Well, Cityboy916, it’s going on three months now since you accepted the challenge. I know you’re alive, since you have been posting in other threads. In a recent one, you said:
So true, so true. Yet not a peep out of you in this thread for months. How’s it goin’, Dude? Not even a wild guess about Glee’s objects? So few dreams, so much time! Shall we declare your claim to be nothing but an empty, idle boast, and you – nothing but a miserable failure? Sure looks like it to me. How much longer do we need to wait for results?
IIRC, IWLN, the year time limit was only a wild-ass estimate, and both glee and Cityboy916 declined to put a rigid time length on this test, which I think is one of its failures.
So is it unreasonable to ask, after 3 months, why no progress reports? Has CB been getting close? Done some trial runs? Making mental trips elsewhere? Unable to find glee’s exact location? Having doubts about his ability?
I think his silence speaks volumes, and no, I don’t think I am being too harsh to taunt. CityBoy916 made a fantastic claim and hasn’t yet supplied a single scrap of evidence that he can perform. I predict this won’t improve but I’m willing to be shown otherwise.
How do you know I’m alive? My last post was 4 days ago.
A few “almost” incidents. Nothing even remotely resembling a trip to England though. :rolleyes:
You should know my priorities are with this test! :eek:
Not expecting that to be a problem.
No.
I respectfully disagree. See, this thread is supposed to be a test of the phenomenon known as “astral projection”, not “dreaming” or “guessing”. Until such time as an actual “astral projection” occurs in the test subject (i.e. me) silence proves nothing and disproves nothing. Whether “astral projection” is a real projection of consciousness or a fantastic altered state, we cannot test or measure it until it occurs!
If the claim was “I can fly to England on a set of homemade wings” and the reason for not attempting so yet was “the parts didn’t arrive in the mail yet” would your response be any different?
I considered the possiblity of your ghost posting under your name. If so, that should improve your chances, right? Don’t ghosts have supernatural abilities?
And until any evidence that it occurs is brought forward, it is no more than dreaming, guessing or idle chatter.
Considering that FedEx delivers almost anything almost anywhere in two days or less, and the slowest shipping method I know of from England to the US is a big-ass container, and my neighbor ships whole containers of antique furniture on that route in about 45 days, I think a boatload of wing parts could be obtained a lot quicker than your astral sessions seem to happen.
Yep, even if you claimed to fly to the Moon on gossamer wings, I think 3 months to get the pieces would be more than enough. The longer it takes to do a particular project, the more it looks like stalling or boasting. C’mon, give us your best shot, then apply for the $1 mil – that’ll buy all the wings you want.
But I can wait. I’ll check in again in 6 months if nothing is heard from you or your ghost until then. Wouldn’t want anybody to forget about this thread, would we?
Well it looks like our other astral projector Gremlyn already sent in his test. Can we see the results of that to tide us over? You don’t have to release the actual list if you think it would interfere with cityboy’s test.
Could you at least give us a general idea of the outcome. Tell us if it was right? Wrong? Close?
But are Gremlyn’s results from actual AP or are they guesses? We need to be sure what the source of the answers, so we know if they are off topic or not. If she actually got them from a real AP event then I don’t see any reason not to give just a number stating how many she got right.
Damn, I saw the resurrection of this thread and thought maybe something had happened… oh well! I can wait another three months (wow, it’s been three whole months!!!)
No, we don’t. We want results, not theories. We don’t care how you do what you claim, just do it. Besides, if she says her source was an AP event, how do we know that’s true? Even if you say your results, which we are still waiting for, are from AP, we only have your word for it anyway. We can’t verify it. Object lists we can.
Since this is a test of Cityboy916’s claim, no analysis of anyone else’s lists should be released until he brings us his. Other participants’ results may be interesting, but have no bearing on his claim and shouldn’t be allowed to influence it in any way whatsoever.
Yes, we do. If a participant sits around taking guesses, the results may confirm some kind of clairvoyance or telepathy, but they do not confirm the nature of AP. If all that’s required is a guess, well then I’ll just guess right now and forget about the friggin’ AP. Whereas if the results come from an episode of actual floating out-of-body sensations, accompanied by the apparent ability to see (or rather sense) objects as they would appear from a vantage point outside the body, then and only then do the results have a place on this thread. If you’ll notice, the thread title is “An SDMB test of astral projection”, not “An SDMB test of guesswork.”
This is an anonymous message board. But, more importantly, this is the Straight Dope message board. It is my sincere belief and hope that there are not many who would lie on the SDMB. :eek: And besides, if I were dishonest, would I have held out for so long?
If astral projection is a “new science”, where are the independent peer-reviewed journals? Where is the rigorous theory? Where are the documented observations in controlled environments (that is, not on an internet messageboard)?
It is not inconcievable that a dishonest person would do so, because it would enable them to use the argument “if I were dishonest, would I have held out for so long?” - I’m not suggesting this is or isn’t the case here (I don’t have enough evidence to decide), but I don’t feel that the delay can really be used as any kind of sound argument either in favour of, or against dishonesty.
Cityboy916, I have a red car. Believe me? Why not? Why would I lie? Red cars do exist, very few people would dispute that, and you can always check my garage. Whether I’m truthful or falseful, no scientific laws have been overturned.
I just took a trip to Jupiter for breakfast and made it back by lunch. On the way past the ammonia clouds, not far from Ceres, I saw Janis Joplin singing with Jerry Garcia. Did this actually happen? No? Why not? Why would I lie? On this message board, no less?
I hope you can see the difference. Your claim is more like the Jupiter trip than the red car; substantually more evidence is required if you wish to overturn accepted scientific knowledge.
And no, we really, really don’t care about your crackpot theories as to how. You haven’t shown the AP phenomena to exist yet. At all. Ever. Not in the slightest. None. Nada. Zilcherino. How it might exist is, therefore, of no value other than philosophical speculation (and that fits better in another thread). If you can provide an accurate list of glee’s objects, THEN we can argue if you guessed, did it by supernatural means, or something else.
Who said anything about any theories? What we’re looking at here, is something called a phenomenon. See, a phenomenon is something that is observed to occur, whereas a theory is a possible explanation for why such phenomenon occurs. Hope this resolves any confusion.
If you told me that you drove your red car to Jupiter, I would believe you have a red car because you seem like the kind of person who would have a red car. Similarly, if I told you I astrally projected to England, you would probably believe that I had some kind of altered sleep state in which I perceived images et al that made me think of England. You might not believe that some part of me actually went to England, unless I brought back proof in the form of a list, just as I would not believe you actually went to Jupiter unless you brought back a sample of ammonia clouds and could prove they came from Jupiter.
Now, I hope you realize that “there is an altered state known as astral projection” is not a theory, but an observed fact, just as “red cars exist” is not a theory but an observable fact. The statement that astral projection actually involves the viewng of a distant location may indeed be just as false as stating that a red car can be driven to Jupiter. That is the purpose of this test: to determine whether AP involves such capabilities.
Now if you claimed to be able to drive your red car to Jupiter, and I asked you to prove it, and you turned around and went there in a space shuttle instead (ignoring for the moment that there has never been a manned mission to Jupiter), I would be disappointed in you for not living up to your claim that it can be done with a car. This is why I did not guess the objects on glee’s desk.
And where is glee anyway? Maybe we need him to revisit this thread if you and I, Musicat, cannot even agree on so much as the conditions of the test.
Not here, it’s not. Not without peer-reviewed publications and tests that can be and have been readily replicated. Your “phenomenon” has not been observed to occur under sufficiently rigid conditions as to remove the possibility of fraud or observer error. If AP is an observed fact, why are you having such a hard time supplying us with results?
You say any list you bring forward is the result of AP, not a guess. But you have not yet brought any list forward at all. I don’t care how you obtain it, just show us the list, tell us how long we should wait for it (looks like 9 months to go), or admit failure.
Unless glee says otherwise, the conditions of this test are very simple. You supply a list of objects on glee’s desk which will be compared to the list given by glee to David B.
An observed phenomenon is only as good as those who observe and report it.
For example, it is not an observed phenomenon that fairies exist. I don’t care how many people reported it, the word observable implies that it is rigorously observed and subject to the standards of scientific scrutiny.
Astral projection has also not been observed. Therefore it is strictly incorrect to say that it is an observed phenomenon.
You can say astral projection is a reported phenomenon, but from the point of view of rigorous science those reported and observed are two VERY different things. Leverrier, for example, reported that he saw a planet “Vulcan” transit the sun. He did not observe the planet Vulcan transit the sun because no such planet exists. When the lack of evidence for Vulcan’s existence became clear, we realized that the report was an error. Reports can be prone to error. The nominal fact of observed phenomena are not in error. Where astral projection has been placed up to scientific scrutiny, it has been found to be unobserved. So, there’s no way for anyone to say astral projection is scientific.
Which brings me back to the point that astral projection is simply not based in science.
cityboy is right, it’s easier to transport to a person than a place or thing. When I purposefully project I use a picture of a person’s eyes to lock in.
The ambient environment isn’t as clear as the physical world, I guess we see an astral-level equivalent of reality, and I don’t know what that’s from. I would not be able to id numbers on a sticky, perhaps not even objects on a desk, but more likely I might be able to identify body implants (Greenfield filters, titanium bone supports, artificial hearts, etc.).
I’m not volunteering yet, I’m a bit out of practice and some of my recent attempts at trips have not been recognized at the destination end. It’s like the broad jump, you get older and out of practice, you don’t do as well.
I’ll check back in, though, and hope to play some day.
What we’re looking at here, is something called a phenomenon. See, a phenomenon is something that is