong and some were vague enough to be right no matter what.


But is Kurzweil all about this telepathy thing? I don't believe I've ever read anything about him having a boner for technology facilitated telepathy (brain-machine-brain interfacing, basically).

Kurzweil's boner is mainly for technological immortality, but your line of thought on telepathy is roughly parallel to a lot of his nonsense.

I get fed up with having to say "well yes, we can't say anything 100% for sure, because objective/subjective reality and absolute statements and blahblahblah..." We all know we can't make absolute objective statements about reality. Hooray, we're capable of abstract thought and thinking outside our own perceptions! Good for us. Now let's all just stfu about that and understand that there are some things that are so unlikely, and so thoroughly tested, that they can be functionally called false and impossible. Telepathy is one of those things. We don't need the "absolute" disclaimer, because too many people hide behind that to say "what if?" Telepathy as it is colloquially understood is not worth believing in, period.

This isn't necessarily aimed at you, dudemon, though it's been brought up in our discussions more than once. You as much as said it's not worth believing in, so we're mostly on the same page. It's just, we don't treat the laws of physics like subjective interpretations of reality. In life, in all of our practice, we treat it as fact. Some things are either so evident, or so completely lacking evidence, that it's more rational to treat them as facts, then rearrange our thinking if we're presented with new information. Because saying telepathy could be real, in the sense that it is "used" by people around the world, is about the same to me as saying Santa Claus could be real. We allow delusion by not taking a hard enough stance, which is why the "well, we can't know, but..." statements irk me.

Originally posted by dadudemon
There's nothing to get sucked into.


edit - Meh, deleted everything.


We can talk about it later.

let me try this approach:

what specific findings in neuroscience are you looking at that suggest that technological telepathy could be possible?

what type of evidence about the brain and its organization/function would suggest to you that technological telepathy is not possible?

So, in an fMRI design for an experiment, all data about images from the brain have to be transformed into what is called Talairach coordinates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Talairach#Talairach_coordinates

Now, I'm with you, this type of thing sucks, however, such a transformation is absolutely necessary, because without "some" type of general basis to start from, fMRI research would be nearly impossible, because of how divergent neuro-organization can be between two neurotypical subjects, even between twins.

The limitations of Talairach coordinates are well known to fMRI researchers, and are used essentially as a "but there is no better way" type deal. Can you give me specifics about how some type of machine is going to be adaptable, even just considering neurotypical populations (and not even those with flipped brains or extreme hemispheric lateralization/cross over), to all types of brains given how different they are? like, technically, I will take an answer that looks at neuro systems level explanations, which do have some overlap between subjects, whereas any invention responsible for technological telepathy would have to be at least at the single neuron level, if not at some ribonucleaic level, where individual differences would be far more pronounced.

Like, where does your argument go once I accept that in the future we will know more about brains? My point is that, given what we do know, it seems more likely we are going to find incredible individual differences and issues with input/output, and more knowledge about the brain will make such technology actually less probable, as we will see just how complex brains are. Keep in mind, early fMRI research had a tendency to simplify the brain down to "this area" and "that area", current neuroscience has largely dropped that approach because it did not allow for nearly enough complexity.

Originally posted by inimalist
let me try this approach:

what specific findings in neuroscience are you looking at that suggest that technological telepathy could be possible?

what type of evidence about the brain and its organization/function would suggest to you that technological telepathy is not possible?

So, in an fMRI design for an experiment, all data about images from the brain have to be transformed into what is called Talairach coordinates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Talairach#Talairach_coordinates

Now, I'm with you, this type of thing sucks, however, such a transformation is absolutely necessary, because without "some" type of general basis to start from, fMRI research would be nearly impossible, because of how divergent neuro-organization can be between two neurotypical subjects, even between twins.

The limitations of Talairach coordinates are well known to fMRI researchers, and are used essentially as a "but there is no better way" type deal. Can you give me specifics about how some type of machine is going to be adaptable, even just considering neurotypical populations (and not even those with flipped brains or extreme hemispheric lateralization/cross over), to all types of brains given how different they are? like, technically, I will take an answer that looks at neuro systems level explanations, which do have some overlap between subjects, whereas any invention responsible for technological telepathy would have to be at least at the single neuron level, if not at some ribonucleaic level, where individual differences would be far more pronounced.

Like, where does your argument go once I accept that in the future we will know more about brains? My point is that, given what we do know, it seems more likely we are going to find incredible individual differences and issues with input/output, and more knowledge about the brain will make such technology actually less probable, as we will see just how complex brains are. Keep in mind, early fMRI research had a tendency to simplify the brain down to "this area" and "that area", current neuroscience has largely dropped that approach because it did not allow for nearly enough complexity.



It would most likely have to be at the nano-scale.

My big long write up (I seriously typed up a shit ton) basically talked about exactly what you're asking. We'd not only have to interface at the individual neuronic level, we'd have to predicatively interact with synaptic groupings (as you probably know, one memory isn't one neuron...it's most likely a collection each holding a little piece of the bigger picture...depending on what type of memories we are talking about) to fully capture on information/memories are processed, stored, and retrieved. Before we get there, we'd have to have a near perfect (we could cut corners with predictive analysis and other types of corner cutting techniques) understanding of the chemical processes taking place. And, yes, understanding the chemicals would require understanding all of the organelles and their roles. Not just generally, but specifically.


But, yes, I talked about a "clean" machine that basically acts like a stem-cell and grows and develops to the person's neurological "fingerprint". Does that make sense? They think this happens with a matrix of nanobots wirelessly communicating with each other as well as an external processing machine.



Where does the argument go if you accept we will be able to directly interface our brains with machines and then to each other? I believe the answer is simple: we are there, now. But it's quite rudimentary and "ugly". We have quite the distance to go before we can emulate full-fledged telepathy. However, some say that we are already there with the "machines controlled with our minds". I can see why they say that but, to me, that's just playing word games. I'm not interested in word games: I want Uatu levels of telepathy. lol

Originally posted by dadudemon
It would most likely have to be at the nano-scale.

My big long write up (I seriously typed up a shit ton) basically talked about exactly what you're asking. We'd not only have to interface at the individual neuronic level, we'd have to predicatively interact with synaptic groupings (as you probably know, one memory isn't one neuron...it's most likely a collection each holding a little piece of the bigger picture...depending on what type of memories we are talking about) to fully capture on information/memories are processed, stored, and retrieved. Before we get there, we'd have to have a near perfect (we could cut corners with predictive analysis and other types of corner cutting techniques) understanding of the chemical processes taking place. And, yes, understanding the chemicals would require understanding all of the organelles and their roles. Not just generally, but specifically.


But, yes, I talked about a "clean" machine that basically acts like a stem-cell and grows and develops to the person's neurological "fingerprint". Does that make sense? They think this happens with a matrix of nanobots wirelessly communicating with each other as well as an external processing machine.



Where does the argument go if you accept we will be able to directly interface our brains with machines and then to each other? I believe the answer is simple: we are there, now. But it's quite rudimentary and "ugly". We have quite the distance to go before we can emulate full-fledged telepathy. However, some say that we are already there with the "machines controlled with our minds". I can see why they say that but, to me, that's just playing word games. I'm not interested in word games: I want Uatu levels of telepathy. lol

GAWD

you look at this like such an engineer!!!!

well, like, sure, I can't say nano-tech couldn't someday, in futureland, create telepathy through technology. That idea is entirely non-falsifiable though /shrug

Originally posted by inimalist
GAWD

you look at this like such an engineer!!!!

well, like, sure, I can't say nano-tech couldn't someday, in futureland, create telepathy through technology. That idea is entirely non-falsifiable though /shrug

In that futureland, we can have much better sex, without touching privates.

You've gotta look at this future telepathy place with more optimism.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I want Uatu levels of telepathy. lol That may involve direct awareness of wavefunctions / parallel realities and I have only a theory on that, which currently works best when writing scifi, oops, I mean syfy.

Please resend this to other people , many people together can solve this tragedy, please suport this letter of Vinko Rajic,
help to find out what is this about:
I am maybe the only really telepathic person in the world. You should not think that I could be Schizophrenic.

STOP PSYCHO TERROR ON ME , PSYCHOPATS ARE PSYCHO KILLING ME, I AM TOTALY MAD OF PSYCHO TORTURE.

Can you please resend this email to other scientists, please save me of this terror.
Can you please give me advice , what I can do against gang that torture me for last 10 Years.
They cost me all important things in my life for last 10 years.
I can not pay back money to CSN, I am this winter going to finish on the street.
I have to get polisen to start arresting them.
Academic degree, job, marriage, sex, pleasure, homeland... and all other things , I have nothing and they talk to me using telepathy:
- "you lost everything and I get paid, they paid me every day and you losing your life time"
- "you future wife is fu__ing someone else and you are mas__rbating and living single"

HEHEH, you suck, I get big money for it, ...



I can exchange voice, video, smell, people can move small move muscles on my body from distance up to few kilometer and much more
and all messages from me are transmitted to big number of people so I am a Mental Radio.
One of the most advanced things I can do is to talk brain to brain and it is very fascinating,
works 100% all the time and it is really talk direct to brain.

I never found any document about any other existing person in human history like myself, but
science never did serious research on me and I actually did not exist in world of science.
I could easy give evidence for telepathy.Maybe some of Neurologist or scientist
could help me or is maybe interesting to make research on my phenomena.


What I find most fascinating my telepathy is nearly identical what Schizophrenics experiences.
They can get voice, videos and smell, I can transmit voice , video and smell using telepathy.
People can connect my brain in such a way that they are like running my thinking, it is like you connect
some ones head and when you think he fill it like he is thinking, difficult to explain.
When someone connect me he can think own thoughts inside my brain and that is exact what Schizophrenics are
talking about "delusional thinking".
My telepathy manifest itself exact like "Schneider's first-rank symptoms".
Very fascinating but some people found some very fuj person to run
thoughts in my head and that's really nightmare. That person has very good knowledge in psycho terror , probably he learn how to
psycho break people in war camps in Bosnia.

Person they finance is suported by some psyckopat Church or Swedish and Norwegian media.
I think sh-it pervert is receiving information how to find me of that sh-it pervert new Church.
I do not know what kind of network they use to collect money and how they find me.
I was in Tibet and Africa and in remote part of Tibet and Africa they could't find me but Europa and Australia they find me
and they send sh-it pervert to place where I am to terroroze me.




What I want to tell is that I think that is very big mistake not to take me seriously and make research with me and stop using me
for creating some idiot show in which my life is just getting vested and some idiots find employment.
I think that some of "Schizophrenics" are just receiving from some person from very long distance.

They are few important differences, moving small muscles on my body and sex.
People can tell me that they are going to move some small muscle on my body and really move it.
One of most fascinating things is pen-is erection. It is possible to get my penis erected from distance any time ,
it means I can have sex forever and very intensive , something like Tantra.



I am working on to get asylum for USA and some other states, maybe they are going to stop this mad terror on me.
I have very bad problem in Sweden, bad that Swedish do not understand how miserable my life is
or they understand but not care.
Swedish polisen just ignore this, they could easy stop this, they could call my ex. Lisa Herne from Halmstad
and she could give them informations on peoples working on this.
I think Swedish police think this is show and I am psycho torrturized for 10 Years or I do not understand what
is wrong with police department in Sweden.


Problem is that for the last 10 Years they paid some very offul person to terrorize me from distance
using telepathy. Problem is that that person found mad fun , something like guards in concentration camps.
People they employ is probably are homosexual, shit, anal perverts with very good knoalage in psycko terror.
Typically Bosnians contrecations cam guard, really nigtmare there.


Terror:
1. I am Software developer and i have to contrecate on my work but he is spending all day long talking to me
15-17 hours a day and he is using tactics of psycho terror, usually used on war prisoners in concentration camps
in Bosnia. He wake me up any time in the night just to psycho break me.

2. Diarrhea problem. He can move muscles in my stomach and he do it all the time, he is in distance of few kilometer day and
night and terrorizing my stomach. He or group of shit perverts is working
day and night around me on it.
At the end my stomach is really not working and I have eating problems and
can get diarrea. I am getting to look similar to war prisoner.
He like to watch me go to the toilet and he talk to me all the time when I sitt in the
toilet, those people are toatal dirty shit perverts.
And than he is joking , "hehe you are thin, you have no chance in fighting me."
"You just try to atack me I am efficient going to hit you in the head and send into coma".
Problem is that he keep distance of few kilometer and I have no chance to find out who he/she is.

3. Stalking and no privacy. He is stalking on me day and night , in shower, toilet, when doing my
intimacy things and more. He has no respect for privacy. Dirty perverts.


Right what I know :
- someone can communicate with me using telepathy
- some percent of people can receive telepathic messages of me
- some people started money collecting and they collected big money
- money has been collected in Sweden, Norway and few other places
- it should be illegal money transfer in size of 250 000 - 600 000 Euro , also illegal paiments to shit perverts
( what is really interesting they do not care about "illegal money transfer", "illegal paiments to terrorize someone",
"illegal cash transfers",
they do not care that I am going to call police and tell them this . )

What kind of people is transfering hunderts of tousend Euro and using it to terrorize someone and just do
not care for police and Justice.

Originally posted by neuro
What I find most fascinating my telepathy is nearly identical what Schizophrenics experiences.

"fascinating"... yes....

Originally posted by neuro
What I want to tell is that I think that is very big mistake not to take me seriously and make research with me and stop using me
for creating some idiot show in which my life is just getting vested and some idiots find employment.

I'm sure we could come up with some simple tests...

I'm writing a word on a piece of paper and will keep it near my desk. what is the word?

Originally posted by inimalist
"fascinating"... yes....



I'm sure we could come up with some simple tests...

I'm writing a word on a piece of paper and will keep it near my desk. what is the word? telepathy works up to few kilometer 100% correct, you should read message above

Originally posted by neuro
telepathy works up to few kilometer 100% correct, you should read message above

so, you are saying you could tell me the word I have written if you were within a kilometer?

Originally posted by neuro
telepathy works up to few kilometer 100% correct What happens after that? Does it get weaker with distance?

Originally posted by inimalist
so, you are saying you could tell me the word I have written if you were within a kilometer?

Isn't what you're talking about remote viewing rather than telepahty?

Or are you saying he can read your mind to know rather than viewing the word?

Is remote viewing considered a subset of telepathy?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Isn't what you're talking about remote viewing rather than telepahty?

Or are you saying he can read your mind to know rather than viewing the word?

Is remote viewing considered a subset of telepathy?

I'd gladly substitute that test for another

Originally posted by Mindship
What happens after that? Does it get weaker with distance?


LMAO...but really distance has nothing to do with it...psychiatrists are known (in the medical field) to be some sort of a psychics.
Some say it's faster than the speed of light

Originally posted by alltoomany
LMAO...but really distance has nothing to do with it...psychiatrists are known (in the medical field) to be some sort of a psychics.
Some say it's faster than the speed of light Shshsh. You'll ruin the surprise.

Maybe we could get technologically based telepathy by using eugenics and clonning at some point.

Question: Would it be possible to distinguish between a true telepath and someone who reads the future by testing?

Originally posted by Bentley
Question: Would it be possible to distinguish between a true telepath and someone who reads the future by testing? What do you mean by a "true" telepath? How would it manifest?

And what would reading the future by "testing" mean?

Seems to me you may be comparing what we think true telepathy ("mind-reading" is (based largely on fictional notions), and tech-based precognition ("seeing the future" via laws of physics).

Not that I care about this thread in the slightest, but shouldn't the response be "if telepathy works, where is the scientific evidence?" not "telepathy works, there's just no scientific evidence for it"?

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Not that I care about this thread in the slightest, but

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qttI6oytqpw

Flaming telepaths in my mind. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhQ6v0y3o8

Originally posted by alltoomany
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MhQ6v0y3o8

The forer effect and the need to belong are two very good reasons that people are cotinually conned and shammed into believing in unscientific stuff such as "indigo" and "crystal" children.

It is almost as bad as selling "healing water" to people because some people may have actual problems that need to be addressed rather than being "indigo" people.

Czarina was a poster that believed in that stuff. Oh the days...

Originally posted by Mindship
What do you mean by a "true" telepath? How would it manifest?

And what would reading the future by "testing" mean?

Seems to me you may be comparing what we think true telepathy ("mind-reading" is (based largely on fictional notions), and tech-based precognition ("seeing the future" via laws of physics).


A true telepath would be someone who can scan thoughts and memories or such.

A person who reads the future is someone who can see what happens in the future in a consistent basis.

We assume that this phenomena -technologic or otherwise- are going to be tested in order to find out if they exist, by a series of questions/answers or whatever. The point I was trying to pass is that a person who reads the future can falsify most of the telepathy tests you can get, since he will be reading the results of the tests instead of the thoughts themselves.

So I was wondering if there is any definitive tests that could prove telepathy over some other non-physical manifestations.

Agreed on the first part.

The second -just to clarify- was just meant to say that without a decent way of testing, we can get all sorts of conclussions without really proving a premise that seems "simple". god-like calculations and predictions are more feasible than telepathy in our current model of experimentation, and thus, assuming one over the other without any decent proof, would be unscientific. I was just wondering if a testing that actually confirmed telepathy could be devised.

Originally posted by Bentley
The point I was trying to pass is that a person who reads the future can falsify most of the telepathy tests you can get, since he will be reading the results of the tests instead of the thoughts themselves. Understood.

This reminds me of "Groundhog Day" with Bill Murray. That diner scene, eg, where he's telling the female reporter what he knows about each person: what can come across as telepathy or even precognition (eg, the waiter dropping the dishes) was really only a surface difference, ie, a difference to everyone else who couldn't "see" what Phil (the Murray character) could "see" (ie, the repeating day). To Phil, all these "different" phenomena were really based on a single, simple mechanism.

I suspect that if we do one day prove that telepathy, precog, clairvoyance, and even PK exists, we will invariably discover that they are all based on a single, simple process, something more quantum-based (Groundhog Day hinting at this), and not Newtonian based (ie, the "psychic" is sending/receiving energy which travels from point A to point B through spacetime).