It is pretty much an established fact that God - not being an object can never be proven to have an objective existence by employing objective logic.. However, it may be possible to prove in the near future that there is such a human talent, Precognition, that would pretty much cause current theories as to the nature of Time and Causality and the rest of Objective Logic to be thrown out the window. What theories could they be replaced with?
I have had a few precognitve experiences in my life so I don't doubt their existence, but what do you think? Anyone else have a premonition, an intuition that something was going to happen before it actually ocurred?
The following is an exerpt from Precognition, Presentiment & Remote Viewing by Dean Radin
Russell Targ's group at SRI International was supported by CIA and defense contracts for most of its existence, so a good deal of their research remains classified. However, in recent years, some intriguing research has been declassified. A number of their studies show that it does not appear to be any more difficult to know the hidden future than to know the hidden present. For example, when they did an experiment with six pictures and the subject's task was to guess which picture would be chosen (via a later roll of a die), the results were just as good as when the subject was asked to view a hidden picture in the present. A recent meta-analysis out of Edinburgh examining 44 different experimental series confirmed that the data for real-time psychic functioning has the same effect size as that for precognitive psychic functioning. A second step in exploring this effect involved telling the die-roller, "You need to get a three in order for the lighthouse to be chosen and to confirm the precognitive remote viewing of the subject." This doesn't seem to interfere at all. This protocol does raise the issue of whether there might be psychokinesis effects; however, Russell feels it is unlikely since PK studies with dice produce only about a 1-2% variation from chance. At SRI, they had sixty targets, which means a PK effect would have to control the data to select precisely a single target from sixty, which seems highly improbable if the usual PK effect is only 1-2%. One famous anecdote involved a pool of sixty locations. The subject was an artist and drew a lot of detail on a Chevy dealership, with a star in the window. Russell's co-experimenter challenged him to psychically force the RNG to choose the number for the target the subject described. Sure enough, the RNG chose the correct target.
With remote viewing protocols involving precognition and using very good subjects, they averaged four hits out of six trials. Subjects typically were instructed to envision the scene where an experimenter would be in thirty minutes. However, the location of that experimenter had yet to be determined through a randomized computer choice from amongst a large database of possibilities. These experiments imply that, in some profound way, we misunderstand the nature of causality.
The picture of causality, time, and precognition grew even more bizarre when Russell discussed a study with a protocol that seemed to confound or interrupt future viewing. In this experiment, there were five possible target pictures. The subjects were asked to describe and draw the picture that will be chosen. Russell then took this detailed description and compared it to the database of five pictures chosen for the experiment. Often there was clear evidence of clairvoyance, such as a lighthouse with stripes and a clover-leaf at the top, drawn exactly like the target picture...
I have had a few precognitve experiences in my life so I don't doubt their existence, but what do you think? Anyone else have a premonition, an intuition that something was going to happen before it actually ocurred?
The following is an exerpt from Precognition, Presentiment & Remote Viewing by Dean Radin
Russell Targ's group at SRI International was supported by CIA and defense contracts for most of its existence, so a good deal of their research remains classified. However, in recent years, some intriguing research has been declassified. A number of their studies show that it does not appear to be any more difficult to know the hidden future than to know the hidden present. For example, when they did an experiment with six pictures and the subject's task was to guess which picture would be chosen (via a later roll of a die), the results were just as good as when the subject was asked to view a hidden picture in the present. A recent meta-analysis out of Edinburgh examining 44 different experimental series confirmed that the data for real-time psychic functioning has the same effect size as that for precognitive psychic functioning. A second step in exploring this effect involved telling the die-roller, "You need to get a three in order for the lighthouse to be chosen and to confirm the precognitive remote viewing of the subject." This doesn't seem to interfere at all. This protocol does raise the issue of whether there might be psychokinesis effects; however, Russell feels it is unlikely since PK studies with dice produce only about a 1-2% variation from chance. At SRI, they had sixty targets, which means a PK effect would have to control the data to select precisely a single target from sixty, which seems highly improbable if the usual PK effect is only 1-2%. One famous anecdote involved a pool of sixty locations. The subject was an artist and drew a lot of detail on a Chevy dealership, with a star in the window. Russell's co-experimenter challenged him to psychically force the RNG to choose the number for the target the subject described. Sure enough, the RNG chose the correct target.
With remote viewing protocols involving precognition and using very good subjects, they averaged four hits out of six trials. Subjects typically were instructed to envision the scene where an experimenter would be in thirty minutes. However, the location of that experimenter had yet to be determined through a randomized computer choice from amongst a large database of possibilities. These experiments imply that, in some profound way, we misunderstand the nature of causality.
The picture of causality, time, and precognition grew even more bizarre when Russell discussed a study with a protocol that seemed to confound or interrupt future viewing. In this experiment, there were five possible target pictures. The subjects were asked to describe and draw the picture that will be chosen. Russell then took this detailed description and compared it to the database of five pictures chosen for the experiment. Often there was clear evidence of clairvoyance, such as a lighthouse with stripes and a clover-leaf at the top, drawn exactly like the target picture...
