How psychic are you? Test!?
This is just for fun, and if you don’t believe in this stuff don’t answer, your already a jackass if you clicked on this question and don’t believe in it.
1. What is the first letter of my middle name?
2. Am I on a laptop, computer, or Ipod?
3. What is my biggest secret against my family?
4. Do I have a stalker?
5. What is the first letter of the city I live in?
6. What is the name of my favorite tv show?
7. why did I make this test?
Who ever gets the most right, you’ll be the best answer, and I’ll tell you which ones you got right and wrong.
Suggestion by TheLollipopTree
3. That your dad drinks?
7. Because you are bord
Suggestion by AnMatrice
3. a big lie
7. To see if people can do telepathy ?
I tried to answer like, first thing comes in mind and not to think too much about it XD
Suggestion by cricket
3. Your significant other
6. True Blood
7. Cause you had the time
Give your answer to this question below!
Are you stupid enough to believe in psychic phenomena?
If you are, look at this:
now watch her agent whine about it:
You may be thinking:
-In the first videos there were some examples of Sylvia being right.
If she had actually gotten those right from “psychic” power then how can she get the other ones wrong, and if she really is psychic why won’t she take James Randi’s test and prove it to the world? The two she got right were from a sort of cheating method similar to what she used with the 9/11 example, or rare lucky guesses.
I’m giving you a chance to make ME feel stupid. Give me some PROOF of psychic abilities, and I will admit that I am wrong and stupid. Now watch as no-one succeeds.
Logical reasoning will always prevail over wishful thinking…
Thank you everyone, including RW, for your interest in your question thus far.
Actually I do know how to think for myself. You talked about evolution, that’s one example. I live in a little conservative town where about 97% of the population thinks evolution is BS, but, since I can think, I know that sceintists probably have more credibility.
about James Randi:
If he’s trying to hide psychic phenomena from the world then why does he offer a one million dollar prize? Trying to encourage people to take his tests doesn’t seem like an efficient way to hide people with those abilities. Do you think his tests are unfair and impossible? What’s impossible about any of his tests? They all seemed perfectly legitimate to me and I’ve seen many of them.
Yes, there have scientificly confirmed cases of psychic phenomena, like with Banachek. Then, after the scientists confirmed he was for real, he told them he was a fraud!
Yes it does seem convenient that “psychics” are only right a…
…small percentage of the time. I don’t see how your analogy with Earth’s distance from the sun applies though, please elaborate.
Every “psychic” phonomena that I’ve heard of in history has had a perfectly rational explanation.
How do you scientifically explain psychic powers? Is it magic? There is no scientifically plausible way that humans can just KNOW things.
“It’s too deep for anyone to understand” is not an explanation, just as “you can’t understand things larger than yourself” is not a valid argument. Saying it’s too large or deep or mystical is just compensation for lack of evidence, and no progress can be made without evidence…only guesswork.
you also said “I’m not getting any reading from you” doesn’t make a very good show even if it’s true. Well, “I’m not getting a reading” is better than wasting peoples time giving them misleading answers (shawn hornbeck case) or false hope. Making the police waste valuable time looking in the wrong place so that you can make a quick buck is just SICK. What if that kid had been murdered while Sylvia was misleading the police? Does she have enough of a soul that she would even feel guilty? or would she just start making excuses.
Here’s my explanation for psychics like Sylvia Browne:
-making excuses when you’re wrong
These seem more plausible than magic.
Kudos to RW for trying to prove his/her point!
I have one question, it is very unlikely that you will convince me of a “metaphysical world” or psychic phenomena, but if you put forth your best effort in answering, I will give you best-answer anyway. The question is this:
What are at least 3 examples of the “scientifically unexplainable” phenomena you mentioned?
True, it was unnecessary for me to ask “Is anyone stupid enough to believe in psychic phenomena”, but you should know that I was just frustrated with cons like Sylvia Browne, and I AM considering everything objectively, even if, at this point, ALL the evidence I’ve seen has pointed towards psychic phenomena being fake.
also, I think that if you were willing to find a person with psychic abilities, and submit them to James Randi for the million, he would gladly devise a test that would suit your needs, even if it meant multiple tests over a period of time. He will design the test based on:
1. What is the psychic
2. To what extent
3. Under what circumstances.
Here’s the application…
If the testee can decide on the circumstances then I see no reason why they wouldn’t be able to use their ability. Even if they need multiple tries, lots of time, etc. They can have it.
Nonobservance is not proof, but good evidence. Nonperformance is not proof or evidence.
Suggestion by nola_cajun
Psychic phenomena ? Yes
Siliva .. not so much .. maybe.. i dont know too much about her to know..
But everyone has the ability .. but they forget how to use it .. or they make up excuses when something happens .. such as.. we call them coincidences .. when there are none .. or we call them instincts .. such as .. a mother knowing when her child is in danger ..
it goes far beyond that .. but those are a few small example
Suggestion by nenamelle
Well! First off let’s look at the probabilities. Her predictions where she’s actually been CORRECT are way, way less than her failed predictions. And I agree, if it were some sort of ‘power’ then she should never get the others wrong, or at least not so much. Basically, my opinion is that she’s a very good ‘guesser’. She obviously gets her conclusions by deducing based on common events, places, or names (what is most likely), and likes to give indirect answers that could be linked to so many possible things. I believe that there have been some strange phenomena (effects caused by nature, how it affects us), and remember, we don’t even use 15% of our brains capacity so maybe, maybe there might be some strange occurrences. But from there to the point where you “move objects” by “thinking hard in your mind that you’re moving it”, umm, no.
By the way I think James Randi is pure genius! I’ve watched some of his videos, and all of the “gifted” he’s tested have all failed!
Suggestion by RW
Psychic abilitys are not always consistent. its not like having next week’s news papers or something. its not always clear or direct.
in fact, Randi’s test is specifically designed in a way that it would, to an ignorant bystander, appear perfectly reasonable, when in fact its utterly and completely impossible to pass, because thats simply not how it works.
apparently YOU are stupid enough to not understand that things are perhaps larger than you understand? or that one person being wrong is not neccesarily meaningful?
its equivalent to a high school student being taught evolution badly. the fact that THEY were taught badly and did not understand it, does not mean what they wrongly think, is what the scientists ACTUALLY think.
proof? like what? I’m curious what sort of hypothetical imaginable circumstance would count for you, if it were shown to you?
there HAVE been tests which have shown in scientific settings there being statistically signifigant abnormalitys relating to psychic awareness. decisive? no. enough to make it so that an honest scientific analysis would be unable to say theres definitely nothing there? yes.
just because YOU don’t understand it does not mean that theres nothing there that explains why it didn’t work in a certain circumstance.
and saying that its “convenient” that its irregular like that, is the same as a creationist arguing that its “convenient” that we happen to be just the perfect distance from the sun. its the same thing. the person arguing it does not really understand the system at work.
why do you assume that if it existed, it would work how you think it would?
edit: also, I do heavily suspect that randi knows its real and has that set up such to hold off it becoming public knowlege, by providing a way for those who are not ready to understand it, to dismiss it out of hand.
and I think sylvia brown, like many others, have some ability, (though, shes on the lower side of that I think) and use non-real stuff to fill in when they don’t get sufficient information. “I’m not getting anything about you” doesn’t make for a very good show! even if its true.
>>”Trying to encourage people to take his tests doesn’t seem like an efficient way to hide people with those abilities.”<< if the parameters are such that they cannot be sucessfully completed, then this hides it very well, because only the most potent would be able to come even close to completing the test sucessfully. and those would have the sense to not try to begin with. >>”Do you think his tests are unfair and impossible? What’s impossible about any of his tests? They all seemed perfectly legitimate to me and I’ve seen many of them.”<< at least when I read up on it, it specifically laid out the parameters such that anyone with much experience in the area would be able to see it'd be nearly impossible. they are SPECIFICALLY laid out to look reasonable and legitimate to the ignorant. an example would be that for the general person, it is irregular. one day things might be crystal clear, one day might be the opposite. and it won't work unless its SUPPOSED to work. the very nature of most people's abilitys are such that it simply could not be tested in a way that would satisfy it. I know it might sound irrational, but really while for those that have it, its a sense and feel like the physical senses, its not as consistent... it changes based on a variety of things, that are not physically observable. if you want to do a scientific test, you have to compare to a control, right? you have to try to regulate and monitor, if not control, as many of the variables that infuence the thing being tested, as possible. in the case of psychic abilitys, this causes a problem. there are a huge amount of variables, most of which are entirely imperceivable to those who don't have the psychic abilitys. so while it might LOOK like the variables are controlled.. in fact theres 50 relevant variables influencing things that they can't even see. >>”I don’t see how your analogy with Earth’s distance from the sun applies though, please elaborate.”<< creationists will sometimes point to things like the distance from the sun being perfect for life on earth and such, as proof that there was an intelligent force deliberately laying out the structure of things. from their view this makes sense. fromt he scientific view, we just happen to be the one in a bazillion that all the circumstances happened to be right, and that if it had been different to begin with, life could(perhaps) developed differently. the perfect alignment for the atheist is less meaningful scientifically, than the creationist thinks. just as the perceived inaccuracy is less signifigant than the scientist may think. >>”How do you scientifically explain psychic powers? Is it magic?”<< no, I wouldnt call it magic, basically theres a variety of different kinds and ways to get to the same point. but the bottom line of it is that the person is more aware of a different level of existence, in which information flows differently. scientifically the entire thing, is outside the scope of science as we know it. but, I am relatively unusual in my view that, if given the right circumstances, the metaphysical world would be testable by the scientific method. the problem with his is that science as we know it is attached to the physical, manifest, organically perceivable world. >>”There is no scientifically plausible way that humans can just KNOW things.”<< but it *does* happen! people do get information that is, scientifically, from nowhere, that they do not have any way of knowing through conventional means. sometimes this information, in reality, comes from communication with ghosts or other nonphysical beings, sometimes it comes from personal non-physical perception, some it could come from perceiving dimensions and potential futures and deducing which is the most likely to manifest here. of course for you this all sounds like guesswork. and honestly, I don't have a way to explain it in a way that sounds more acceptable to you. I do not disagree that its not good for people to fill in the gaps in their ability with nonsense to make a better appearance. I think thats bad and not very responsible. and ultimately it does hurt the case of it. for example with the test he mentioned, the problem with this is severalfold, the average person isn't that particularly unique in a metaphysical sense. they call it "average" for a reason! most people are born, live their life and die, with only small amounts if any of dramatic metaphysical encounter, or "ripples" occuring involving them. to have a truly distinctly unique reading, would require a variety of things, such as: 1) a subject that actually has something particularly notable to "report" on. 2) a data source that the reader has the ability to understand properly, (one person might have relevant information to be communicated via a no longer living person, some might be relevant enough in a dimensional sense, or whatever) 3) a reason for that information to be given. if theres no interesting information to get, ... how could it be given? if theres no reason for the information to be given, why would it be? and unfortunately proving it to be real is not a sufficient reason. why assume that the system is dry and hard and mechanical? what makes it so reasonable to assume that the mechanism is not intelligent and have its own motivation as to what information to give or hide. now be honest. is one famous alleged psychic being more fake than real, proof that none of it is real? no. people do experience psychic phenomena that are NOT scientifically explainable. in fact I would go so far as to say if you think that every psychic phenomena is scientifically explainable, then you have not researched much. that, or simply unreasonably dismiss the reality of some things, because they are unprovable. hopefully this makes sense to you. I entirely understand that some people don't believe it. and some people have no reason to. but its irrational to consider non-observance as proof.
What do you think? Answer below!