Science investigating the Paranormal

pH

mysteria wrote:

Really Ph my post has more to do with this topic than talking about bears. And it is a very valid point!

No it doesn't, your post was a deliberate attempt to muddy the water and somehow equate political/budgetary spending decisions with scientific proof.

Of course people and very vocal interest groups can pressure the government to spend their tax-euros and pounds in all kinds of silly and non-productive ways.

psi wrote:

if you do not understand the nature of something, how do you show its effect in a scientific way? Surely by being paranormal, rather than phenomenological, it cannot be readily defined. Where would you even begin to look.

Once again you don't need to understand anything (or it's nature) to measure its effect. Unless you want to play silly philosophical word games; If an effect 'exists' then that effect can be measured. Whether science can explain (what causes ) the measured effect is then an open question.

mysteria

6th:That's because you have to be A.a Graduate to study parapsychology and B. I'm currently writing the results of my research and that of my colleagues in a book. Check with Trinity or any School, college etc and see if you can get free access to their experimental ongoing research results. It is a privately funded, 3 continent Institution, I never wanted publicity for it, you'll have to wait for the book.
Ph so you're a psychic who is reading my mind? Assumptions again. At least my post was on topic.

Zombrex

mysteria wrote:

That's because you have to be A.a Graduate to study parapsychology and B. I'm currently writing the results of my research and that of my colleagues in a book. Check with Trinity or any School, college etc and see if you can get free access to their experimental ongoing research results. It is a privately funded, 3 continent Institution, I never wanted publicity for it, you'll have to wait for the book.

Stop hogging your book (joking)

Can you at least tell us the results of the study?

6th

mysteria wrote:

6th:That's because you have to be A.a Graduate to study parapsychology and B. I'm currently writing the results of my research and that of my colleagues in a book. Check with Trinity or any School, college etc and see if you can get free access to their experimental ongoing research results. It is a privately funded, 3 continent Institution, I never wanted publicity for it, you'll have to wait for the book.
Ph so you're a psychic who is reading my mind? Assumptions again. At least my post was on topic.

Am I wrong in saying it was founded in 1984? If i'm right its taken 22 years to get results?

Er ... I am a graduate. Its not that I want to study parapsychology, its that i'd be inetrested in reading papers written from a Institute based (partically) in Ireland. You always tell be to google in if they want info yet it only points at your site.

I've asked in a few libraries and gotten funny looks, I've also asked friends to check in colleges they are in to ask their libraries and still nothing.

If its being studied as a science here, why can no info be gotten on it?

mysteria

Wicknight wrote:

Stop hogging your book (joking)

Can you at least tell us the results of the study?

I like the GSOH Wicknight, no problem. Fact is it's really difficult to condense 22 years of research into a book, never mind a post. Also if I talk about myself or my work, I'm accused of self-promotion, lying, being old :eek: , annoying etc. And if I don't answer cheeky questions, yes you've guessed it. I'm accused of self-promotion, lying, being old :eek: , annoying etc.:rolleyes:

6th

Ah you take things too personal, i've never seen you called old, or annoying in a post.

Surely there is something you can say about the work done at an institute that beens around for 22 years?

Zombrex

mysteria wrote:

And if I don't answer cheeky questions, yes you've guessed it. I'm accused of self-promotion, lying, being old :eek: , annoying etc.:rolleyes:

Yeah I was actually going to say "I won't attack you if you do" at the end. i can understand why you would be reluctant to post them here since you would be on the defensive straight away (we are at times too skeptical)

Without giving any specific details that can be argued for ever, did the study developed any theories as to how it happens, assuming something is happening. TBH I've always been far more interested in what is happening rather than if it is or not what people think it is. Obviously something is happening

mysteria

Well that was my original intention when I joined the paranormal board, thought I'd find some people who would be interested in experimental work but you've gotta admit Mark I've not been made feel welcome here and if I say any more I'll be banned for talking about myself. You said I was looking for "groupies", hysterical you should see who I work with, hot tottie!!! Why should I share my knowledge and experience with people who are really nice, sound, cool in private yet rip me to shreds on the board at the slightest opportunity?Wicknight I don't think you'd attack me, ask challenging questions maybe which I'd love someone to do. Anyone whose read stuff posted about me will see I even was asked who took my virginity! So I'll pm you, ok?eek! about Parapsychology not the latter.

6th

mysteria wrote:

Well that was my original intention when I joined the paranormal board, thought I'd find some people who would be interested in experimental work but you've gotta admit Mark I've not been made feel welcome here and if I say any more I'll be banned for talking about myself. You said I was looking for "groupies", hysterical you should see who I work with, hot tottie!!! Why should I share my knowledge and experience with people who are really nice, sound, cool in private yet rip me to shreds on the board at the slightest opportunity?

This is a different, forum. You are mixing up the paranormal forum, thunderdome and fedback now. Anyone around a while here (which you are) knows better than to carry baggage around with them between the different forums. When you say "here" you mean paranormal forum and thats not for this thread.

I'm asking in regards to what is relevant to this topic and forum. Personal feelings dont come into it.

mysteria

6th wrote:

This is a different, forum. You are mixing up the paranormal forum, thunderdome and fedback now. Anyone around a while here (which you are) knows better than to carry baggage around with them between the different forums. When you say "here" you mean paranormal forum and thats not for this thread.

I'm asking in regards to what is relevant to this topic and forum. Personal feelings dont come into it.

I'm not mixing up people though. With me, personal feelings do come into it.

pH

Sandra/mysteria, you seem constantly to bring up academic qualifications, so let me ask you once again :

Holding a Ph.D. normally means one has already completed degrees at bachelor (at upper honours level) or masters level. It will also normally involved researching and publishing a thesis.

Do you actually have any real academic qualifications, from any acreditited institutions or have you merely bought a Ph.D. from an on-line doctorate shop?

Maybe you could let us know where you received for your primary degrees(s) and the title of and a link to your doctoral thesis?

Thanks in advance ...

goldilocked

Hey mysteria, a quick question re the book. Will there be paragraphs?

6th

Well its holding you back from being a worthwhile poster.

So back to the topic, what areas have your institue focused on in the last 22 years and what methods have they applied to their studies?

6th

goldilocked wrote:

Hey mysteria, a quick question re the book. Will there be paragraphs?

Ok now that was funny

mysteria

Ph, I don't make the rules. Every University offering Parapsychology requires at least a Psych degree. And I've no need to lie. I have my qualifications from TCD, UCD ( Ph.D.), Maynooth, UWI St. Augustine (Trinidad...and no, not the doctorate, B.Sc.Pharm) Berkeley ( Parapsychology&Metaphysics)But I studied for my Doctorate in the 70's so I doubt you'll find it online. Unlike Psi I don't mind people knowing. Now, what are yours?

mysteria

I rest my case. Mark, don't even bother, I'm not responding to anything you ask. Can't handle a genuine Paranormalist on the board ay?

pH

mysteria wrote:

Ph, I don't make the rules. Every University offering Parapsychology requires at least a Psych degree. And I've no need to lie. I have my qualifications from TCD, UCD ( Ph.D.), Maynooth, UWI St. Augustine (Trinidad...and no, not the doctorate, B.Sc.Pharm) Berkeley ( Parapsychology&Metaphysics)But I studied for my Doctorate in the 70's so I doubt you'll find it online. Unlike Psi I don't mind people knowing. Now, what are yours?

Just to be absolutely clear, you (Sandra Ramdhanie) hold a Ph.D. issued by University College Dublin (UCD) which was awarded in the late '70s?

May I ask the subject of the doctoral dissertation, the year it was awarded and whether you were using the same name (Sandra Ramdhanie) at the time of the award?

Unlike Psi I don't mind people knowing. Now, what are Yours?

Which qualifiations that I am claiming to have are you interested in more details in?

robindch

> Ok now that was funny

...it was also faintly rude. Politeness, please, folks. Despite occasional appearances to the contrary, we're in a public debating forum and not a kids' nursery.

Zillah

pH wrote:

Just to be absolutely clear, you (Sandra Ramdhanie) hold a Ph.D. issued by University College Dublin (UCD) which was awarded in the late '70s?

May I ask the subject of the doctoral dissertation, the year it was awarded and whether you were using the same name (Sandra Ramdhanie) at the time of the award?

Which qualifiations that I am claiming to have are you interested in more details in?

Oh now this is interesting...

GuanYin

Wicknight wrote:

That makes even less sense as support for your argument

If something is not understandable by scientific law then the understanding of the law is wrong or incomplete, which is exactly what I've been saying since the beginning.


You keep missing the "known" bit. Current known scientific law is not all scientific law.

Under what basis are you making the assumption that everything is discernable by scientific law?

Can you prove this or is it merely your belief?

The key word being "current" science. As I pointed out everything we know has at one point been outside the scope of current science. "Current science" increases and improves to encompass the new stuff. That is what science and understanding are. They grow.

Which is why something can at some point be classified as paranornmal, or unknown, or just plain weird, and at a later stage be understood and considered simple.

But retrospectively it was never paranormal. It was just something that people thought paranromal. Preternatural if you like.

The paranromal encompasses that which is truely without explanation.

It was paranormal at the time. As I explained, the classification "paranormal" is dependent on the current state of human understanding.

No, the point is it was never paranormal.

Like the Panda Bear was long thought to be a Bear for so long, until someone actually looked and argued that it was a Racoon (thi sis still disputed mind you). If it is a Racoon, it was never a bear.

If you are in doubt about this sustitute the word "unknown" for "paranormal". If something was unknown and then discovered that doesn't mean that before it was discovered it actually was known. The classification "unknown" depends on what we as a species actually know. As does the classification paranormal. Paranormal is dependend on our current understand of what is normal[/quoute]
No, because "unknown" is not outside the scope of scientific understanding.

Here is the definition you accepted:
"not understandable in terms of known scientific laws and phenomena "

This doesn't have a tense. There is no currently. To be paranormal you are outside the understanding of science period.

If it turns out that science can undertsand it, it was never Paranormal.

You don't have to. Even if we never discover a 10% of the natural laws in the unvirse (of which it is quite possible are infiniate number), that doesn't mean they cannot be discovered, only that we haven't or are incapable of doing so.

It still doesn't mean that even if we did find them, they would explain everything. Its quite possible that having found all laws, there would still be phenomenon that science cannot explain. You cannot prove this either way.

I know this is getting a bit abstract, but imagine the atomic theory. If the universe had ended in 1790 and we or no one had ever discovered atomic theory, does that mean it was not possible to do so? No, it just means we didn't.

Poor arguement. The point is not that science can find thing, its that you have no waying of proving that it can find EVERYTHING. Its pure belief and assumption on your part, no more real or valid than belief in the bogeyman.

It is logical to assume that anything that can be observed can be studied using the scientific method and explained, even if one admits that that does not hold true when applied to humans.

Please define the logic that leads you to this conclusion. Show references if you can - I want to see that this is actual logic rather than just what YOU think is logical.

I don't know if humans will ever discover everything, only that it is possible.

Back this statement up with something factual to support it.
Is this your opinion or someones opinion or can you PROVE this?

We do have evidence for the law, the thing we are observing is the evidence for the law.

How so. Explain how you can derive a law from observing a phenomenon?

GuanYin

Zillah wrote:

Oh now this is interesting...

Only because the UCD library has no record of a thesis fitting those details - and it catalogues everything right back to pre-1900 online.

mysteria

What "details" did I give about my thesis, Psi? Presuming you're talking about me? Way off topic by the way.

Zillah

psi wrote:

Only because the UCD library has no record of a thesis fitting those details - and it catalogues everything right back to pre-1900 online.

Well, yeah, that was kind of my point...

And Mysteria, could you please stop playing the moderator, its quite annoying. I'm sure Robindch will say something if anyone is being innapropriate.

GuanYin

mysteria wrote:

What "details" did I give about my thesis, Psi?

You don't need to give details. I searched the catalogue for a thesis under your name and found nothing.

mysteria wrote:

But I studied for my Doctorate in the 70's so I doubt you'll find it online. Unlike Psi I don't mind people knowing. Now, what are yours

Au contraire, the UCD catalogue system lists thesis back to pre-1900's.

So if you REALLY don't mind people knowing, can you give the thesis title and theme? also, what name did you publish it under?

Zillah wrote:

Well, yeah, that was kind of my point...

Well anything to stop you trolling me

mysteria

You don't know my actual name do you Psi or are you Psychic too? I don't know what trolling is, but I sure recognise where you're coming from. What has this to do with the topic?

GuanYin

mysteria wrote:

You don't know my actual name do you Psi or are you Psychic too? I don't know what trolling is, but I sure recognise where you're coming from. What has this to do with the topic?

I was accusing Zillah not you (unless you are Zillah) and it was in jest.

Well I'm not sure it does or doesn't (although you spent alot of time asking about my qualifications and it dodn't bother you then) meet the topic requirements, but if you want you can PM them to me?

You don't need to give your real name, just the title of the thesis, or even the area it is in?

pH

mysteria wrote:

You don't know my actual name do you Psi or are you Psychic too? I don't know what trolling is, but I sure recognise where you're coming from. What has this to do with the topic?

You make it something to do with the topic by continually throwing your 'qualifications' around and claiming a Ph.D. in your sig

mysteria wrote:

have dozens of Doctors I work with because I have medical qualifications as well, and have lectured in Trinity and several hospitals.I joined this discussion originally because I felt there might be people who would like advice from an expert in this field (I have two Doctorates as well as other qualifications),

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=50588356&postcount=48

mysteria wrote:

No problem Ozzy.I've studied in Maynooth, U.C.D. & Trinity (Psychology, Philosophy, Medical Science),also in the USA (Parapsychology & Metaphysics). But I don't think this makes me any better at my work.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=50602635&postcount=170

Are you going to give us a hint as to what subject you earned both your doctorates in, and let us know which institution awarded the 2nd one?

mysteria

I asked you once as you were relying so heavily on them for the rather incoherent rambling about Scientific research of the paranormal. So pm me where you got all your qualifications etc. and I'll consider it. If my pedigree has become the topic, I've a Knighthood too. I can't believe the reaction every time I post. \sorry for interrupting your interation with wicknight.

GuanYin

mysteria wrote:

I asked you once as you were relying so heavily on them for the rather incoherent rambling about Scientific research of the paranormal. So pm me where you got all your qualifications etc. and I'll consider it. If my pedigree has become the topic, I've a Knighthood too. I can't believe the reaction every time I post. \sorry for interrupting your interation with wicknight.

I was never relying on it. I was stating it for context.

You DO as has been shown, go mentioning yours. So off you go, you said right there in the text above that you have no problem showing it.

So off you go.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I've got Ph.D too!

-edit


lol, absolutely fantastic sig editing skillz