|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Diploid]
#18965061 - 10/11/13 05:49 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Eating a ghost chi-li will significantly raise your chi level for about 20 minutes.
--------------------
|
extreme


Registered: 04/05/11
Posts: 9,340
|
|
Wow 20 pages. Epic.
By the way I got goosebumps on the way to work today listening to a nostalgic song. I was so chi'd up - my vision got blurry and the road started to morph into a golden brick road and the sky turned green.
And then the song ended and my goosebumps faded and everything went back to normal
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: extreme]
#18966024 - 10/11/13 09:45 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
extreme said: Wow 20 pages. Epic.
By the way I got goosebumps on the way to work today listening to a nostalgic song. I was so chi'd up - my vision got blurry and the road started to morph into a golden brick road and the sky turned green.
And then the song ended and my goosebumps faded and everything went back to normal 
Damn you lost all that chi brah
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: extreme]
#18966522 - 10/12/13 12:19 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Yo, you need to be careful with that man, that's your life force you are talking about. There goes 5 years off your life.
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Diploid]
#18967439 - 10/12/13 07:42 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Diploid said: Chi is such a vague term I think one is free to speculate on what it is.
That ^^^
It's like when a psychic tells you that "there's change in your future", then sits back and waits for the most amazing pattern-recognition system known (your brain) to fill in the blanks and convince yourself that you were told something specific instead of something so general that it could mean anything.
Chi (and god, and magic, and all the rest of the mambo jumbo in the world) is just like that. There are multiple conflicting definitions so there's always one that conveniently aligns with whatever flavor of unevidenced belief you're trying to convince yourself of at the moment.
If someone were to give a rigorous definition for their flavor of chi, it will render it amenable to rigorous testing and falsification. That's why we get shifting definitions and hokey threads like this one instead.
For the purpose of this thread, Prana or Tian Chi is the energy that can be controllable with certain practices and when channeled or activated, illicits piloerection in its wake. Making it verifiable.
It is also known as ASMR type A.
Falsify that.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: extreme]
#18967442 - 10/12/13 07:42 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
extreme said: Wow 20 pages. Epic.
By the way I got goosebumps on the way to work today listening to a nostalgic song. I was so chi'd up - my vision got blurry and the road started to morph into a golden brick road and the sky turned green.
And then the song ended and my goosebumps faded and everything went back to normal 
How did it feel? I have not personally had hallucinations for channeling chi. Maybe what you say is true, but I think you are likely being sarcastic. Also we have no way to know if what you say is true without evidence.
|
Diploid
Cuban



Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix] 2
#18967607 - 10/12/13 09:21 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
For the purpose of this thread, Prana or Tian Chi is the energy that can be controllable with certain practices and when channeled or activated, illicits piloerection in its wake.
So it's either "prana" or "tian" or "chi" but none of those are defined either, eh? A circular self-referential definition is noise. You sound like an evangelist who says he knows the bible is the word of god because the bible says it's the word of god.
Your definition is the standard vague mystic-head fare. It can be used to confirm or deny any pet notion, including diametrically contradictory ones.
How about you tell me the unit of measure for this energy. Is it an SI unit or some new variety? Can I see a dimensional analysis of the equations you're using to define how this energy relates to established physics? How much energy is involved here? Can you state it in joules, or ergs, or is there some other unit that is more appropriate? What form does this energy take? Is it potential, kinetic, thermal, radiant, something else? Does chi have an equation of state or not? What is its energy density? How about its power density?
Can you answer all these questions for prana, tian, and chi? I mean, if you're going to hinge your definition on yet more undefined words, you have to define those too.
No? Can't do it? That's what I thought because an honest effort to provide a rigorous definition would necessarily lead you to realize that this whole thread is meaningless word-soup.
Making it verifiable.
Oh yeah, it's verifiable alright. Anyone can verify that people can give themselves goosebumps. I can give myself erections. I had a friend in high school who could fart on demand. Some people can move their ears. Others can lick their nose. I've even seen some circus performers who can bend over backwards. Hell, some people can even suck their own dick.
So what?
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Diploid] 1
#18967674 - 10/12/13 09:50 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Diploid said:
an honest effort to provide a rigorous definition would necessarily lead you to realize that this whole thread is meaningless word-soup.
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Repertoire89] 1
#18967850 - 10/12/13 10:54 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
an honest effort to provide a rigorous definition would necessarily lead you to realize that this whole thread is meaningless word-soup.
I have been trying to work that angle since the beginning. It's not going to happen. The definition, "for the purposes of this thread" have changed a multitude of times, and none of them were satisfactory in my opinion.
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Diploid]
#18967861 - 10/12/13 10:57 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Diploid said: For the purpose of this thread, Prana or Tian Chi is the energy that can be controllable with certain practices and when channeled or activated, illicits piloerection in its wake.
So it's either "prana" or "tian" or "chi" but none of those are defined either, eh? A circular self-referential definition is noise. You sound like an evangelist who says he knows the bible is the word of god because the bible says it's the word of god.
Your definition is the standard vague mystic-head fare. It can be used to confirm or deny any pet notion, including diametrically contradictory ones.
How about you tell me the unit of measure for this energy. Is it an SI unit or some new variety? Can I see a dimensional analysis of the equations you're using to define how this energy relates to established physics? How much energy is involved here? Can you state it in joules, or ergs, or is there some other unit that is more appropriate? What form does this energy take? Is it potential, kinetic, thermal, radiant, something else? Does chi have an equation of state or not? What is its energy density? How about its power density?
Can you answer all these questions for prana, tian, and chi? I mean, if you're going to hinge your definition on yet more undefined words, you have to define those too.
No? Can't do it? That's what I thought because an honest effort to provide a rigorous definition would necessarily lead you to realize that this whole thread is meaningless word-soup.
Making it verifiable.
Oh yeah, it's verifiable alright. Anyone can verify that people can give themselves goosebumps. I can give myself erections. I had a friend in high school who could fart on demand. Some people can move their ears. Others can lick their nose. I've even seem some circus performers who can bend over backwards. Hell, some people can even suck their own dick.
So what?

Lol, you already lost a long time ago on the grounds of making shit up and falsely citing evidence. Obv is bias is obv. ASMR is in fact a phenomena so if you consider all the evidence provided that explained the phenomena previously, then it is not ASMR but prana or chi. Not only is the phenomena described as prana, there is also a method given to attain it . And diploid never put up, all he did was run his mouth until challenged.
BTW the offer is still on the table if you wanna make a bet diploid. You seem to have no problem offering out other peoples money, but when it comes to your own you don't put up.
Now you know the phenomena has been noticed and described by our sciences, even though the descriptions are no better than those you would consider mystical and supernatural!
Edited by teknix (10/12/13 11:26 AM)
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18967862 - 10/12/13 10:58 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cactilove said:
Quote:
an honest effort to provide a rigorous definition would necessarily lead you to realize that this whole thread is meaningless word-soup.
I have been trying to work that angle since the beginning. It's not going to happen. The definition, "for the purposes of this thread" have changed a multitude of times, and none of them were satisfactory in my opinion.
Chi is a specific controllable type of energy in your body, that most people don't notice and those that do generally learn it through certain practices that involve meditation and self-inquiry.
So now diploid loses twice (-2) and cactilove I don't know how many (<=-1).
It is simply controllable electrical phenomena within the body that elicits pleasurable feelings, similar to an orgasm, but more of a braingasm. (bliss or ananda)
Edited by teknix (10/12/13 11:21 AM)
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Cactilove]
#18967873 - 10/12/13 11:02 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Controllable electrical phenomena within the body, what more do you want?
Cactilove and Diploid are working under the assumption that the previous explanations are somehow mutually exclusive, and have never shown them to be.
And no, they are different descritions of the same phenomena, just as there are different languages and cultures, people use different words to describe the same things, otherwise we would never be able too translate anything.


Edited by teknix (10/12/13 11:08 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix] 4
#18967978 - 10/12/13 11:32 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Diploid has been putting his money up for years here. You really don't know what you're saying.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Icelander]
#18968000 - 10/12/13 11:38 AM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
He doesn't in this case. He offers Randi's millions sif it is his own idea and offer.
ROFL, how deluded.
Show me some evidence of it and I mean > 1.
And I don't mean of him claiming to do it, but actually doing it.
Obviously he wouldn't take the bet now because he was already proven wrong because it is an actual phenomena recognized by science. And he was claiming it was supernatural or mystical, rofl.
|
extreme


Registered: 04/05/11
Posts: 9,340
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18968386 - 10/12/13 01:49 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said:
How did it feel? I have not personally had hallucinations for channeling chi. Maybe what you say is true, but I think you are likely being sarcastic. Also we have no way to know if what you say is true without evidence.
i know sarcasm can sometimes be hard to read over the internet, but yes of course i was lol. it seems everyone else caught that. it's ok though i still love you 
but the goosebumps part really happened. from wikipedia:
"goosebumps ... may involuntarily develop when a person is cold or experiences strong emotions such as fear, nostalgia, pleasure, euphoria, awe, admiration and sexual arousal"
all of those that i bolded, particularly the nostalgia, are what i felt. when i get strong feelings i get goosebumps sometimes 
i haven't read pages 2-19 so i'm not exactly sure where all this stuff headed. i think it's a little bit interesting getting goosebumps and a sense of euphoria when something cool happens, but i really can't chalk that up to the chi. does it work different for you?
also sometimes i can just think about something cool and voila goosebumps but it's easier when something external triggers it
|
Cactilove
Controversial Mystic


Registered: 02/17/11
Posts: 4,826
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: extreme]
#18968903 - 10/12/13 03:56 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So now diploid loses twice (-2) and cactilove I don't know how many (<=-1).
You can say what you want, but that's not really for you to decide.
-------------------- Orgone Conclusion...Bringing OTD to PS&P since 2007.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18969286 - 10/12/13 05:58 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said: He doesn't in this case. He offers Randi's millions sif it is his own idea and offer.
ROFL, how deluded.
Show me some evidence of it and I mean > 1.
And I don't mean of him claiming to do it, but actually doing it.
Obviously he wouldn't take the bet now because he was already proven wrong because it is an actual phenomena recognized by science. And he was claiming it was supernatural or mystical, rofl.
He offers to pay the applicant's fair down and put them up while they are there. If no one actually puts up an application how can he put up on his end?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: Icelander]
#18969376 - 10/12/13 06:21 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Blah blah balh, how many "fairs" has he actually paid, on his own behalf? because I know he didn't want to put up his money verse me.
We all know he would have been a fool to bet his money verse me.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18969456 - 10/12/13 06:45 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
He's paid every one for every person who's taken him up on his offer. Every single one. And now ask how many people said they were going to take him up on his offer and didn't go through with it? (all of them)
It's not like he can't afford it.
Refresh my mind on what you offered to bet on again?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: The Best Objective Evidence of Chi. [Re: teknix]
#18969624 - 10/12/13 07:38 PM (10 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said:
ROFL, how deluded. deluded deluded deluded deluded deluded deluded deluded
|
|