Debunk My Spiritual Bullshit!

[Grandpa Harley]

It's Randi logic. One can reproduce the effect like this, thus everyone does it like this. It's not even true for stage illusionists, but apparently that's the logic...

[Grandpa Harley]

Indeed, that was my thought afterwards, having time to talk about it and review what we had seen. However, regardless of whether the target had been "prepped," he was still able to move it without touching it, and then to cause it to split without touching it.

 

I've seen three other martial experts on several occasions cause things to move without touching them. And I have been on the receiving end of "no-touch" assaults numerous times to tell you there is something there.

 

And I've seen David Blaine do some fairly fantastic illusions as well.

Unless you've seen it live, all you've seen is people reacting to something, and then a camera trick... 2/3 of Blaine's stuff is pretty much done without an audience and the audience reactions not attached to the shown trick (commonly a watered down version of the trick... some people are easily amazed)

 

As far a Jun's stuff... being in the same room adds credence. A comparison to David blaine is not credible, unless you're inthe same place. As to whether things are gagged is an open question. My studies of stage illusions goes back to the late 19th Century. Normally, one relies on the following

 

1) Audience collusion

2) darkness

3) mirrors

4) a man will seldom pat down another man's johnson

5) a man will seldom stick his finger up another man's ass

6) a proscenium arch

7) forced perspective.

8) magnets (both permanent and electro)

9) silk strings (later nylon)

10) elastic

11) extreme close up

[Jun]

Indeed, that was my thought afterwards, having time to talk about it and review what we had seen. However, regardless of whether the target had been "prepped," he was still able to move it without touching it, and then to cause it to split without touching it.

 

I've seen three other martial experts on several occasions cause things to move without touching them. And I have been on the receiving end of "no-touch" assaults numerous times to tell you there is something there.

 

And I've seen David Blaine do some fairly fantastic illusions as well.

 

I can assure you, these are not "illusions."

 

I have been knocked flat by the force while wearing Samurai armour which weighs 17kg (37 pounds).

[HadouKen24]

I have no doubt. After only two months, I was able to pull my youngest brother and his friend (at that time, 10 years old) off balance without touching them. I suspect if I'd stuck with it, I'd be able to do quite a bit more. I shudder to think of the power someone who has dedicated his life to the practice could wield.

[Grandpa Harley]

Jwing-Ming Yang cites a pretty extensive selection of Chinese language scientific tests on this kind of thing. Of course, it being in Chinese, it doesn't exist.. never happened... and if it did happen it was falsified cos the only science is Western. A bit like Japanese language results on the same sort of thing or French and Australian Clinical trials on the medicinal use of distilled plant oils...

[Jun]

Jwing-Ming Yang cites a pretty extensive selection of Chinese language scientific tests on this kind of thing. Of course, it being in Chinese, it doesn't exist.. never happened... and if it did happen it was falsified cos the only science is Western. A bit like Japanese language results on the same sort of thing or French and Australian Clinical trials on the medicinal use of distilled plant oils...

 

Really? Dr. Jwing-Ming Yang? The Shaolin Qin Na teacher? I have several of his books.

 

Quite a lot of Japanese/Chinese scientific research has been carried out in regards to harnessing the use of ki/chi. But it is ignored. As Gramps says, if research isn't carried out by prominant "Western" scientists - it doesn't exist.

 

I recall a Japanese scientific team conducted an experiment with some Tibetan monks back in the early 80's. The monks had their robes soaked, and while sitting in meditation in a small room in the snow, were able to raise their body temperature and dry their robes out completely within ten minutes. The whole experiment was recorded and I remember the steam rising from them was quite evident. This experiment and all the data from it was ignored by "Western" scientists until recently.

[.god]

The fact that people are that soft headed is far from inspiring...

 

yes, very. but the fact that the mind can be shown to be so suceptible to suggestion as well as so powerful exert such an influence over the body/mind is inspiriing - in the possibilites open to someone who can harness and control that power within themselves.

 

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exa...dichallenge.htm

 

Ah, that's too bad if that is still the case. However large award amonts are often paid out over a period of time, it's just too bad that is what would stop someone who makes such claims to not make a go at submitting their skills to such scrutiny. Funny thing, I came in second an art contest once in school, government sponsered national contest, and received a 30 yr bond worth $50. With my wry humor I could easily appreciate the fact that it was basically worthless a the time, but that didn't matter to me at all. It was the fact that my effort and skill were recognized (especially considering the effort and time I had invested), and I still have the bond as well as the award certificate framed somewhere, but tossed in the closet =)

 

I've only read one side of the story and while I can understand that JREF is bombarded constantly by many claimants and applicants of all tempers. it still doesn't shed the best light on them. But while I don't hold randi or his organization to any exalted pedastal (i just like to read their stories), I still have read too many similar tiffs on the net between so-and-so organization and an individual, or that internet store and this customer, etc, (and it always dissolves into a he-said-she-said) to make complete blanket statements about either a person, company or organization. And always keeping in mind that any company or organization is made of many different people.

 

So yeah, show me more. I'm interested in whatever dirt you can dig up! So that I can form my own view, short of applying to such a challenge myself.

[.god]

God said - oh and Jun - about your Ki Master in Japan who split the target, how do you know whether or not the target was "prepped" before the event? As in pre-cut so to split along a seam, and barely held together until the master "broke" it with his chi? You don't mention being allowed to examine the object prior to the demonstration, only afterwards.

 

Indeed, that was my thought afterwards, having time to talk about it and review what we had seen. However, regardless of whether the target had been "prepped," he was still able to move it without touching it, and then to cause it to split without touching it.

 

I've seen three other martial experts on several occasions cause things to move without touching them. And I have been on the receiving end of "no-touch" assaults numerous times to tell you there is something there.

 

Well, I'm not going to tell you that you didn't see what you believed you saw and experienced since I wasn't there, have no diagrams or photos to refer to and just have no idea what the setup may have been like. I'm only suggesting that things do not have to have a direct physical cause/effect to be manipulated, but can be indirect eg. foot -> floorboards -> target. Or as gramps suggested hand -> thread -> target.

 

I've never personally seen these "no-touch" assaults in person so I'm not sure what they look like.

And I'm not denying that something is going on, I'm just questioning why it should be attributed to some external "force" or "substance" controlled by man and name "chi/ki"

It reminds me of the substance of "ether/aether" that was posisted in the early 19th century as some invisible transmission medium for what was not yet understood at the time.

 

While I have no issue with monks controlling their body temperatures with their minds (my body automatically forces me to raise my own body temp when I have start experiencing chills frmo an infection, and I consciously help it along), I do remain very skeptical of people who claim to be using their mind to cause things to burst into flames, etc.

 

But I would think with the "no-tuoch" falling one would have to do the folllowing experiments to start ruling out other factors.

Attempt it normally.

Do it with the subject's vision covered so no light can enter.

Block out the auditory senses as well.

Block out the touch sense from any air pressure due to motion.

Block out smell.

Basically put the person in a blind, soundproof box and theoretically if this chi energy exists and one can manipulate it one should be able to obtain the same result right?

 

Then have a person who is unable to manipulate chi (by all accounts it takes some training?) attempt the same thing and record the results upon the subject in the various setups.

 

In any case, does this "no touch" assault look something like this?

 

- i linked to this in my other post, i think i've seen some other "chi master" do something similar on pbs as well.

- I wish derren would actually be punched by the martial arts guy to see what his reaction would be

 

To me, as derren remarks in his video, it's all in the mind. I'd like to see a chi master do the same to an animal such as a bear or an elephant or any non-domesticated non-human.

[.god]

well.. unless they claim animals/non-humans have no "chi"?

[Vigile]

David Blaine trained for a long time in all kinds of sleight of hand and magic tricks. Unless you're willing to make the claim that all the Asian martial artists who do that sort of thing (and there are many) have spent enough time practicing stage magic in secrecy even from their students and family that they can achieve professional level illusions... I wouldn't bother making the comparison.

 

I don't need to make the claim. The default position is that they are not doing anything out of the ordinary. If they claim they are doing something beyond the ordinary sleight of hand, then it is up to them to provide an extraordinary level of proof.

[Vigile]

As far a Jun's stuff... being in the same room adds credence. A comparison to David blaine is not credible, unless you're inthe same place. As to whether things are gagged is an open question. My studies of stage illusions goes back to the late 19th Century.

 

I'm dubious of any extraordinary claim that is not backed by extraordinary evidence. This is a reasonable position to take. All I see here are people saying "it's true, I've seen it/experienced it." This is not extraordinary evidence.

[HadouKen24]

I don't need to make the claim. The default position is that they are not doing anything out of the ordinary. If they claim they are doing something beyond the ordinary sleight of hand, then it is up to them to provide an extraordinary level of proof.

 

I'm afraid you do need to make that claim. The suggestion that they are using stage magic is only plausible if they have some sort of stage magic training. It need not necessarily be a lot of training, but they at least need to know things like basic misdirection. Having occasionally dabbled in illusions myself, I'm well aware that it's much harder than it looks. Success takes not just practice, but practice in front of others, figuring out how to misdirect them and control their reactions. In other words, one must develop showmanship. If the individuals do not have this training, and have not had this practice, then it is extremely implausible to suggest that this is what is going on.

 

Moreover, I'm not sure I know what you mean by "ordinary" and "extraordinary." In Asian culture, this sort of thing is ordinary, in the sense that it is part of the accepted cultural paradigm. The "default" position for them, then, is that it is actually chi/ki which is being used to accomplish these feats. To ask them to provide "an extraordinary level of proof" is, from their perspective, preposterous. "The" default position becomes, on closer analysis, a variety of default positions dependent on the observer's cultural perspective. I'm not sure that it's useful to speak about things in this way.

 

Note, by the way, that I'm not saying you should just accept the existence of these abilities simply because someone on the internet says you should. I'm merely pointing out that your rejection of it, as you have described thus far, is unfounded.

 

 

I've never personally seen these "no-touch" assaults in person so I'm not sure what they look like.

And I'm not denying that something is going on, I'm just questioning why it should be attributed to some external "force" or "substance" controlled by man and name "chi/ki"

It reminds me of the substance of "ether/aether" that was posisted in the early 19th century as some invisible transmission medium for what was not yet understood at the time.

 

Ether theory wasn't actually rejected by the scientific community until Einstein's theory was confirmed--and even then, it was more a case of scientific consensus moving to a more attractive theory, than an actual disproof of the existence of ether. If I recall correctly, Thomas Kuhn wrote about this in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the most significant book on the philosophy of science this century.

 

I don't see why the idea of "chi/ki" is a poor working hypothesis for now, though. As a placeholder like the idea of dark matter, perhaps.

[Vigile]

I can assure you, these are not "illusions."

 

I have been knocked flat by the force while wearing Samurai armour which weighs 17kg (37 pounds).

 

I can't tell you how many testimonies I've heard over the years, many from honest and reliable witnesses, how they experienced something quite similar from the holy spirit. My best friend (the most sincere and honest person I know) was thrown to the floor during a charismatic service and couldn't get up for almost an hour.

 

Why isn't any of this tested with control groups and documented? Any researcher who could find a statistically significant finding would be famous.

[HadouKen24]

Why isn't any of this tested with control groups and documented? Any researcher who could find a statistically significant finding would be famous.

 

Jwing-Ming Yang cites a pretty extensive selection of Chinese language scientific tests on this kind of thing. Of course, it being in Chinese, it doesn't exist.. never happened... and if it did happen it was falsified cos the only science is Western. A bit like Japanese language results on the same sort of thing or French and Australian Clinical trials on the medicinal use of distilled plant oils...

[Vigile]

I'm afraid you do need to make that claim. The suggestion that they are using stage magic is only plausible if they have some sort of stage magic training.

 

I don't need to make the claim when all I'm doing is offering a "potential" alternative explanation. For example, if I'm at a Benny Hinn revival and I see a person in a wheel chair "healed," and I make the suggestion that that person was a plant, do I then have to provide hidden camera footage to back up my suggestion of fraud?

 

Moreover, I'm not sure I know what you mean by "ordinary" and "extraordinary.".

 

Ordinary would be knocking someone over by a physical shove. Extraordinary would be knocking someone over without touching them.

 

In Asian culture, this sort of thing is ordinary, in the sense that it is part of the accepted cultural paradigm.

 

Precisely, which is also an alternative explanation for the so-called phenomena; group think/group delussion.

 

To ask them to provide "an extraordinary level of proof" is, from their perspective, preposterous. .

 

As it would be preposterous to demand of a charismatic extraordinary proof for speaking in tongues. Nevertheless, it is still a valid request.

 

 

I'm merely pointing out that your rejection of it, as you have described thus far, is unfounded. .

 

Why? Should I be forced to consider every extraordinary claim I'm faced with? I don't have time to dedicate my life to disproving claims. I don't reject it out of hand, I simply don't accept it until I'm provided with a reasonable reason to accept it.

 

If there is something to chi or whatever it is we are discussing here, then I'm sure that it will be studied with a control group and that statistical analysis will be forthcoming. At that point I will consider it further. It occurs to me that this is the only reasonable position I can take on this or similar matters.

[Vigile]

Why isn't any of this tested with control groups and documented? Any researcher who could find a statistically significant finding would be famous.

 

Jwing-Ming Yang cites a pretty extensive selection of Chinese language scientific tests on this kind of thing. Of course, it being in Chinese, it doesn't exist.. never happened... and if it did happen it was falsified cos the only science is Western. A bit like Japanese language results on the same sort of thing or French and Australian Clinical trials on the medicinal use of distilled plant oils...

 

Yes, I saw this. All I can say is it's a convenient explanation.

 

Believe me, I don't have "faith" that western researchers are entirely intellectually honest and that they don't simply dismiss things that seem dubious on their face. I actually think that there are areas of Oriental medicine that have something to them, that are dismissed by western scientists without adequate research. But we aren't talking about testing the chemical effects of garlic on the human body, we are discussing an unquantified invisible force. From where I sit there is a huge difference between the two.

[HadouKen24]

I don't need to make the claim when all I'm doing is offering a "potential" alternative explanation. For example, if I'm at a Benny Hinn revival and I see a person in a wheel chair "healed," and I make the suggestion that that person was a plant, do I then have to provide hidden camera footage to back up my suggestion of fraud?

 

Certainly not. Putting a plant in the audience requires no more than having a friend willing to keep his mouth shut. It's far more simple than complex stage magic.

 

 

Ordinary would be knocking someone over by a physical shove. Extraordinary would be knocking someone over without touching them.

 

Let me rephrase my question.

 

Where do you get your ideas about what is and is not ordinary? Isn't it primarily cultural?

 

As it would be preposterous to demand of a charismatic extraordinary proof for speaking in tongues. Nevertheless, it is still a valid request.

 

I'm not sure how you'd test "speaking in tongues," considering that most of the charismatics I've run into claim that they're speaking angelic languages.

 

Why? Should I be forced to consider every extraordinary claim I'm faced with? I don't have time to dedicate my life to disproving claims. I don't reject it out of hand, I simply don't accept it until I'm provided with a reasonable reason to accept it.

 

If you're simply going to wait for evidence to make a decision, then why all this business about David Blain? Why do you suggest (as if it's a reasonable suggestion) that these men might be doing something similar to professional stage magic? I'm forced to doubt whether you're as neutral on this matter as you claim.

[Jun]

.........

[HadouKen24]

Believe me, I don't have "faith" that western researchers are entirely intellectually honest and that they don't simply dismiss things that seem dubious on their face. I actually think that there are areas of Oriental medicine that have something to them, that are dismissed by western scientists without adequate research. But we aren't talking about testing the chemical effects of garlic on the human body, we are discussing an unquantified invisible force. From where I sit there is a huge difference between the two.

 

A close look at the history of science will show that science in the West has never looked at this sort of thing until parapsychological research began this century. The predecessors of modern science, such as Descartes, all presupposed a mechanistic world. Our ideas of the physical come from them. Not only did they never closely and methodologically examine claims of "unqantified invisible forces," but they rejected them on their face. Newton had a great deal of trouble getting his theory of gravity accepted, despite its obvious brilliance, because it merely resembled something like an occult philosopher would say. Such claims were simply presupposed to be wrong, and were never adequately tested.

[Lycorth]

.........

 

Ditto that...

[Vigile]

Certainly not. Putting a plant in the audience requires no more than having a friend willing to keep his mouth shut. It's far more simple than complex stage magic.

 

I'm not sure what the complexity or simplicity has to do with it. Illusions may be more complex, yet many, many people can do them effectively. Thus, it's a valid alternative explanation. Again, I'm not making an extraordinary claim by offering this explanation. I'm not claiming that is what it is, just that this is what it could be.

 

Where do you get your ideas about what is and is not ordinary? Isn't it primarily cultural?.

 

That, and from experience. Gravity is ordinary, despite cultural influences. If I, or someone else floats off the ground, this would be extraordinary no matter what my cultural background is. Why?

 

I'm not sure how you'd test "speaking in tongues," considering that most of the charismatics I've run into claim that they're speaking angelic languages..

 

Good point, most xian claims are not falsifiable. An invisible force surounding one's body may or may not be falsifiable. It depends on how the claim about it is framed. For example, if it is claimed that it can only be experienced when those in the room are "open" to the energy, it would be an unfalsifiable claim. This is just an example, I'm not saying that that claim is made.

 

If you're simply going to wait for evidence to make a decision, then why all this business about David Blain? Why do you suggest (as if it's a reasonable suggestion) that these men might be doing something similar to professional stage magic? I'm forced to doubt whether you're as neutral on this matter as you claim. ..

 

Oh, I'm definately taking a more aggressive position than just wait and see. I am absolutely dubious. And yes, I do think that it's probably an illusion. Me thinking that and me actually claiming that I know that to be the case is two different things though. I believe that you guys forcing me to not only posit an alternative explanation, but to back it up with ample evidence is nothing but a burdon of proof shift. You guys claim that there is something to chi, which is the primary issue here. Therefore it's your burdon, not mine.

[Legion]

The predecessors of modern science, such as Descartes, all presupposed a mechanistic world.

I think that this is largely correct HadouKen. But I think that we are beginning to see that the West is slowly waking up to the fact that there is something wrong with the mechanistic picture.

[Vigile]

A close look at the history of science will show that science in the West has never looked at this sort of thing until parapsychological research began this century. The predecessors of modern science, such as Descartes, all presupposed a mechanistic world. Our ideas of the physical come from them. Not only did they never closely and methodologically examine claims of "unqantified invisible forces," but they rejected them on their face. Newton had a great deal of trouble getting his theory of gravity accepted, despite its obvious brilliance, because it merely resembled something like an occult philosopher would say. Such claims were simply presupposed to be wrong, and were never adequately tested.

 

Fine, someday I may be proven wrong. I'm ok with that. So far though I haven't seen any good reason offered why I shouldn't also just reject the claim on it's face. All I see here is eye witness testimony and an arguement that we in the west just don't understand. If there is more to it, then I hope that researchers will delve in and start giving us more reasons to study it further.

[Vigile]

The predecessors of modern science, such as Descartes, all presupposed a mechanistic world.

I think that this is largely correct HadouKen. But I think that we are beginning to see that the West is slowly waking up to the fact that there is something wrong with the mechanistic picture.

 

Can you provide examples?

[Vigile]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-x4iJM2aU4