Can you have out of body experiences?

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

This discussion has entered the realms of the farsical. Whatever happened to the goal of people thinking for themselves in an enlightened society? I seem to be encountering people who are unable to do a bit of research themselves and seem to want me to do it all for them.

Not true. I looked for some of this research you mentioned, but all I found were research studies that disprove out of body experiences, ESP, and other similar phenomena.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Hmm ... you mean sources like this?

It certainly tries to sound scientific, but of course provides no links to the studies it cites, so the studies themselves cannot be evaluated. Evaluating the claims about the studies, then, reveals to me:

(1) Questionable methodology
(2) Experiments which assume the phenomenon exists and search for causes, without verifying the phenomenon itself
(3) A willingness to accept anecdote as proof
(4) A few citations which appear to debunk the OBE claims themselves

About the only thing I'm comfortable concluding from that mass of material is that they can correlate REM activity with very lucid dreams.

 

[Janx]

This discussion has entered the realms of the farsical. Whatever happened to the goal of people thinking for themselves in an enlightened society? I seem to be encountering people who are unable to do a bit of research themselves and seem to want me to do it all for them.

We, as a global society, have got to do better than this. Having other people think for us is not going to get us any further forwards than we are now. We are always going to be targets for manipulation if we cannot seek out information for ourselves and make our own minds up about it. This is because any time we are removed from the source we can be deceived easily. And believe me, this is happening. Heck, don't believe me, but go look for yourself to prove me wrong. Whatever you do, go look.

Replacing one dogma with another is a trap. Merely repeating what others have you taught us to think does not make us clever, though it may fool some. We are an intelligent species, let us not squander that intelligence.

I know more psychics who believe they have psychic abilities than you can shake a stick at.

You have failed to consider that I some of us are well versed in the topic.

I have rows of books on meta-physical topics.. I am quite well informed.

So again. Cite some proof of anything meta-physical being proven.

 

[Umbran]

Circular logic is... circular, independently of the results of the scientific method.

Yes, but again, you seem to be behind what I'm saying.

What part of, "Science works because it allows us to get beyond the limitations of casual human thought. The proof that it works is that we get results (like, say the semiconductors that allow the computer you're using to function) when we apply it," is circular? The cause for function is *separate* from the proof of function. Nothing self-referential in that.

 

[sabrinathecat]

This discussion has entered the realms of the farsical. Whatever happened to the goal of people thinking for themselves in an enlightened society? I seem to be encountering people who are unable to do a bit of research themselves and seem to want me to do it all for them.

We, as a global society, have got to do better than this. Having other people think for us is not going to get us any further forwards than we are now. We are always going to be targets for manipulation if we cannot seek out information for ourselves and make our own minds up about it. This is because any time we are removed from the source we can be deceived easily. And believe me, this is happening. Heck, don't believe me, but go look for yourself to prove me wrong. Whatever you do, go look.

Replacing one dogma with another is a trap. Merely repeating what others have you taught us to think does not make us clever, though it may fool some. We are an intelligent species, let us not squander that intelligence.

Would you care to lead by example? So far you have insisted that something extraordinary is possible, and followed it up with the assertion that scientists, as some unified oligarchy, have dismissed it and refuse to even discuss it, but not cited a single source of information. Why, oh because you don't wish to converse with us "on our level."
We are just supposed to accept your statements on blind faith and conspiracy logic.
You have yet to go through a logical, rational discussion. You reach your conclusion, and then make up the argument along the way, and anyone that doesn't agree with you is biased.
Please, lead us out of farcical with some logical discussion.
Only one person gets to decide what the rules of conversation are on that board: the owner. The rules include no personal attacks, no politics, and nothing derogatory about religion.
Your pattern of (I can't call it 'dialog' because you don't seem to be listening to what others are saying) seems to be more religion-based than science based.
No one has (so far) said that you are wrong: they have asked you for proof. Proof you have refused to provide, thus totally negating your own side of the discussion.

 

[Kramodlog]

Yes, but again, you seem to be behind what I'm saying.

Actually, you seem to.

 

[Umbran]

Actually, you seem to.

Ah. I get it. Okay, we're done.

 

[Kramodlog]

Ah. I get it. Okay, we're done.

Not my fault in post #79 you said the proof science gets results are its results. That is circular.

 

[Arduin's]

If paranormal powers were "real", I think we would have already had a very good confidence they exist and were using them practically in large capacity.

So if one out of ten million people had random, very infrequent, uncontrollable paranormal powers we'd, "have already had a very good confidence they exist and were using them practically in large capacity."

Please explain EXACTLY how that would be so. ...

 

[sabrinathecat]

So if one out of ten million people had random, very infrequent, uncontrollable paranormal powers we'd, "have already had a very good confidence they exist and were using them practically in large capacity."

Please explain EXACTLY how that would be so. ...

Then there would be about 600 to 800 people alive right now who could provide useful data.
Or, like life itself, the powers would be a statistical anomaly.
If they want to be taken seriously, they have to be willing to submit to study.
Once proven, people would be jealous, wishing they had the ability(ies), regardless of the consequences or price paid by the individuals. They would be branded as pariahs, and become the new rock stars, at the same time.