A remote viewer's prediction

**raiders72001** · 11-17-05, 07:43 PM

I use to listen to Coast to Coast daily. Is Art Bell back full time? Art use to have Major Ed Dames on all the time talking about remote viewing. Dames teaches classes on it.

Art had lots of interesting guests. Mitchio Kaku was one of my favorites. He's a theoretical physicist at NYU that's written books on String Theory and ten dimensions. I read two of them.

He also has a good psychic Sylvia Brown on once in a while. Some of his topics are fairy tales but the are always interesting.

**Betman** · 11-17-05, 08:15 PM

Art Bell is on his way to retirement. He is on on sundays only. George Noory is on weekdays.

They brought in another guy to do the shows on saturdays.

**Ganchrow** · 11-17-05, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by Betman

Before you brush off remote viewing as a pile of high grade balloney, try to keep an open mind. This guy made me some serious cash with his predictions regarding gold and where prices were headed.

High grade baloney? Personally, I'd label it low-grade nonsense.

There's a man by the name of James Randi who has outstanding offer on the table of a "one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event." (http://www.randi.org).

You might want to suggest to Mr. Morton that he make a try for this prize. If his claims are indeed correct it should be easy million. Considerably more likely, of course, he'll run from the challenge knowing full well that his charlatan's ways will prove decidely useless under the light of scientific scrutiny.

That or like many before he'll simply crash and burn.

**Ganchrow** · 11-17-05, 11:26 PM

Here's the direct link to information reagrding Randi's $1,000,000 paranormal challenge: http://randi.org/research/index.html.

**raiders72001** · 11-18-05, 12:18 AM

Law enforement use psychics. The military has used remote viewing both in the US and Russia.

**Shawn01** · 11-18-05, 12:40 AM

Originally posted by raiders72001

Law enforement use psychics. The military has used remote viewing both in the US and Russia.

Or so Art and other eccentrics claim. The problem is that neither Art Bell and his type, nor the federal government, are believable.

**Betman** · 11-18-05, 12:47 AM

When a remote viewer is able to provide precise information regarding the whereabout of a missing person such as the fact that the person is dead and provide enough information to locate the body, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is indeed "low grade nonsense".

When a remote viewer is able to provide precise information regarding the future price movement of a specific commodity and repeat the performance many times, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is indeed "low grade nonsense".

When a remote viewer is able to describe exactly what a person is doing thousands of miles away as part of an experiment, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is "low grade nonsense"

I could go on and on and on but I am sure that you get my point.

**Bill Dozer** · 11-18-05, 12:59 AM

When a remote viewer is able to provide precise information regarding the whereabout of a missing person such as the fact that the person is dead and provide enough information to locate the body, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is indeed "low grade nonsense".

Not that I have an opinion on this, but there is a difference between what you guys are debating. Telling the police where a dead body is at the time is different than forecasting conclusions of events that are still unfolding.

Then again, valued forecasting can become truth. If someone starts a rumor or lie that book XYZ is going to go down in 1/2006, it can have an effect on on the book and prove true. If Sylvia Brown says a stock is going to double the company may see an infusion of investments.

I never bought into telling the future, for the reason that knowing it would change it.

**Ganchrow** · 11-18-05, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by Betman

When a remote viewer is able to provide precise information regarding the whereabout of a missing person such as the fact that the person is dead and provide enough information to locate the body, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is indeed "low grade nonsense".

When a remote viewer is able to provide precise information regarding the future price movement of a specific commodity and repeat the performance many times, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is indeed "low grade nonsense".

When a remote viewer is able to describe exactly what a person is doing thousands of miles away as part of an experiment, one has to wonder whether remote viewing is "low grade nonsense"

I could go on and on and on but I am sure that you get my point.

If what you were saying were indeed true it would be rather impressive. Hell, it would be life-changing impressive. As such, if you can provide even the most minute smidgen of verifiable peer reviewed scientific evidence of such claims I'll be right with you nodding away and smiling as you collect your million dollars. But until then, my Friend ... naught but low grade nonsense.

And rather absurd low grade nonsense at that.

**raiders72001** · 11-18-05, 02:54 AM

Ganch- If the final score is 35-27 would that make you a believer?

**Ganchrow** · 11-18-05, 03:03 AM

A reprint of a Skeptical Inquirer article detailing a failed attempt at a remote veiwing team's winning the $1mm prize.

**Ganchrow** · 11-18-05, 03:04 AM

Originally posted by raiders72001

Ganch- If the final score is 35-27 would that make you a believer?

I suspect you already know the answer to that one.

**Brick Tamland** · 11-18-05, 05:09 AM

ganch

I believe!! All day i been seeing this piece of cat shit in my mind. Turns out its been raiders!!!

**raiders72001** · 11-18-05, 06:18 AM

Brick- Take your head out of your ass and you'll be able to see.

**JoshW** · 11-18-05, 09:11 AM

I am with ganchrow all the way. This remote viewing and psychics in general over and over fail any attempt that actually puts their skills to the test in controlled scientific environments. Is BS that still gets attention because these news shows can only talk about so many subjects before they get old so why not talk about quacks on the edge.

**Sam Odom** · 11-18-05, 01:42 PM

If someone can 'see the future' they wouldn't waste their time on talk radio

If a tout could really pick gms he wouldnt have to sell his picks.