Precognition- What is your take on it?

[Gray-Wolf]

The fact that humans are able to react to realities not yet in the 'present' has been a proven human facility for over 20yrs now (in repeatable experimentation in both the U.S. and Netherlands) so how does this ability occur in us?

[flagpole]

I remain open-minded on the subject.

I would be interested to see the proof.

I do however believe that many unscrupulous people claim to have abilities they do not posess for entirely selfish reasons.

[Gray-Wolf]

Then maybe if you had a look Flaggy.

Try Princeton uni (PEAR) or Amsterdam uni on their work on precognition. I think the most common experiment involves you being wired up to detect minute bodily changes and then you being subjected to a randomly generated set of images, some nice some not so nice, some exciting some boring and then to measure your physical 'reactions' in 'real time'.

It has been found to occur in different labs, on different continents (by folk trying to prove 'errors' in methodology) that subjects tested by this method will, milliseconds before a 'disturbing image' is shown, prepare the body for the shock.

So how does this work? The computer 'chooses' the images yet we pre-empt the image by our precognitive physiological responce.

An open mind could prove (when measured to everybodys satisfaction) to be a very powerful thing indeed.

[flagpole]

Aaah I have heard of the Princeton Department, I believe it is now closing down but I shall look into the research.

Incidentally have you ever visited Bad Psychics? I think you would find some interesting debate on the subject over there and also see why I am so sceptical about many who claim to have these abilities

http://moh2005.proboards78.com/index.cgi

[Gray-Wolf]

As you well know 'one bad apple will spoil the barrel'. Only last week I had to advise a group of 'clairvoyants' that there 'pub gig' in Bury would be canceled due to bad weather....it was... but they didn't 'see it coming' did they? We are not focusing on side show freaks but day to day, run of the mill, 'normal' folk and their experiences of communication that has nothing to do with normal 'channels' of communication (thought of a person and the phones rings and there they are sort of thing)

[flagpole]

(thought of a person and the phones rings and there they are sort of thing)

Actually that is something that comes up quite often on Bad Psychics.

They suggest writing down each phone call and who you thought it would be, whether you were right or wrong. Do this for a period of time and see how you go. You might get it right a few times but we have to allow for coincidence or regularity (ie someone often calls at that time or has said they will call)

BP is opn to believers, non-believers and sceptics.

[Gray-Wolf]

We digress. The question was how the process within the experiment 'worked' and whether it is enough 'proof' of something outside our quantifiable universe as it stands and worthy of further research (remember Dark matter/Energy didn't used to belong in observable physics a few years back so lets not close doors we haven't opened eh?)

We are rural and as such have many tight ,blind corners. My biker 'sense' has stopped me having many unplanned meetings around these routes (mostly witnessed by my partner) so I don't mind it so much when I find no danger around the bend but these instances are remarkable as they make up the least frequent event.

[flagpole]

I'm not closing any doors GW.

I apologise if you think I was digressing, I thought I was discussing precognition.

Carry on with your thread.

[Gray-Wolf]

Sorry F.P. I thought you were dismissing precognition.My boob.

[Hemlock]

We are rural and as such have many tight ,blind corners. My biker 'sense' has stopped me having many unplanned meetings around these routes (mostly witnessed by my partner) so I don't mind it so much when I find no danger around the bend but these instances are remarkable as they make up the least frequent event.

I'm not sure I understand this, I also live in a very rural area, I use a tight twisty B road twice a day to and from work and I've also managed to avoid several accidents through nothing else but caution, I know the areas where people are liable to cut corners, be driving to fast, i know where the pot holes that can throw you into the middle of the road are etc and have avoided a certain collision on several occasions, this however is nothing more that a bit of common sense and a prior knowledge of the road and its conditions.

[Gray-Wolf]

I'm not sure I understand this, I also live in a very rural area, I use a tight twisty B road twice a day to and from work and I've also managed to avoid several accidents through nothing else but caution, I know the areas where people are liable to cut corners, be driving to fast, i know where the pot holes that can throw you into the middle of the road are etc and have avoided a certain collision on several occasions, this however is nothing more that a bit of common sense and a prior knowledge of the road and its conditions.

So your accepting that 'prior knowledge' can be a useful addition to your personal safety but only see it as cognitive process?

If you had a 'bad feeling' about something would you/have you dismissed it because you couldn't understand why you should have the concerns or have you 'hedged your bets' just in case?

Have there been any 'problems' with things if you haven't accepted your 'gut feelings' and carried on regardless?

[shuggee]

It must be true - I saw Final Destination I, II and III.

(With apologies)

[Gray-Wolf]

It must be true - I saw Final Destination I, II and III.

(With apologies)

Before their release?

[Hemlock]

So your accepting that 'prior knowledge' can be a useful addition to your personal safety but only see it as cognitive process?

If you had a 'bad feeling' about something would you/have you dismissed it because you couldn't understand why you should have the concerns or have you 'hedged your bets' just in case?

Have there been any 'problems' with things if you haven't accepted your 'gut feelings' and carried on regardless?

Erm, its just common sense GW, I know an area can be dangerous and as such I'm naturally cautious when approaching said area, there is nothing mystical about it, its just plain old common sense, same as when somebody makes you a cup of tea, the first sip you always tentatively bring the cup to your lips because you are aware there is a chance it could be hot enough to burn you, our brain is very good at remembering places and situations that have hurt or scared us, any future caution is 2nd nature in those situations, almost as if its been hardwired in, however, it IS just a reference to a past experience.

[Gray-Wolf]

But Hemmypoos all 'experience ' is based on past events.

If 'pre-cognition' exists you would still be utilising the same neural pathways as you would in a situation of 'cognitive' danger (as the experiment I refered to would prove).

The reason we call it a 'gut' feeling is because our bodies have started to produce sustances at the Adrenals that help bring the body into it's 'fight or flight' mode. For 'gut' feeling to be within our language it must be a similar experience for all.

So how then does the brain respond within the experiment. The random selector takes micro seconds to select the image by which time the body has had it's 'feeling' enough for a message to go to the brain, be diseminated, distribute a complex array of signals throughout the body to the point that those signals promote physical changes witihin the body that can be registered (heart rate,sweat rates,blood flow) so where is the 'common sense' in this 'repeatable' experiment?

Edited February 13, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[flagpole]

Sorry, how are you trying to tie the fight or flight response into precognition?

[Hemlock]

Sarcastic comments aside, I was referring to your posts earlier in the thread as you well know.

We are rural and as such have many tight ,blind corners. My biker 'sense' has stopped me having many unplanned meetings around these routes (mostly witnessed by my partner) so I don't mind it so much when I find no danger around the bend but these instances are remarkable as they make up the least frequent event.

So your accepting that 'prior knowledge' can be a useful addition to your personal safety but only see it as cognitive process?

If you had a 'bad feeling' about something would you/have you dismissed it because you couldn't understand why you should have the concerns or have you 'hedged your bets' just in case?

Have there been any 'problems' with things if you haven't accepted your 'gut feelings' and carried on regardless?

[Gray-Wolf]

Sorry, how are you trying to tie the fight or flight response into precognition?

Tie in? Trying?

How do you respond to anything Flaggy? How do you set your neurons in motion. I'd guess that some sensory faculty 'picks up ' on an event and ,via it's connections, alerts you to that event.

How would you recieve 'precognition'? or do you feel the system is 'special 'and therfore removed from the 'normal' way we sense and respond to stimulus?

Fight or flight (increased adrenalin, reduction of bloodflow to the skin/stomach, heightened visual/aural perception, sweating) is one of the more 'basic' systems in your body. The autonomic nervous response was selected for the series of precognition experiment purely because it is not easily brought under your concious control (in most 'untrained' folk) and so will give a 'truer' reading of the subjects current state. You wouldn't want them to cheat now would you.

If it would make it easier for folk maybe we should stick to showing our understanding of the precognition experiment outlined and how they would 'explain away' the effect?

Sarcastic comments aside, I was referring to your posts earlier in the thread as you well know.

Ditto.

Edited February 13, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[flagpole]

GW I in fact know more about fight or flight responses than I ever wished to know but they are not tied in to precognition. They are caused by a fear of what may happen, or by anticipation or by actual physical danger. They are an instantaneous reflex action.

I just don't see how you are suggesting precognition is tied in, that's all.

[Hemlock]

Ditto.

[Gray-Wolf]

GW I in fact know more about fight or flight responses than I ever wished to know but they are not tied in to precognition. They are caused by a fear of what may happen, or by anticipation or by actual physical danger. They are an instantaneous reflex action.

I just don't see how you are suggesting precognition is tied in, that's all.

Fear of what 'may' happen, anticipation of actual physical danger.

How do we find ourselves at the juncture where 'fight or flight' measures are deployed? 99 times out of 100 it will be either a response to a threat or a mental manifestation of deep seated personal insecurities but if 1 time out of 100 the 'feeling' is not generated by the above but from some onboard precognitive ability how would this translate within us physiologically?

My guess would be through the normal pathways our body uses to monitor/prepare us for events. I do not find the problem with seeing that our bodies will respond to stimulus where-ever it is generated as it appears you do.

Edited February 13, 2007 by Gray-Wolf

[flagpole]

but if 1 time out of 100 the 'feeling' is not generated by the above but from some onboard precognitive ability how would this translate within us physiologically?

but how would you know it was precognition and not just a guess? or fear? or coincidence?

You would need to conclusively prove precognition and then establish which neural pathways were involved but I do not believe that precognition has been proven as yet.

By all means provide links etc. I will gladly read what you believe to be proof

I do not find the problem with seeing that our bodies will respond to stimulus where-ever it is generated as it appears you do.

Appearances can be deceptive GW. I just need proof before I believe

[VillagePlank]

I just need proof before I believe

No you don't. I'm fairly sure that you'd find it difficult to prove the Earth is ellipsoidal, but I suspect you believe that to be the case anyway

Edited February 13, 2007 by VillagePlank

[flagpole]

No you don't. I'm fairly sure that you'd find it difficult to prove the Earth is ellipsoidal, but I suspect you believe that to be the case anyway

Aaaaaaaaarggghhhhh please don't even mention The Flat Earth Society! I was reading their forum last night!!!! What an interesting bunch

[VillagePlank]

My guess would be through the normal pathways our body uses to monitor/prepare us for events. I do not find the problem with seeing that our bodies will respond to stimulus where-ever it is generated as it appears you do.

Neurons (and their associative networks) do not react in a linear way as you (maybe mistakenly) suggest. Indeed the electical potential on the soma membrane is well known for it's non-linear behaviour.

Edited February 13, 2007 by VillagePlank