ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
There is no valid material evidence to support any claim of psychic experience - it's all subjective, anecdotal, and largely open to interpretation.
Read my link about morphic fields and resonance. Also, there's advanced wave solutions.
That is not evidence. It is not even theory or hypothesis. It is no more than untestable speculation.
What's in the box?Then how do you explain fish schooling or birds flying in patterns while in unison? Don't you wonder how they know where to fly? How do they synchronize it? Could there be a morphic field that tells their brain where they should fly? Could they be responding to morphic resonance during such intricate flights?
Could it be that
you don't know either? It takes a flying leap of faith to go from
"I'm too ignorant to know how they do that" to
"They must be psychic!" Isn't it enough to watch the pretty little birdies fly without imagining that they have psychic abilities too?
What's in the box?Technically they are responding to morphic fields. Humans use the word "psychic" to describe a myriad of unexplained phenomena.
What's in the box are too many thoughts. Time to start thinking
outside the box, Fnord.
Are you taking obfuscation lessons from Philologos? "Thinking outside the box" is the new buzz-phrase that alleged psychics employ instead "Keep an open mind" - neither means anything, especially in the light of the fact that you have provided no valid material evidence to support the claim that psychic abilities are real. You
can remedy this failing, however, if you stop playing these juvenile word-games and tell me...
What's in the box?