• Paranormalia is written by Robert McLuhan, a journalist and author based in London. Please contact me at robertmcluhan@gmail.com

« Children Who Remember on TV | Main | On the Non-Existence of France »

February 18, 2014

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6d8553ef01a73d7adb57970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Psychic Prophecies:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

As with any purported 'spirit' communication it seems to me that the key is evidential content, or lack thereof.

What is the prophet's track record? I assume none recognised in this case. What I find more curious is why Eric thinks anyone would pay him any heed.

Isn't it possible that Eric is simply delusional?

Don't think Eric has to much to worry about fracking particularly when you look at the decline curves for those type of wells!

Paul, I avoid using the term 'delusional' which in modern usage is often no more than an ideological construct. It's what sceptics say about people who have psychic experiences generally, or even those who believe in God (eg Dawkins). I'd also argue it doesn't have to be evidential to be taken seriously, as an experience.

I think you're onto something there with subjective sensitive to collective human insecurity.. I remember reading "Mass dreams of the future" by Chet Snow and Helen Wambach - a majority of the people who were progressed into future lives in the 80's imagined a future with a reduced human population after a nuclear war. This was when a massive nuclear war was a very real fear and the devastation was timed as it would have happened by now. Evidently world events took another turn and the future as it was seen in the 80's never came to be in our dimension/timestream.

Most interesting is that Helen Wambach earlier had shown how accurate past life regressions and hyppnosis in general can be when done on a large scale and analyzed statistically in her books "Reliving Past Lives: The Evidence Under Hypnosis" and "Life before life".

I had a vision of a catastrophe, and it came true, but not in the way I expected.

I saw orange and yellow in the sky and a gigantic plume of some sort. I had a sense of looking up in terror and dread and of devastation all around me. And I had a sense of a huge tsunami.

The problem though was both time and location. The oil spill was going on in the gulf and there was a danger of a huge methane blow. I related my vision to that.

Yet that's not what happened. The plume turned out to be an enormous gas explosion near my home that burned down fifty homes and killed several people. The plume was tower of flame shooting hundreds of feet high.

The tsunami was in Japan much later.

Even when they're true these predictions aren't very useful.

Hi Robert

I use the term delusional in the strict sense of suffering from a delusion. I can't see anything wrong with that term to be honest. The delusion would be that he is receiving visions from the future if he isn't. If he attempts to convince someone else that they should share in his experience somehow then I'd argue it's a potential problem. Whether he is delusional or not, I'm not qualified to say.

As for taking 'it' seriously as an experience: if you mean acknowledging that he has had some kind of experience, I'd agree that's a matter for his own judgement. If by 'take it seriously' you my taking action on it then, without supporting evidence, I would see that as unwise and potentially risky.

Hi Craig

It sounds to me like you had some sort of experience. Then there was a catastrophe. I can't see how it 'came true' ie how the two events are necessarily connected.

If one accepts accepts that visions of future events are possible, and I'd say that there is evidence this may well be the case, I can't tell from your comments how your experience differs from coincidence.

I'm not saying it was coincidence, just curious to understand what makes you think it wasn't.

In my view, Eric incarnated to have certain experiences, and the archetypes of his visions were part of his life plan. His experience should be seen as highly personal and not necessarily predictive of consensus reality. There might be times when his visions match the unfolding of consensus reality, but that would be incidental. Eric was to have those symbolic experiences, and they may or may not be experienced by the rest of us. If we insist that he is delusional, that too might be part of his life plan.

For the record I'm not saying Eric is suffering from a delusion. I'm simply wondering how we know he isn't.

Sorry Rob I know you're not keen on the word. Not sure what to use instead.

Well Paul I'm not banning it or anything. But it is a challenge for psi-advocates, if we argue that some things that aren't there really are there (eg NDE visions) and other things that aren't there probably really aren't there. If you see what I mean :)

Yes I understand where you're coming from. You'd probably agree that there are occasions where people experience things that don't have a basis in reality though? Or would you?

Well yes of course, but as I say, it's a mug's game trying to distinguish between them.

Not if there is evidential content. Which is the point I was making originally.

I'd never thought about it this way before, but thanks to you, I had a sort of mini-epiphany reading this article.

"Predictive psi" is, indeed, consistently and overwhelmingly disappointing, and I would say that the feeble results of this particular type of manifestated psi are actually one of the major impediments to psi being taken more seriously by the lay population.

Remote viewers, telepaths, mediums, etc., in contrast, have enjoyed strikingly persuasive results, so it's too bad that for so many lay people "psychic" is often defined predominantly (or even exclusively) as "being able to predict stuff." Prediction is really not where the action is.

Having said that I have received some very interesting and oddly pertinent predictions.

Hey, would be good to hear more!

Do you mean me? Well I'm happy to relate a couple but I'm not sure they will mean much. Here's one: I went to a medium looking for evidence of survival really but didn't get any. What she did say was that someone connected with me was talking about football (sock-er for anyone from US of A). She told me that I was standing in front of an open goal, and that it was business-related.

I hadn't worked for about 9 months up to this point and hadn't anything on the horizon. Within a month or so we landed the biggest job we ever had and because of the circumstances we could literally name our price as no one else could do the work. In essence, an open goal.

I'm not saying it's evidential and I'm also aware that I am looking for things that fit what she said. Nevertheless it struck me as, at least, curious.

Yes that's a good example. I've had one or two experiences like that (relating to family matters, and a bit too intimate to talk about). As you say, not something that would convince a sceptic, but the sort of thing that makes one think.

As a long-time resident of Southern California, I've read a lot of prophecies (from both sides of the veil) about apocalyptic disasters that are supposed to destroy us at any moment now. To the point where I actually DIScredit any supposed psychic who claims a vision of any version of "California's going to slide off into the ocean". Yeah, okay, tell us something we don't know already!

This is one of my favourite subjects, being a Psychic and a Medium myself. I also happen to know who I believe is one of the best Psychics in the world for predicting events, and his predictions were made in the media in the 90's, recorded and highly accurate including 9/11.

The problem is real psychics like this are in the minority. It's all very good and well for Eric to go around predicting stuff and hoping people will listen, but what is his track record? Has he successfully predicted events in the past? Have they been independently verifiable? If not then he just adds to the 10,000's and millions of Psychics who make predictions that never come true.... and cast doubt amongst the whole industry.

If you want to know what a REAL psychic who can predict events with high accuracy including timeframes... then Scott Russell Hill is what I see as the measuring stick for premonitions that should be acted upon.

Not only were his premonitions accurate and actually happened... they were very very specific and more importantly VERIFIABLE. He made them on air on a radio station in the 1990's (He was a radio DJ with a Psychic radio show on Mainstream radio. They were recorded and verified after they happened as being 100% genuine (Not to mention the 10000s that heard it live at the time and remembered them after 9/11)

Here is the actual audio of his predictions... taken from the radio in the 1990's. Now compare these predictions of disasters and events... to what Eric is giving you... and you see the difference between someone who can genuinely see the future... and someone who may or may not be. If Scott Russell Hill says a giant hole is going to open up under Manchester... then you bloody well better listen! because he has proven himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woh_A4y9PEQ

That's interesting, Frank. To quote Chris earlier: -

"...it's too bad that for so many lay people "psychic" is often defined predominantly (or even exclusively) as "being able to predict stuff."

I couldn’t agree more Chris. In fact, the attitude you describe irritates the hell out me.

Actually, I have to fess up here and admit to a (not entirely rational) prejudice against the idea of precognition as understood by most – i.e. a magical ability to ‘read the future’ as though the future already exists. The idea of ‘time travel’ winds me up similarly because it implies that such ‘magical’ precognition might be possible.

And yet, with a nod in the direction of Craig’s comment earlier (and Paul's contribution), I also have to confess that I had a, seemingly precognitive, lucid dream a couple of years ago – on the night of Tuesday, March 8 2011, to be precise.

I dreamt that I’d taken my kids and girlfriend on holiday to what appeared to be a far eastern location (the entire local population were oriental in appearance, anyway), and upon arrival I was extremely under-whelmed by the place – a quite scruffy, grey, semi-industrialised location by the sea. The accommodation was similarly disappointing and I remember thinking ‘...how much money have I wasted bringing us all the way to this dump for two weeks?’

Shortly after arriving at our hotel, we were standing in the ‘lounge’, when someone shouted ‘tidal wave’ (a term I hadn’t heard used for many years), and an evilly black wall of water, of unimaginable power, smashed through the wall. The water carried a sense of merciless annihilation that I find very difficult to put into words.

Nevertheless I managed to grab the kids and my better half by the scruffs of their necks all at the same time (it was a dream after all, folks) and haul them out to the safety of a high area where we could see that everything for miles around had been smashed to pieces. Then, I found myself smoking a cigarette while sitting on an extremely dirty beach on a wide river estuary, surrounded by all sorts of wreckage; and I could see a headland around which, I 'knew', was the open sea. The dream ended with me thinking that 'given that this place is prone to this sort of thing...what a stupid place to build a town. I wonder if the travel agent will give me a refund?'

I have to admit that I was actually a little nonplussed to see the breaking news about the tsunami when I switched on the TV on Friday morning. I was, frankly, speechless to see a shot, taken in one of the affected locations and repeated on the news many times over subsequent days, that pretty much matched, in every major detail, the view I'd had whilst smoking my post-tsunami dream cigarette.

So what happened here?

Well, I have little doubt that the skeptical explanation would be that I have dreams about going on holiday to tsunami-prone far-eastern locations all the time and, just by chance, one has occurred three days before a real event of that nature. Or, I’m making it all up. Or, a few years after the event, I’ve confabulated the memory of the dream to make the content rather more relevant to the actual event than it really was.

I think that it’s probably more likely that psi really just amounts to there being a greater, non-local, mind. This is not brain dependent, and has links to the fabric of physical ‘reality’ itself and other ‘local’ minds. Our local link to this greater mind (mediated to an extent by the brain) is what we term the ‘subconscious’, and this, in turn can access information being processed in the non-local version – with its access to wider events in the ‘physical’ world and also the input of the conscious/subconscious processes of other sentient beings. With most people, however, the only way such non-local information can reach the conscious mind (for some reason) is during sleep (dreams), or immediately either side of the sleep state i.e. the hypnagogic and hypnopompic states.

Researching the Japanese tsunami a little further, I found that pre-shocks were felt up to around three days before the main earthquake – which would have been around the time that I had my dream. So doubtless, (even though I knew nothing about this) other local minds, geographically more closely connected to the issue, were starting to assess that information and, probably, deducing the possible major and tragic consequences. Myself, Craig, and (probably), others, then picked up on this.

However, that explanation still struggles a bit, in my view, to account for my (seemingly), substantially accurate, depiction of the view across the estuary at one of the disaster locations. I think that, perhaps, there may be something similar to G.N.M Tyrell’s proposed mechanism for the perception of apparitions. That is, that there is an unknown mechanism in each localised mind that can, on occasion, construct an accurate scene, using minimal information – possibly from multiple sources (see http://www.amazon.co.uk/Apparitions-H-Price/dp/1169829872). Such sources might, even, include (in theory) discarnate minds that are in on it.

Unfortunately, though, if that is something like the real explanation, then the mechanism will doubtless be subject to elements of interference. Chief of these, I feel, would be (as already mentioned): the preconceived ideas and fears of the ‘receiver’, which could end up interfering with, or aping (entirely) the results of the genuine process.

Hopefully Eric’s visions fall into that category and, I feel that they probably do. But one can only really make any judgement after the event. And I’ve little doubt, that if I’d contacted the media and announced that I’d dreamt that there was going to be an earthquake in Japan then I’d have been labelled a ‘nutter’.

I obviously should have just given Rob a bell ;)

Hey, dramatic stuff Steve! This sort of experience is the most direct answer to the question 'why on earth do people still believe in the paranormal in this day and age?'

Bit pressed for time now, but would like to hear more at some point.

To paraphrase (and slightly alter) Russell Targ's original statement - as Steve's experience shows, people believe in paranormal experiences "not because they reading about them, but because they are having them." :)

Michelle Gibson
To paraphrase (and slightly alter) Russell Targ's original statement - as Steve's experience shows, people believe in paranormal experiences "not because they reading about them, but because they are having them." :)


Think that was a reply to me when I posted an article on the number of people that believe in ghosts had risen.

Hi everyone!

Since we're on the topic of psi/pre-cognition I thought I might share a few things.

Since I've started to really entertain the idea that mind may not be constrained to the brain, I've noticed the instances of small (possible) psi experiences increasing. Whether I am more in tune with it or that my mind is just trying to find patterns, I do not know. I can only relate my experience.

Two of which occurred at my college's improv club. Both consisted of an idea in my head that was later said/realized by one of my colleagues. Now anyone that knows improv knows that the acts are completely made up and off the top of one's head, so it's surprised me that they said what I was thinking (almost exactly) when there was no prompt for doing so. Now sure, it definitely could just be coincidence but having the possibility that minds could interact without (known) sensory signals across brains might allow psi experiences to occur, especially in an environment, like improv, where ideas and thoughts are popping in and out of one's head at a moment's notice.

Another idea that I have been thinking about involves slight precognition, similar to the experiments Dr. Daryl Bem has done. I have noticed, and maybe some of you have as well, that when I search for the answer to something online, the second before the loading is complete, I will remember the answer. Now this is more specifically in the case of remembering a celebrity's name. I will blank out on it completely, go to search the movie/show on IMDB and the second before the page loads I will remember the name. Now, again this could just be coincidence or connecting patterns, but when we have the possibility available that stuff like this MAY happen, then these occurrences become more interesting. What do you guys think? Has this ever happened to you?

I have often noticed the 'improv' effect, Natasha, albeit in a different context: Music.

I noticed many years ago that on odd occasions when performing with a fair degree of improvisation (when the occasion allowed it) that sometimes the musicians would just 'go for it' and damn the consequences. There would often be occasions where everyone would seem to anticipate effortlessly what the others were going to do. Sure, everyone knew the key and, usually, if everyone stuck to that then one would justifiably expect to be slapped for going awry harmonically.

I’m sure that most experienced musicians, especially jazzers, would acknowledge that there are certain rules of thumb that you usually follow, and subtle normal cues that musicians give each other while improvising, to avoid making a complete fool of themselves.

However, I have had many occasions when all that has just gone out of the window, and everything seems to take care of itself. Everyone just appears to anticipate what everyone else is going to do AS THEY ARE DOING IT. I used to describe this phenomenon as being like the instrument is playing itself, with me as a casual observer. But after talking about it to a very experienced jazz player a couple of weeks ago (who acknowledged that he tended to experience it a couple of times a year, in a major way), I decided that it would be more accurate to describe it as being as if someone else is playing the BAND - as if it was one instrument.

Incidentally, I have experienced this phenomenon probably more often with musicians that I’m not familiar with than the other way round.

Interesting, Steve! Thanks for the feedback.

I never thought of seeing it in music, but now that you say it, it makes perfect sense. Also lines up with what I've seen of jazz performances, always amazed me that something so fluid and on key could be improved.

Or started from nothing at all - which is often the way.

So do we really want ‘spirits’ interfering in our world

according to these articles the "diviners" of the Zulus (prior to the white man) were very effectively "interfering."

(www.iapsop.com)
"LIGHT" vol.32.aug 1912.
pp374-aug 10.
pp.406-aug. 24

The Spiritualism of the Zulu and his evidence for a future life"

this just in:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-143899/Another-quake-rocks-Manchester.html

Another quake rocks Manchester
Manchester was shaken by another small earthquake today, the British Geological Survey said.
A tremor measuring 2.9 on the Richter scale was felt in areas of north Manchester at 4.39am, said assistant seismologist Julian Bukits.
An aftershock, measuring 2.0 on the scale, was felt 14 minutes later, and was then followed by a series of three more small aftershocks.
The latest tremor comes after Greater Manchester was hit by a series of quakes yesterday, which caused damage to property but caused no injuries.
The first tremor, measuring 3.2 on the Richter scale, alarmed people arriving for work at 8.45am. There were reports of a smaller tremor seconds later.
A second earthquake, measuring 3.9 on the Richter scale - 11 times bigger than the morning's tremor - shook the area at 12.42pm.
Just seconds later it was followed by an earthquake measuring 3.4 on the Richter scale.
Further quakes followed at 6pm and 11.30pm.
The Fire Brigade reported damage to several homes in the district, including fallen chimney pots and slight damage to stores in Manchester city centre.
The British Geological Survey said the earthquakes were quite big for the UK, but only minor damage would be caused.
Mr Bukits said: "It appears that the first quake at 8.45am yesterday was a pre-shock, which was followed later by the main shock.
"What we have been seeing since are a series of aftershocks.
"We can expect to see more but they should be diminishing in size.
"It could go on for weeks or months but most of them will go unnoticed."
Last month the West Midlands was hit by a quake measuring 4.8 on the Richter scale.

i don't think i'd have taken much notice of the article, had i not seen your article here first, Robert.

keeping my ears and mind open
Lenny
_____________________________________________
"Oh, what's really going to bake your noodle later on is, would you still have broken it if I hadn't said anything?" The Oracle, the matrix

But they haven't even started fracking yet, have they? Unless I'm very much mistaken, they were protesting at the possibility at the weekend.

The comments to this entry are closed.

ORDER ONLINE!

  • SOME REVIEWER COMMENTS
  • ‘A brisk, bracing look at this continuing controversy, exhaustively researched .. a must-read for anyone with a serious interest in parapsychology and its critics.’
  • ‘‘Packed with accurate information while at the same time surprisingly engaging and fun to read.’
  • ‘‘This is one book that gives a completely objective review of skeptical debunking, and spells out in detail a clear pattern of chicanery which pervades a well-funded and organized campaign against all psi research.’

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

  • ‘These disturbing phenomena seem to deny all our usual scientific ideas. How we should like to discredit them! Unfortunately the statistical evidence, at least for telepathy, is overwhelming. It is very difficult to rearrange one’s ideas so as to fit these new facts in.’ Alan Turing, computer scientist.

  • ‘I have noticed that if a small group of intelligent people, not supposed to be impressed by psychic research, get together and such matters are mentioned, and all feel that they are in safe and sane company, usually from a third to a half of them begin to relate exceptions. That is to say, each opens a little residual closet and takes out some incident which happened to them or to some member of their family, or to some friend whom they trust and which they think odd and extremely puzzling.’ Walter Prince, psychic researcher.

  • When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong. Arthur C. Clarke

  • ‘Science seems to me to teach in the highest and strongest manner the great truth which is embodied in the Christian conception of entire surrender to the will of God. Sit down before fact as a little child, be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abysses nature leads, or you shall learn nothing.’ Thomas Henry Huxley

  • We can always immunize a theory against refutation. There are many such immunizing tactics; and if nothing better occurs to us, we can always deny the objectivity – or even the existence – of the refuting observation. Those intellectuals who are more interested in being right than in learning something interesting but unexpected are by no means rare exceptions. Karl Popper, on the defenders of materialism.

  • If we have learned one thing from the history of invention and discovery, it is that, in the long run - and often in the short one - the most daring prophecies seem laughably conservative. Arthur C. Clarke.

Become a Fan