Home | Community | Message Board


Crestline Sales - MycoPath
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Calling Swami & all other Sceptics...
    #2171263 - 12/11/03 02:38 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

What do u think of the PEAR project
at princeton ?

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

no fruit-cake jokes please :tongue:


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: lucid]
    #2171270 - 12/11/03 03:15 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Interesting stuff. It looks like that research may clear up a little of the confusion surrounding human consciousness and its interaction with the physical world.

Perhaps it is just the tip of an iceberg.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: ]
    #2171277 - 12/11/03 03:29 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Mr_Mushrooms said:
Interesting stuff.  It looks like that research may clear up a little of the confusion surrounding human consciousness and its interaction with the physical world.

Perhaps it is just the tip of an iceberg.




Yup, that's exactly what I thought.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic :grin:


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemuhurgle
Turtles all theway down

Registered: 10/29/03
Posts: 299
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: lucid]
    #2171286 - 12/11/03 04:11 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

It would be kinda cool if there was something to this. But as far as I know, nobody has managed to reproduce their results (the human/machine anomalies).

Also, there are some parts of their works which doesnt sound very convincing. Even though 'consciousness' isn't a well defined or well understood concept, they draw the conclusion that these effects are somehow linked to 'human consciousness'. At the same time they also say that "These random devices also respond to group activities of larger numbers of people, even when they are unaware of the machine's presence.".

Assuming that it is in fact a real measureable effect, it seems to me that if they get a response from people who aren't even aware of the machine, it isn't necessarily linked to 'consciousness'. So that they still use consciousness to explain this sounds a bit dubious.

There's another quote (in http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/correlations.pdf) that is strange:

"Experiments performed by operators far removed from the devices, or exerting their intentions at times other than that of device operation, yield results of comparable scale and character to those of the local, on-time experiments. Such remote, off-time results have been demonstrated on all of the random sources."

Coupled with the first quote (or even by itself), this seems to invalidate the whole experiment. They get the same results at times the operators are NOT exerting their intentions. And they get results when people are unaware of the device. How can they then attribute that the device responds to anything?


--------------------
"To make this mundane world sublime
Take half a gram of phanerothyme."

Aldous Huxley


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: muhurgle]
    #2171311 - 12/11/03 05:25 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

RCA

Lucid: I was dead serious.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: muhurgle]
    #2171315 - 12/11/03 05:42 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

muhurgle said:
It would be kinda cool if there was something to this. But as far as I know, nobody has managed to reproduce their results (the human/machine anomalies).

Also, there are some parts of their works which doesnt sound very convincing. Even though 'consciousness' isn't a well defined or well understood concept, they draw the conclusion that these effects are somehow linked to 'human consciousness'. At the same time they also say that "These random devices also respond to group activities of larger numbers of people, even when they are unaware of the machine's presence.".

Assuming that it is in fact a real measureable effect, it seems to me that if they get a response from people who aren't even aware of the machine, it isn't necessarily linked to 'consciousness'. So that they still use consciousness to explain this sounds a bit dubious.

There's another quote (in http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/correlations.pdf) that is strange:

"Experiments performed by operators far removed from the devices, or exerting their intentions at times other than that of device operation, yield results of comparable scale and character to those of the local, on-time experiments. Such remote, off-time results have been demonstrated on all of the random sources."

Coupled with the first quote (or even by itself), this seems to invalidate the whole experiment. They get the same results at times the operators are NOT exerting their intentions. And they get results when people are unaware of the device. How can they then attribute that the device responds to anything?




Actually, it's still logically valid. They might be attributing
3 independant qualities to thier findings:
1) Simple Presence of people can affect experiments (sub concious
perhaps, but not necessarily).
2) they get results at times when operators are NOT exerting
intentions (but note that the operators ARE exerting
intentions at a different time) - this would indicate that
concious intent affects the experiments
3) remote intention seems to affect results too. so
remote concious intent may be a factor.
I'm not saying that they're found final proof of anything,
but their findings seem to indicate potential and a good
case for further studies (altho that makes me wonder
if the findings might be fibbed in order to get funding)...


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemuhurgle
Turtles all theway down

Registered: 10/29/03
Posts: 299
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: lucid]
    #2171336 - 12/11/03 06:50 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Searched for some more info on PEAR, and found this:

http://www.btinternet.com/~neuronaut/webtwo_features_psi_two.htm

which appears to be quite solid critique of the whole experiment and the PEAR lab. This excerpt nicely sums it up:

"Suspicions have hardened as sceptics have looked more closely at the fine detail of Jahn's results. Attention has focused on the fact that one of the experimental subjects - believed actually to be a member of the PEAR lab staff - is almost single-handedly responsible for the significant results of the studies. It was noted as long ago as 1985, in a report to the US Army by a fellow parapsychologist, John Palmer of Durham University, North Carolina, that one subject - known as operator 10 - was by far the best performer. This trend has continued. On the most recently available figures, operator 10 has been involved in 15 percent of the 14 million trials yet contributed a full half of the total excess hits. If this person's figures are taken out of the data pool, scoring in the "low intention" condition falls to chance while "high intention" scoring drops close to the .05 boundary considered weakly significant in scientific results."


--------------------
"To make this mundane world sublime
Take half a gram of phanerothyme."

Aldous Huxley


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: lucid]
    #2171343 - 12/11/03 07:07 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

1. Everyone on this board is a skeptic.

2. How many times must I respond to this ancient study?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: Swami]
    #2171346 - 12/11/03 07:17 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

3. I wasn't aware of 2...


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisiblePhoshaman
L.A, L.A., BigCity of Dreams.
Male
Registered: 06/02/99
Posts: 1,521
Loc: Downtown L.A.
Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: lucid]
    #2171495 - 12/11/03 09:11 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

Shouldn't the 5th dimensional cyber-uber-beings show the telekinetic information vessels (humans they communicate with) how to be good with their grammar?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: Calling Swami & all other Sceptics... [Re: Swami]
    #2171688 - 12/11/03 11:41 PM (13 years, 3 months ago)

1.  I am a styptic, not a skeptic.

Whew, that was a close shave.  :lol:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

Amazon Shop for: Scales

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Contacting your Inner Swami
( 1 2 all )
Swami 1,481 25 05/26/03 10:07 PM
by RebelSteve33
* the boundaries of scepticism mr crisper 589 12 12/08/03 10:03 AM
by Alan Stone
* The Swami Swami Three Month Challenge
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Swami 4,040 78 09/09/04 02:17 PM
by ElfWizard
* Swami/Shroomism relations
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Learyfan 4,496 68 03/20/02 09:32 PM
by Swami
* For the sceptics...
( 1 2 3 all )
Chronic7 2,627 59 03/29/08 10:48 PM
by allisthesame
* Patent granted on Free Energy Device!
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 2,172 20 04/17/02 10:24 PM
by Anonymous
* Swama New Year = Resolution or Revolution?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
LunarEclipse 4,738 110 01/04/05 06:24 AM
by Asante
* Scepticism
( 1 2 3 4 all )
raytrace 3,414 78 11/28/02 11:38 PM
by Phluck

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
615 topic views. 2 members, 5 guests and 17 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Everything Mushrooms
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.062 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.