Since late 2016 we have entered the age of disclosures! Fasten your mental safety belt and enjoy the ride! Heretic

Sunday, June 24, 2018

Russell Targ on his research on psychic abilities

.
Banned TEDTalk about Psychic Abilities | Russell Targ | suespeaks.org

American physicist Russell Targ talks about several decades of work with Hal Puthof, Ingo Swann and other people on development, training and practical employment of remote viewing in practical intelligence-gathering on behalf of various three-letter agencies.

5 comments :

Robin P Clarke said...

I think it is important to differentiate between three or more different categories of "controversial science".

A first sort is where a particular person or group has some motivation to deny the true account of matters and instead promote a false account. Such motivations include commercial, ideological/emotional, and career convenience (Prof Superstein dismissing as fools the critics of his flawed theory of multi-dimensional wotsits).

A second sort is what we might call "proper controversies", for instance where some people have just failed to grasp the correct view among some compelling alternatives (e.g. the pre-Copernican view which did have a lot going for it), or where there just isn't clear enough evidence to resolve the matter to everyone's satisfaction.

A third sort is where some people don't understand that their theory is making stupendously improbable assumptions (and with lack of detailed working out) without sufficiently amazing evidence to justify them. Into this category fall homeopathy and formative causation (aka morphic resonance) and notions of remote consciousness being able to "see" something miles away without some external technology).

Sadly this here comes into that latter category. These remote viewing or remote causation advocates never explain any detail of how they see this rather than that (from zzillions of options, or cause this rather than that. They have yet to produce any fantastic bio-phones or whatever from their theories. In that latter category, the objective mind, instead of being "open to new ideas" is rightly closed to far-fetched ones instead.

Sorry if this treads on any toes here.

Anonymous said...

....though I could of course be wrong!

Stan Bleszynski said...

Hi Robin,

We cannot reject an unconventional method of gathering information even if we do not understand a mechanism, otherwise we may end up in a position of French Academy of Science (during Napoleonic era) which declared that "stones don't fall from the sky".

I have done some speculation and worked on some ideas but no proof. This field is also riddled with political pressure and some organisations actively obfuscating & debunking it. There are also too many flakes. Note that I do not call a "flake" a person who investigates the unknown and asks question, a "flake" is somebody who claims to know the answer without providing a proof or at least some logical hypothesis.

Best regards,
Stan

Anonymous said...

There was an interesting, I think BBC, show where Alfred Rupert Sheldrake covered psychic abilities. There was one that particularly impressed me. This Women had a dog that when she went out the dog would lounge around or do whatever but the
"exact" second she decided to return home the dog would run up to the window and wait for her to get home. They decided to test the dog by giving the Women a random timer that would time when she was to go home and every time the timer went off and she was to return the dog would go to the window. I think Sheldrake also wrote a book on reincarnation. The stories that children told were very convincing. They knew things that only the deceased person would know and were accepted by the former families of the deceased as a reincarnation of their deceased loved ones. Of course all these could have been lies. I'm only saying that they are convincing if the data relayed was not cooked up. There have also been several military people involved in remote viewing that said they were convinced that it worked for some people who seemed to be able to train themselves to do this. Once again the military could be lying about this for some unknown reason.

Stan Bleszynski said...

Hi Anonymous,

Rupert Sheldrake published a paper describing his experiments on pets. I will post a link when I find it. Sheldrake and Targ are probably 100 years ahead of time in their studies. BTW, that brilliant psychic detective Pat Price that Russell Targ is mentioning in that video, died in mysterious circumstances in Las Vegas, which looked like murder by poisoning. I heard about that only recently. The problem is that an entire group was financed by the three letter agencies which offered a protection - as long as they followed the "rules".
H.