I don't know why skeptics feel like they need to have a counterargument immediately. They have plenty of time to study out the arguments and come to a conclusion that is thought through. But their imagination that they could decisively refute a person who has been studying this for decades after doing a google search- it's embarrassing. And I'm afraid it is this mindset which drives much professional "skepticism."
Cognitive dissonance and bias. Every human's subjected to it. The bad things come when someone pretends not to have it and to be speaking out of neutrality.
Then they're not real skeptics, and I dont mean this as a no true Scotsman fallacy. Unless we are talking about "skeptics" (the popular misconception of the term), a skeptic should hold judgment rather than just try and defend their points of view. In fact, those are the ones they're meant to question the most. Those would be skeptis you mention not only don't do that, but they're also quick to judge everything that disagrees with their preconceived (whether or not well founded), and eager to side with and parrot the vast majority of people who have a status they're like the ring of it. That, by definition, is not skepticism.
Unfortunately it is a sad state of affair in the scientific community. The same thing happens with sasquatch and UFOs, both being most probably real phenomena. The problem is that these people who claim to be real scientists fool the average person to believe in their fallacies.
They're the same people who would be burning people at the stake for believing the earth was round hundreds of years ago, i.e. they champion whatever is the dominant narrative of the time no matter what evidence there is against it. In our era it's material reductionism.
Floder Hlod Err, no one was burned or treated to be burned for believing the earth was round. Unlike popular misconception, everyone agreed the earth was round since at least ancient greeks (the church included), except a hand full of (or fewer) writers who everyone though they were not that right in the head.
I am appreciating this scientists method and approach. Dean Radin is cool and calm as he collects his data. I am liking his compelling style, so consistent and non emotional which makes him a real gift. Believers have long tried to demonstrate to non believers concrete proof; however, both sides generally run into emotional upset (anger mostly). This man is able to remain consistent in his scientific perception. Brilliant! We need more like you. Thank you.
All humans have an incredible ability for blindness to the evidence. Even an accomplished scientist like Lord Kelvin, president of the Royal Society of England, declared in 1895 (8 years before Kitty Hawk) that "heavier than air flying machines are impossible". What fascinates me in this example is that an illiterate peasant could have told Lord Kelvin that insects fly, birds fly, bats fly and even some fishes too. True, they are living beings, but from the point of view of 19th century physics, they were machines. And flying toys had been known in Europe since the Renaissance. Another example is Lord Rutherford, also a towering figure of science, expressing in 1937 his disdain about the prospect of nuclear processes ever being practical for energy production. This was five year before the 1st crude nuclear reactor in Chicago, as part of the Manhattan project. Remember that these men were the top experts of their time... and were incredibly wrong.
@@Bobanyno they were really Smart you didn’t get the Point of the comments which is Even Smart people can be wrong. Even the best scientist. It wasn’t trying to say they weren’t Smart
I found the tone of the Google audience quite rude in their responses, especially as this is not their field of expertise. Many of their questions were not put like an inquiry but more like an attack. Odd, for Google. Dean Radin's books are a lot fatter than this brief talk. There is only so much you can cram into an hour's delivery. I think a bit of humility and curiosity would have been nice. I have a lot of respect for Dean Radin's courage in challenging the status quo of Western Science with this research. Without pioneers like himself we would still be living on a flat Earth.
Radin is courageous. When I had criticized views presented researchers like him in the past, usually because of my societal/university conditioning, it was from a place of fear. It was okay to toss out comments and branding someone like him as a witch or communist or what ever. It took me a while to open up to his message…..my guess it will take others a while also.
pacificprospector Yes, our social conditioning can be very powerful. And we all turn on new circuits in our brain at different timings. Thank you for sharing your experience. But I was really surprised by the Google staff. I thought they might have been more open. Even these Google Talks are fabulous - how many companies do this for their staff? Google is one of the most innovative and open-minded companies in the world... but maybe only within a certain context.
Kerrie Redgate They are scared and they attack. My science university profs taught us to do this well….but of course, if you applied the same degree of scepticism and incredulity to the message the profs themselves where espousing, they would go ape. I would be embarrassed if I was the Google rep who had invited Radin to speak there and my staff treated him in this manner. It wasn't until I started learning how to give psychic and mediumship readings myself that I was able to understand and crack through the myth that we have been taught…..before that I doubt any amount of blinded studies could have changed that for myself.
pacificprospector Yes, I suppose of course most people view reality only through their own personal experience, apart from formal education which they have to accept without question - which is left-brain dominant. There is a whole right-brain reality out there that they will never know. I have observed, though, that when people become defensive about a new idea it is because they are very close to a breakthrough. The ego-mind's resistance becomes stronger. Those who are settled in their beliefs are not bothered by opposition.
Wow, this Google crowd is pretty annoying in the Q&A. I understand being skeptical of the speaker's claims, but in ANY Q&A session it's really rude to follow-up your question with a bunch of argumentative remarks after the Speaker answers.
No, quantum mechanics haven't proved anything of this. There are just some interpretations that claim that consciousness plays a role in the measurement process (see Von Neumann-Wigner). But these kind of interpretations are not even very popular among scientists, and that's not because of a TABOOOO, but because "consciousness" is not a very well defined physical term. And physicians demand well defined terms, in this case "consciousness", because otherwise you can exchange "consciousness" with "magic".
Dean Radins knowledge is making me feel embarrased for the people in the audience raising such freshman level questions. The implications of the data are obviously over their heads.
LOL. I have to give Dean Radin props. If I was as brilliant as him, I'd humiliate these smart-asses who think they are asking all these "smart" questions. You can ask honest questions but the hostile manner they're asking them is embarrassing.
I found one thing especially interesting in Mr Radin's response to an audience question. Mr Radin said that a confirmed skeptic can conduct one of his experiments, get the same positive result and if he publishes his result HE IS NO LONGER VIEWED AS A SKEPTIC. In other words, a positive result with one of these PSI experiments, that is published, automatically brands you as a 'crackpot'. How is that fair?
New discoveries in Quantum Physics showing that what was once thought of as solid matter has nothing solid about it at all has turned classic physics on its proverbial head. Notice how classic, closed-minded physicists are doing their best to quietly sweep this under the proverbial rug and act as though they knew it all along. From my studies, Einstein was so outraged by the findings of Quantum Physicists that he spent a lot of time and energy trying to prove them wrong and COMPLETELY WASTED HIS TIME!! Einstein was eventually forced to admit that the new discoveries in Quantum Physics were indeed correct. This OBVIOUSLY must have shattered the entire gamut of classic physics apart. I mean, for Einstein to come to this conclusion must have been a devastating blow to their old classic model of the universe. However, in typical human fashion, they quietly tried to hush this up, sweep it under the proverbial rug and go on as though nothing had happened. THUS MY CONTENTION THAT ONLY FOOLS BLINDLY TRUST SCIENCE!! FIND OUT WHO IS FUNDING THEM BEFORE YOU TRUST THEM!!
MinistryOfLove999 There are so many friggin liars in modern society I've gotten to the point where I only believe that which I personally very as true. I hold the rest in question and use words like "SUPPOSEDLY" or "APPARENTLY" or phrases like "IT IS SAID" when speaking of things when I have not personally verified the information one way or the other. Blind faith in science people tend to say things like, "What we know...." as though they themselves have Ph.D.s and made the discoveries right along with the scientists. They act as through they have personally verified all the information and are absolutely trustworthy authorities when they actually are human parrot idiots who blindly believe science with the zeal of nuns who blindly believe in the pope!
My ex-husband was an avid science-fiction reader, atheist, and enthralled by NASA's space program. He used to say that if someone as intelligent and psychologically stable as our astronauts were ever claimed to believe he had a spiritual experience with God, he would take it under serious consideration. Came the day Astronaut Col. James Irwin returned from his mission claiming to have had a mystical experience and my husband observed, "Gee, I don't know how such an unstable man slipped through all the rigorous testing." If you don't want to accept possibilities, nothing will convince you.
digidgetnation yup im so sick of layman scientists who know fuck all about what science has or has not proven spouting off opinions about science they dont even realize the are worshiping at the feet scientism bowing to the high priests of science
slinky vagabond IT WAS THE SCIENCE OF THE DAY who convinced everyone that the world was flat and that the universe revolved around the Earth IT WAS THE SCIENCE OF THE DAY who convinced every blind faith idiot that the Piltdown Man was a genuine example of Darwin's precious "missing link" Have the idiots learned anything from this? Apparently not. They still blindly believe whatever official authority figures tell them. Is the Earth flat? Well, it's pretty flat where I live. That much I know. If the Earth is round where YOU live that must be terribly inconvenient
I'm not sold on the existence of psi, but this guy is great! Handles the over-confident, under-experienced young fools with grace :) I can tell he's been through the guantlet and back.
@@MadMax-gc2vj I've had experiences I couldn't explain at the time, like seeing lights in the sky, synchronicities, etc., but after learning more about the world and the human brain I've found plausible explanations for them (including my own wishful thinking). I understand how confirmation bias works and how it manifests in religion, racism, superstition, etc. I've also done enough drugs to know how easily the mind can be mistaken about what is real. If psi is a real thing, then it's effects should be evident today and throughout history. That it is so hard to find any evidence tells me it's existence is dubious. But I would be gladly proven wrong, and I like that Dean Radin is making the effort to study it.
@@OTVIIIClear I have had experience too . I used drive a big truck 18 wheeler one night i ended up in the Cosmos ...and no i do not do drugs. At 17 a Entity attacked and almost killed me but i was a believer in the Bible but now no more... as to my experience i do not consider it nothing special at all many have had them too. i also saw a Huge UFO right on top of my rig while reading the bible then just flew up.
A reasonable analogy as to why skeptics have a hard time accepting psi phenomea might be similar to the discovery of microbes several hundred years ago. If you were Zacharias Janssen (one of two guys credited with inventing the microscope), and you started telling people that there was another whole invisible ecosystem that existed basically everywhere, like in the water people are drinking, and it’s right there in front of you but you can’t see it, they’re all going to think you’re nuts. And rightfully so. After all, they’ve never seen any of this guy’s fantastical, invisible, so-called microbes. Obviously the man is crazy and this is all a bunch of BS. And then Zacharias lets the townspeople have a look through his microscope. Until you see the microbes yourself (or until it becomes common, accepted knowledge) it is all unbelievable nonsense to the materialist reductionist mind-frame, and understandably so. Personally I find the evidence to be clear and compelling. Psi phenomena is indeed demonstrable and real. Cheers.
casualdespair If consciousness is indeed fundamental, non-local and non-empirical, as many highly open-minded researchers are coming to understand it, then we're just never going to get any hard evidence for these attributes of consciousness because it can’t be measured directly (as we’re finding out). That’s why dedicated researchers, like Pim Van Lomel, Jim tucker, Dean Radin, Michael Newton, Brian Weiss, etc. have turned to collecting indirect (yet highly significant) evidence. It is a mark of maturity that they are continuing to look for (and find) evidence of non-local conscious, because it is so difficult to pin down, rather than just taking the easier path and saying it’s all bullshit - and do something else with their lives. Physician Pim Van Lomel and many others have been collecting NDE accounts from patients for decades, who can accurately describe specific operating room procedures or conversations that were happening in other parts of the hospital at a time when they were “dead," which they would have no way of knowing unless their consciousness “left the body” and they witnessed these events “directly.” (And the more involved NDE accounts, like Natalie Sudman and Nanci Danison, are really mind-blowing, if they end up being an accurate portrayal of “the larger reality”). Jim Tucker from the University of Virginia, the Division of Perceptual studies (and his predecessor, Ian Stevenson, as well as many other researchers around the world) have been investigating claims of children’s recollections of their past lives, and verifying what they can in the real world. There is some compelling evidence within all this data (James Linegar is a particularly strong case). Although many of the NDEs are quite compelling, I tend to put more stock in the hypnotherapy “life between life” regression experiences (done by Michael Newton, Brian Weiss and others) because this process seems to bypass all the religious iconography, which many researchers believe are “presented" to people during their NDEs in order to make them feel secure and comfortable during what must be a very disorienting process. So the images they see will often coincide with their various earthbound belief systems because it makes them feel safe. But the “life between life” experiences aren't "muddied up" by a lot of religious figures or any of the fear-based stuff. In other words, the people involved in the “life between life” hypnotherapy never encounter Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna, etc., or hellish environments using this method. If you want to learn what the “life between life” regression data tells us about what happens to us in between our various incarnations, check out the work of hypnotherapist Dr. Michael Newton. (I read his books for free online, and he has some RUclips videos, as well). He has spent 30 years recording and compiling in-depth, highly consistent accounts from his thousands of patients, much of it confirmed with “material world verification” (like how they matched James Linegar’s past life memories with the historical record of WWII fighter pilot James Houston) about how the whole reincarnation process works. His evidence is all very revealing because it fills in the gaps of the sometimes vague and contradictory NDE data. Unraveling the mystery of the true nature of our existence in not about belief; it’s about evidence. And the extensive ‘life between life” data tells us that we are all involved in a multi-lifetime “learning program” here on earth (and perhaps other places, as well). And that this earthly “reality frame” functions as our school, with one lifetime representing one school day. Then when we die we go back “home” to the “life between life place” (or heaven, if you will) to talk about what we did right or wrong in this lifetime, then make plans and get better prepared for the next one. At which point we’re born into our next life, our next “school day,” and so on and so on forth, as we continue to grow and perfect ourselves, spiritually. Brian Weiss is another hypnotherapist who had pretty much the same experience happen to him as Michael Newton did (and has collected the same type of data from his patients). Both guys started their practices as conventional hypnotherapists, who helped their patients with things like quitting smoking, various fears and phobias, etc. And both were complete materialist skeptics who believed, as many of us do (or once did), that the physical world represents the totality of this reality. And anything to do with the “spirit world” or “non-physical realms” (or whatever you want to call it) is all just coming from people’s imaginations. Needless to say, once both men started delving into their patient’s past life and “life between life” experiences, they both eventually became completely convinced that this material world is only a part of (a subset of) a much larger, non-physical reality system. Sure, it’s easy for the reductive materialist mindset to dismiss all this stuff as a bunch of New Age woo woo, but the evidence continues to accumulate, nonetheless. All the best!
***** "because it is so difficult to pin down, rather than just taking the easier path and saying it’s all bullshit - and do something else with their lives." I agree. I'm a massive skeptic myself but I sometimes get the idea that when it comes to certain subjects and theories that may or may not be taboo, many skeptics often try to explain something away rather than actually research it. Peer pressure and fear of ridicule, while many may not admit it, also play a big role. I'm very interested in non-local consciousness and life after death myself and there are many bullsh*t articles out there yet there also mountains of evidence supporting the notion of continuity of consciousness after death. I don't know of any actual proof of an afterlife but there sure is a lot of evidence that keeps piling up and that is hard to ignore.
***** Ignaz Semmelweis: the doctor who lost his job and died in an asylum for suggesting (and proving) his colleagues should wash their hands in between patients to reduce deaths from childbed fever.
Tesla seemingly worked almost entirely with the experiment -> observation cycle. He rarely had preconceived theories on what he worked on. He was amazing.
Like a believing, inspired and well educated Sheldon Cooper but without the stubborn insolent self determination of the regular normal scientist or non believer (or any one or combination who is determined to reject facts and reality). You are refreshing to me. Thank you.
My friend and I read each others minds. It began with the telephone telepathy but evolved. We had many experiences where one of us would be getting ready to go to the others house and we'd have a thought like, 'I should bring this video game'. It was so obscure sometimes that after a while we knew what was going on and expected the other to bring what they thought of. A moment when you are rushing out the door and the item flashes in your mind.
Personally, I feel studying psi, and knowing how to use it will make humans very powerful, and that is what authorities around the world fear. Maybe subconsciously we all fear. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Psi exists. We all know that. Just like we know how to breathe. We may not be informed on so many things, yet we know. But we cannot really bring this truth of Psi up, as we all fear the true capacity of a human spirit with Psi in hand. .. yes we think it will be negative before it is positive. Is it another thing we all know?
There is something very unattractive about the skeptic questions that got asked at the end of this very well executed talk. There is something about the nature of the questions that sounds very naive and highly unintellectual while posing as being exactly the opposite: highly intellectual. It sounds like 15 year old kids thinking they're smart because they think they see past the problem while they can barely even grasp it. That is not how proper thinking is done. Dunning-Kruger effect got real but Dean handled it with perfect patience and rationale. That's why I love that guy!
Really weak criticism at the end, not much more than frustrated emotional responses. I'm particularly embarassed for the guy at 1:24:28 ... he was too concerned with trying to get out his criticism that he didn't stop to actually listen and process what Radin was saying (which seems to be a VERY common thing people do in this subject). The best counter argument anyone said was "well, you don't have a testable theory" which, while valid, doesn't actually say much of anything. The theory portion is definitely extremely important but denying results on that basis is so stupidly unscientific. Just maybe the most effective way to reach the theory is through empirical results? Ironically, it seems that it may be possible the only way to truly understand this phenomenon is to first believe in it... which brings up all sorts of questions I really never thought I would consider myself.
When we leave our ego behind, and test a theory from a new perspective, we can avoid following popular belief, and we can begin to understand the truth.
“The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘eureka!’ but ‘that’s funny….’” Isaac Asimov Also, with the colored dots presentiment experiment, one must account for the time that light frequencies landing on the rods and cones are without color and it takes processing in the brain to assign these frequencies color.
What is really interesting is that if you look at the levels of significance and effect required for drug treatment studies, many drugs have way less significant and effective results than these psi studies. It is also clear that some of these people in the audience don't understand even basic research statistics. It reminds me of sitting and debating with freshman students in various sociology classes that I taught concerning data vs. their beliefs. It's to be expected. Most people are stunningly ignorant of how mathematics and statistics function. The only person who actually comes close to a really interesting question is the man who asks about free will. Of course, the studies only showed presentiment at an interval of one second prior to stimulus, meaning that any precognition is in a very compressed period of time. This matches very nicely with attitude versus behavior. You can measure someones attitude about a particular subject long before they have to engage in a behavior related to that subject. Then you measure the actual behavior at the time of action. We find that attitudes actually correlate very poorly with behavior over a significant period of time, but they correlate very highly in a short period of time. So, Nostradamus style visions are far less likely than some form of precognition a second before an event.
Electric Universe. Everything is connected, from the atoms that make up your cells, to the largest galactic structures we can see so far. The more I learn about it the more everything starts to make more sense and I start to see connections between so many different concepts, including this idea of a connected human consciousness.
The bias of modern scientism/dogma is nowhere more evident than in the fact that so called supporters of "real" science would tout James Randi, a magician who has no idea what real science is, as some kind of scientific paragon. Yet at the same time would denounce the findings of a real, credentialed, educated scientist like Radin as "pseudoscience".
Listen to all the materialists getting triggered. I have no problem with materialists at all: I DO have a problem with their (arrogant) assumption that they know "the truth".
Isn't that weird how their paragon of materialism _is_ *always* *_triggered!?_* "God can't exist because there are starving children and if God existed then He would feed them." They have one emotional appeal after another and yet our affections/emotions, the seat/facility of our affections/emotions should "never be a part of science!" "Atheism" = Horrific Double Standard.
Thank you for this excellent lecture Dean Radin, it is refreshing to see up-to date psi research data, hopefully this type of research could come beck into fashion again for the umpteenth time over the past 150 years. I have a large collection of historic parapsychological publications. Many are out of print and many are academic non-fiction studies involving trials and experiments spanning decades and involving many reputable and qualified researchers working out of universities from all over the world. I have read a lot of the theoretical conjecture proferred by Eastern and Western parapsychologically inclined scientists in order to explain the nature of the energy in psi. What is particularly interesting in this lecture is the qualitative information received by the unconscious mind of a telepathic respondent to stimuli directed by a sender reaching the receiver before the event. It has been my theory, as someone who accepts chi, PK-energy, bioplasma as a quite real and directly sensorily detectable force, that this information is transported in a faster-than-light realm. Just like the invisible realm of electromagnetic energy and forces were not understood at one time, likewise, perhaps with the hypothetical psi-field's energy and manifestations of PK, telepathy and pre-cognition through direction of this energy into a force that seems to have the ability to at least convey information, or, with psychokinesis influence matter or energy. Simply put, it is my contention that the 'psi-field', collective unconscious, the aether, quantum intelligence information energy field (call it what you like) that exists in faster-than-light dimensions and is tachyonic in nature (very possibly in consort and as a frequential harmonic of the E-M field ?). It Involves energy systems that are yet to be understood properly and even more difficult to measure and quantify in the current paradigmatic framework. The implications of human to human pre-cognitive communication would mean that information can be sent faster than light which could have incredible connotations. Coming up with a cohesive theoretical model sounds like a job for a hyper-dimensional mathematician, quantum biophysicist-philosopher.
It's strange that there is such a taboo on this subject in science. It doesn't seem like a farfetched idea to me that consciousness is received by, rather than generated by, the brain. I'm not claiming this as 'the truth', just pointing out that it's really not that weird of an idea. Our universe is full of invisible 'fields', why shouldn't the mind be made of them as well?
I've heard Dean Radin speak a few times, always on video, and what I like is that he does explain things in a fairly clear manner, and it asks a lot of him to be as on point as he is... with the energy of the crowd, skeptical or not, being a bit of a drain. You've got to give him credit for speaking to this particular crowd, knowing what he is getting into. In fact, that is the point. He has an outlook shaped by his experiences, but he is also, no doubt, asking for more people to follow suit and make inqueries. He encourages you to replicate the experiments. He has spoken to, contrary to this example, FULL lecture halls of scientists, whom he encourages to run their own experiments. Just listening to most of the question askers here in this less full room... the tension was evident, and the delivery, on part of question askers, was often not only defensive, but I've got to say a bit snappy, impatient and immature when it came to back and forth exchanges. Any of us can be defensive of course, but the fact that this defensiveness is there in such doses is itself part of the problem... and it is the subject of the talk.... the taboo in science. This illustrates the point. People keep highlighting the danger of making assumptions, and this is true, but also ironic considering the assumptions of the audience. If I had to pick a person in the room with a cool head, it would hard to find someone more apt to keep a cool head than Radin. Still, it isn't a character contest... its about data. In that way, this talk reminds me in some ways of a number of conventional physicians when first introduced to energywork. Even NIH has studies involving positive results with Reiki at this point, but it is very strange for people to consider. I am not much of a scientist, but I am despite my creative skew, by nature skeptical and prone to over analyze things. I'm impressed with the PEAR studies (random number generator trials) out of Princeton... and in general with Dean Radin's seemingly reasonable approach to experiments. What would his talk have been like with a more inviting audience who was open beyond their current programming?... who actually gave a little good energy or atleast nuetral. We're all programmed, myself included, so that wasn't a put down, and I am not in any way claiming to be a scientist. In fact, don't look at me... I would refer someone to The field by Lynne McTaggart and The Intention Experiment, where she mentions Radin and a few others... and more importantly her efforts to collect ongoing data and her upcoming experiments with intention. Have a good day.
I've had an OBE, all of these experiments proves what I experienced. 1 in 10 people have had on OBE, 1 in 3 people have had a supernatural experience. I think because we are spiritual everything we do supervenes on nature. Try this in the youtube search bar: Blind woman sees while out of body
When you have first hand consistent experience of psi and you see the statistical significance from 88 university experiments, it is very encouraging to see the courageous scientists who dare go there while their dogmatic peers attempt to belittle and undermine their efforts and results. Some of the audience members are so threatened by the findings that simply warrant further investigation rather than blind acceptance or negation is quite telling. Science is great, scientists are a big work in progress like the rest of us.
How do you judge the 88 experiments with statistical significance against the thousands and thousands that find no statistical significance? Isn’t that just cherry picking the results you want to see and saying those take precedence over the results you don’t like? We know from psychology that a lot of statistically significant results don’t hold up to replication. And in part, that’s the nature of statistics. A p-value of 0.05 (the general test for statistical significance) means that there is still a 5% chance that the result you received would have occurred just because of random chance and not because your hypothesis is actually correct. When you do enough studies, some of them will always be statistically significant. That’s why we look to the entire weight of the scientific evidence and don’t just assume that the results that we like are the correct ones.
@@justinoneill6351 From my understanding, the video explained that scientists don't dare to do studies on psi to avoid ridicule, which is why there were only 88 at the time. He pointed out that the field is so underdone because of the dogma that intuition cannot exist.
I love how the guy at the 1:19 mark is worked up into a frenzy, going on about bias, as he tries to throw all these experiment's away with a google search/article he found on the fly, like a typical gen zer. And I love how Dean Radin handles him. Yes, if you google the subject more in depth, and actually read the literature, the findings hold, even amongst skeptics
I’m a part of genz, we were still learning to walk when this was made. I don’t speak for all of us but we aren’t as close minded as you’d like to generalize us as.
question 1: do you accept or deny that mathematics is a language? question 2: have you read Seife's mathematical "proof" that Winston Churchill was a carrot? question 3: why, given the ambiguity of language, do you choose to refute the notion that attitude affects outcomes (this is what i understand psi to be)? q4: do you accept or refute "wavicles" and "non-locality" as well? q5: are you angry? q6: are you an "athiest"? and if so is that the basis of your griping? (q7 is my hypothesis)
+The double slit experiment where an electron is always a particle when observed but may act as a wave when not observed is another area where psi could be the link. I am a firm believer in morphic resonance and a connection to magnetic field influences, so i am always looking for information in this area.
He was asked why no one got the prize offered by Randi. The answer is really that Rand is demanding that the experiments are double blinded. That removes relationship and thus also all psychic effects, with the exception of remote viewing. Relationship is essential for ESP and telepathy.
I am Telepathic person. I am maybe only one person in the world with this kind of telepathy. I can exchange voice messages with people using telepathy , I can exchange video with other people, I can exchange smell and bad and good filings with people around, people can move muscles on my body from distance and much more.
Funny you mention this: I actually am co-authoring a parapsychology paper at this very moment, with a theoretical physicist! But this is beside the point. There is already a very large body of published scientific papers on psi, many of them in mainstream journals such as Psychological Bulletin, Nature, Science, Procedings of the IEE, etc. I will send you and AzureDrag0n1 some information about them.
Just last driving back from a friends I came a intersection as I approched it great fear came over me. So I started braking and as I was slowing down a car suddenly drove through the intersection. If I hadn't slowed I would have crashed into that car very hard.
Jesse Reiter So what you're saying is that you did not consciously see that car, therefore psi exists? How sure are you that you didn't unconsciously notice something? How can you prove that you didn't?
I saw the car coming toward me in his lane I sudanly felt panic enough where I hesitated to enter the entersection then he sudanly crossed in front of me all I would have done is slammed into his right side. Maybe he would haved crossed behind me but he saw me slow so he crossed in front. But I hesited
How often fear has save my life like when three odd beings tried to get me to leave with them with promise of sex with their sister I felt fear of not having what I was seeing matching with what I was hearing . Our 8 years later being crushed and the fear of death it's self coming for me and doing everything in the world to stay alive for 7 days till my fever broke and could tell death to take a hike. but the last 10 years was the worst. forcing my self to take chemo till It finally killed the hepC yes fear real are imagined is a very strong motivator.
I was in college in NY. My dad was in FL scheduled to go into open heart surgery at 4 pm. At 10:45 am, I was taking my chemistry final. I had just finished the exam, it went well and I had nothing to do for the last 15 min of class. Suddenly, my chest started hurting. I mean HURT like it was being crushed. I hunched over, arms cradling my center chest. It just went on, so I walked out of class to the hall. A few minutes later, it just faded away and I was fine. I continued my day taking more exams, then at 4:30 called my mom to give her my support while my dad was in the OR. She said, “Oh, he’s in recovery…they took him in early at 10:30 and he’s doing fine.” I dreamed my sisters death before I knew she was sick. I dreamed the course of a 15 year career in aerospace, which ended with the last sequence of the dream. I dreamed of my son before I met his father, and the dream included a sentence that everyone said when they saw him, and the response I’d always give. When I saw HW Bush on TV during the first campaign with Reagan, I had a visceral dislike and said, “War,” though I had no reason…had no idea who the man was. I KNOW these things and more all really happened, so I don’t require scientists to give me affirmation, but it’s nice to see them breaking away from restrained thinking.
The "Randi Fallacy" fails for two reasons: He requires 100% proof, on-demand, in 100% of cases; this is like asking a baseball player to prove home runs exist by saying you must make a home run when he says to, and any amount of failure means you lose. Second he only deals with those with media presences (as specified by the application standards), giving the fallacy a predication for frauds to begin with.
so many skeptics !People need to understand mind creates matter not matter creates mind . why do we need scientific proof to know what we are ? closed minds cant be creative ! i thought that it was interesting lecture ! and spot on !
This is amazing. These things should be studied and taught under regular coursework. Not only is this interesting to almost everyone but it will also give a better understanding of the things we don't understand. Thanks for this Video Google
Extraordinary lecture. Concise, extremely interesting and informative. Dont know if it changed that much in those 14 years that have passed. Something so present, even if only in Symbology, should be treated with more curiosity and zeal by the científic community. Will sure read his works
>>Great video. It appears that Science is finally making a breakthrough on things which do not conform to conventional logic and rationality.>> That's called quantum mechanics. Psi powers etc are just trash, attempts to grasp complex things using everyday misconceptions.
@IceAges14Aces What worries me even more is how information is being more controlled and that we may lose touch with the creativity that inspired this type of development in the first place. People need to think outside the box in order to make the progress beyond this point. Combing science and "spirituality" or whatever word you use for it is definitely an awesome idea. After all, humans are very limited as far as sense of sight, smell, hearing. Certain animals outclass us in sensory ways.
Recently, Dr. Persinger (The God Helmet man) demonstrated telepathy in the lab. The interview is on Skeptico. He mentioned something about quantum entanglement on a macro scale. I was a bit surprised he brought this up because he is an atheist/materialist scientist. The way it works is 2 brains wear the god helmet and are on the same magnetic field. Also, in the past he has discussed the correlation of earths geomagnetic activity and Psi experiences.
I have been following mr radin for a long time. I am 100% sure he is telling the truth. What he says plus my own experience proves to me we all are connected .
Thank you for this guy! This should be more than enough to encourage education in this area. There are too many skeptics. With skepticism we will not be able to improve and learn as a race.
So you're arguing that 100% of their discography is stolen. Do you see how idiotic you sound? Also, who cares if they stole it? Their execution was superb, never matched.
On being 70, lifelong learning, understanding, observation, experience, re-examination 247 365. Scepticism is the bedrock of any science experiments. In fact Scepticism is the soul of any curiosity and awareness of any conscious cognosentient being. Love always.
huntertony56 Think of it like music or movies. We want new content, that's what the humanities are all about, what we are all about. Parapsychology is more than just psi experiments. Do you ever watch those ghost hunter shows? That's parapsychology too.
Ehhhhh, not really. Parapsychology primarily concerns phenomena that you can examine experimentally. Hard to fit a haunted house in a laboratory to run tests on it ;^)
yea thats really cool. an important part of psi abilities tends to be when you are younger and not to bogged down by what society tells you to be, u know like media influences and science stuff. then the psi abilities become less powerful.
scott williamson I was unable to access the link you provided. Is it correct or is the site maybe down? I'm very curious how he differentiated "many human beings can directly perceive the future. Not just predict it based on the past." This statement seems to contradict itself "with weak but highly statistically significant accuracy" In my own tests on myself I found my perception often created a pattern of connecting events that appeared to be predictive after the fact but not before. Other times I was not significantly different than randomness. Sometimes things occurred that allowed me to create an accurate model of prediction. I was wrong way more than right though. Bummer really. I tested my family and friends as well so I'm curious what tests he came up with. I was a kid and didn't have the resources to setup a double-blind study. I'll assume he did his experiments with both participants and researchers blind to the variables while testing and had a control group. I'm also curious what explanations of mechanism he has given for his observations. What causes it? What mechanism causes time to not only give us a peek sometimes and not others but also what part of our brain accesses this? Has he named a cortex? Has he done MRIs? If I imagine the universe moving through time, are these predictions locally occurring? In other words, are there ever predictions of what's happening on Pluto? The Andromeda Galaxy? Is there a limit in space? 5 meters, kilometers, astronomical units, light-years? Is there a limit in time? Are the predictions limited to 5 minutes, hours, days, years, millinia, eons? Perhaps an inverse square law between the events with respect to time and space?
scott williamson "... in the prestigious Journal of Personality and Social Psychology" Few more such "revelations" and this journal will be just as prestigious as TEDx is today.
I could sit here for hours and spit out a superb philosophical rant, but I'll keep it short, sweet, & plain......The paranormal world is real, & I'll continue bringing true evidence before the skeptics & naysayers until there are none left. -Dr. Sonny "Doc-Mach's" Kaminski A.S.K.P.R.D.C.&G.
For nice quite list of published papers, see Dean Radins website and on the blog see show-me-the-evidence post. It is not list of ALL published PSI papers but enough to keep you busy for awhile.
Hello Dean Radin, i am 12 minutes into this video and it has already impacted me.... The graph is amazing, a brilliant visualization. THANK you so much
Very cool, people of Google, thanks for posting. Dean Radin, Hal Puthoff, Russel Targ are such marvelous honest and open-minded researchers whose research is only recently breaking through to the mainstream for subjects that everybody is interested in, but are indeed 'taboo' because of commercial reasons and what not.. Keep it up.
Well said. The point is that for controversial subjects, as soon as we get an explanation, things get accepted but in the meantime, the evidence gets discarded. Funny old world, isn't it?
All these nay sayers are throwing all kinds of hypothetical questions...We will never evolve with these nit witts becoming that of science connasuers!! Dr. Dean...you the man!!
Aspirin/Breast Implants is simply a case of "playing it safe", the old "What if we're wrong?" situation. This doesn't mean that we should play it safe and assume people can see into the future "just to play it safe". The rule I play by is this: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Aspiring "might help reduce heart attacks" is NOT an extraordinary claim.
This video puts the scientists in denial into a state of "Whoa! I had no idea. Why has psi been covered up by the controllers of information of scientific discovery?!"
Dyad meditation fMRI studies at 32:26 , for full discussion of the autonomic nervous system responses one would need to read the study I think. Audio startle experiment at 41:03 ^_^ with other studies discussed before and after that one.
On a craps table suddenly the hard ten looked almost black while the rest of the hard nr's remained light grey. Next roll was the hard ten. Then the boldface look was gone and all the hard nr's were now light-grey. That one (among others), got me reading Radin.
Please keep in mind the error bars when looking at the graph. The old data shows a much higher deviation between data points in aggregate. The new data has much smaller deviation and focuses around a significant value. In other words, the old data was sloppy compared to the new.
Does this guy in the crowd really think he's going to flip Dr Radin's work by just implying that Dr. Radin's work is wrong. (Notice I didn't use a question mark, as it's not a question). This is a common argument of layman and skeptical people, which is it's unbelievable, therefore it must be wrong. Also, I know a few people who work at Google that I used to work with and they've been wrong during the course of our tenure together, but continue to argue that they are/were right in retrospect, even though the evidence had proved them wrong....this guy could be one of them.
Dr. Radin is a brilliant man, any opportunity to hear him speak on the results of his research is a blessing. It has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that extra-sensory perception and interaction is real and demonstratable. Anybody who disagrees with that needs to provide their own evidence to the contrary. The James Randi technique of ridicule, without ANY data, is pathetic and reminds me of the people a hundred years ago saying planes heavier than air will never fly.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't know why skeptics feel like they need to have a counterargument immediately. They have plenty of time to study out the arguments and come to a conclusion that is thought through. But their imagination that they could decisively refute a person who has been studying this for decades after doing a google search- it's embarrassing. And I'm afraid it is this mindset which drives much professional "skepticism."
Cognitive dissonance and bias. Every human's subjected to it. The bad things come when someone pretends not to have it and to be speaking out of neutrality.
Then they're not real skeptics, and I dont mean this as a no true Scotsman fallacy. Unless we are talking about "skeptics" (the popular misconception of the term), a skeptic should hold judgment rather than just try and defend their points of view. In fact, those are the ones they're meant to question the most.
Those would be skeptis you mention not only don't do that, but they're also quick to judge everything that disagrees with their preconceived (whether or not well founded), and eager to side with and parrot the vast majority of people who have a status they're like the ring of it. That, by definition, is not skepticism.
Unfortunately it is a sad state of affair in the scientific community. The same thing happens with sasquatch and UFOs, both being most probably real phenomena. The problem is that these people who claim to be real scientists fool the average person to believe in their fallacies.
They're the same people who would be burning people at the stake for believing the earth was round hundreds of years ago, i.e. they champion whatever is the dominant narrative of the time no matter what evidence there is against it. In our era it's material reductionism.
Floder Hlod Err, no one was burned or treated to be burned for believing the earth was round. Unlike popular misconception, everyone agreed the earth was round since at least ancient greeks (the church included), except a hand full of (or fewer) writers who everyone though they were not that right in the head.
I am appreciating this scientists method and approach. Dean Radin is cool and calm as he collects his data. I am liking his compelling style, so consistent and non emotional which makes him a real gift. Believers have long tried to demonstrate to non believers concrete proof; however, both sides generally run into emotional upset (anger mostly). This man is able to remain consistent in his scientific perception. Brilliant! We need more like you. Thank you.
All humans have an incredible ability for blindness to the evidence.
Even an accomplished scientist like Lord Kelvin, president of the Royal Society of England, declared in 1895 (8 years before Kitty Hawk) that "heavier than air flying machines are impossible". What fascinates me in this example is that an illiterate peasant could have told Lord Kelvin that insects fly, birds fly, bats fly and even some fishes too. True, they are living beings, but from the point of view of 19th century physics, they were machines. And flying toys had been known in Europe since the Renaissance.
Another example is Lord Rutherford, also a towering figure of science, expressing in 1937 his disdain about the prospect of nuclear processes ever being practical for energy production. This was five year before the 1st crude nuclear reactor in Chicago, as part of the Manhattan project.
Remember that these men were the top experts of their time... and were incredibly wrong.
Manufactured reputation
And Semmelweiss' theory of germs shot down by the old guard.
@@Bobanyno they were really Smart you didn’t get the Point of the comments which is Even Smart people can be wrong. Even the best scientist. It wasn’t trying to say they weren’t Smart
@@marcobelli6856 I didn't say anything about whether they are smart or not.
@@Bobany yes Smart is Not the right Term it’s just that english isn’t my First Language I’m from italia I hope you still understood what I meant
I found the tone of the Google audience quite rude in their responses, especially as this is not their field of expertise. Many of their questions were not put like an inquiry but more like an attack. Odd, for Google. Dean Radin's books are a lot fatter than this brief talk. There is only so much you can cram into an hour's delivery. I think a bit of humility and curiosity would have been nice. I have a lot of respect for Dean Radin's courage in challenging the status quo of Western Science with this research. Without pioneers like himself we would still be living on a flat Earth.
Radin is courageous. When I had criticized views presented researchers like him in the past, usually because of my societal/university conditioning, it was from a place of fear. It was okay to toss out comments and branding someone like him as a witch or communist or what ever. It took me a while to open up to his message…..my guess it will take others a while also.
pacificprospector Yes, our social conditioning can be very powerful. And we all turn on new circuits in our brain at different timings. Thank you for sharing your experience.
But I was really surprised by the Google staff. I thought they might have been more open. Even these Google Talks are fabulous - how many companies do this for their staff? Google is one of the most innovative and open-minded companies in the world... but maybe only within a certain context.
Kerrie Redgate They are scared and they attack. My science university profs taught us to do this well….but of course, if you applied the same degree of scepticism and incredulity to the message the profs themselves where espousing, they would go ape. I would be embarrassed if I was the Google rep who had invited Radin to speak there and my staff treated him in this manner. It wasn't until I started learning how to give psychic and mediumship readings myself that I was able to understand and crack through the myth that we have been taught…..before that I doubt any amount of blinded studies could have changed that for myself.
pacificprospector Yes, I suppose of course most people view reality only through their own personal experience, apart from formal education which they have to accept without question - which is left-brain dominant. There is a whole right-brain reality out there that they will never know. I have observed, though, that when people become defensive about a new idea it is because they are very close to a breakthrough. The ego-mind's resistance becomes stronger. Those who are settled in their beliefs are not bothered by opposition.
Kerrie Redgate Have you read Left in the Dark by chance?
For those who are ready, no explanation is necessary and for those who are not, no explanation is possible. Even with this empirical evidence of psi!
Those who know, know...
this is so true
the q&a section has made dean radin my new hero
Wow, this Google crowd is pretty annoying in the Q&A. I understand being skeptical of the speaker's claims, but in ANY Q&A session it's really rude to follow-up your question with a bunch of argumentative remarks after the Speaker answers.
They might be psi agents testing his discord logo....
Dean Radin has the patience of a saint
m0L3ify Yes, I'd like to be doing some of the drugs he must be doing . . .
Arbiter’s narrow-minded view is typical of those forgotten by historians ...
No, quantum mechanics haven't proved anything of this. There are just some interpretations that claim that consciousness plays a role in the measurement process (see Von Neumann-Wigner). But these kind of interpretations are not even very popular among scientists, and that's not because of a TABOOOO, but because "consciousness" is not a very well defined physical term. And physicians demand well defined terms, in this case "consciousness", because otherwise you can exchange "consciousness" with "magic".
@Justin Quezada Are you talking about the Penrose & Hameroff theory ?
@@eyebee-sea4444 please shut up
Dean Radins knowledge is making me feel embarrased for the people in the audience raising such freshman level questions. The implications of the data are obviously over their heads.
snowboarder50000 - Well it is Google, a company of Cool-Aid drinking sheeple 🐑.
@@markturney8843 in all fairness, if they're as you say just "bunch of Kool-aid drinking sheep", there a herd that's at least a cut or two above.
LOL. I have to give Dean Radin props. If I was as brilliant as him, I'd humiliate these smart-asses who think they are asking all these "smart" questions. You can ask honest questions but the hostile manner they're asking them is embarrassing.
1:08:25 Girl says "please say something that will allow me to hold on to my current mindset because I'm not ready for a paradigm shift."
dude theyre both cia, they both know the program.
@@rickdeckard1075 dean radin is CIA too ?
@@cazimim3375 No :)
Well done Mr Radin! You are a lone voice of reason in a mad world!
I found one thing especially interesting in Mr Radin's response to an audience question. Mr Radin said that a confirmed skeptic can conduct one of his experiments, get the same positive result and if he publishes his result HE IS NO LONGER VIEWED AS A SKEPTIC. In other words, a positive result with one of these PSI experiments, that is published, automatically brands you as a 'crackpot'. How is that fair?
New discoveries in Quantum Physics showing that what was once thought of as solid matter has nothing solid about it at all has turned classic physics on its proverbial head. Notice how classic, closed-minded physicists are doing their best to quietly sweep this under the proverbial rug and act as though they knew it all along.
From my studies, Einstein was so outraged by the findings of Quantum Physicists that he spent a lot of time and energy trying to prove them wrong and COMPLETELY WASTED HIS TIME!! Einstein was eventually forced to admit that the new discoveries in Quantum Physics were indeed correct.
This OBVIOUSLY must have shattered the entire gamut of classic physics apart. I mean, for Einstein to come to this conclusion must have been a devastating blow to their old classic model of the universe. However, in typical human fashion, they quietly tried to hush this up, sweep it under the proverbial rug and go on as though nothing had happened.
THUS MY CONTENTION THAT ONLY FOOLS BLINDLY TRUST SCIENCE!!
FIND OUT WHO IS FUNDING THEM BEFORE YOU TRUST THEM!!
MinistryOfLove999 There are so many friggin liars in modern society I've gotten to the point where I only believe that which I personally very as true. I hold the rest in question and use words like "SUPPOSEDLY" or "APPARENTLY" or phrases like "IT IS SAID" when speaking of things when I have not personally verified the information one way or the other.
Blind faith in science people tend to say things like, "What we know...." as though they themselves have Ph.D.s and made the discoveries right along with the scientists. They act as through they have personally verified all the information and are absolutely trustworthy authorities when they actually are human parrot idiots who blindly believe science with the zeal of nuns who blindly believe in the pope!
My ex-husband was an avid science-fiction reader, atheist, and enthralled by NASA's space program. He used to say that if someone as intelligent and psychologically stable as our astronauts were ever claimed to believe he had a spiritual experience with God, he would take it under serious consideration. Came the day Astronaut Col. James Irwin returned from his mission claiming to have had a mystical experience and my husband observed, "Gee, I don't know how such an unstable man slipped through all the rigorous testing." If you don't want to accept possibilities, nothing will convince you.
digidgetnation yup im so sick of layman scientists who know fuck all about what science has or has not proven spouting off opinions about science they dont even realize the are worshiping at the feet scientism bowing to the high priests of science
slinky vagabond IT WAS THE SCIENCE OF THE DAY who convinced everyone that the world was flat and that the universe revolved around the Earth
IT WAS THE SCIENCE OF THE DAY who convinced every blind faith idiot that the Piltdown Man was a genuine example of Darwin's precious "missing link"
Have the idiots learned anything from this? Apparently not. They still blindly believe whatever official authority figures tell them.
Is the Earth flat? Well, it's pretty flat where I live. That much I know. If the Earth is round where YOU live that must be terribly inconvenient
I'm not sold on the existence of psi, but this guy is great! Handles the over-confident, under-experienced young fools with grace :) I can tell he's been through the guantlet and back.
have you change your mind?
@@MadMax-gc2vj No, why do you ask?
@@OTVIIIClear Just asking.. have you had any experiences like super natural.
@@MadMax-gc2vj I've had experiences I couldn't explain at the time, like seeing lights in the sky, synchronicities, etc., but after learning more about the world and the human brain I've found plausible explanations for them (including my own wishful thinking). I understand how confirmation bias works and how it manifests in religion, racism, superstition, etc. I've also done enough drugs to know how easily the mind can be mistaken about what is real. If psi is a real thing, then it's effects should be evident today and throughout history. That it is so hard to find any evidence tells me it's existence is dubious. But I would be gladly proven wrong, and I like that Dean Radin is making the effort to study it.
@@OTVIIIClear I have had experience too . I used drive a big truck 18 wheeler one night i ended up in the Cosmos ...and no i do not do drugs. At 17 a Entity attacked and almost killed me but i was a believer in the Bible but now no more... as to my experience i do not consider it nothing special at all many have had them too. i also saw a Huge UFO right on top of my rig while reading the bible then just flew up.
A reasonable analogy as to why skeptics have a hard time accepting psi phenomea might be similar to the discovery of microbes several hundred years ago. If you were Zacharias Janssen (one of two guys credited with inventing the microscope), and you started telling people that there was another whole invisible ecosystem that existed basically everywhere, like in the water people are drinking, and it’s right there in front of you but you can’t see it, they’re all going to think you’re nuts. And rightfully so. After all, they’ve never seen any of this guy’s fantastical, invisible, so-called microbes. Obviously the man is crazy and this is all a bunch of BS. And then Zacharias lets the townspeople have a look through his microscope. Until you see the microbes yourself (or until it becomes common, accepted knowledge) it is all unbelievable nonsense to the materialist reductionist mind-frame, and understandably so.
Personally I find the evidence to be clear and compelling. Psi phenomena is indeed demonstrable and real. Cheers.
Hey, hey, I'm an open-minded skeptic. Can you please enlighten me?
casualdespair
If consciousness is indeed fundamental, non-local and non-empirical, as many highly open-minded researchers are coming to understand it, then we're just never going to get any hard evidence for these attributes of consciousness because it can’t be measured directly (as we’re finding out). That’s why dedicated researchers, like Pim Van Lomel, Jim tucker, Dean Radin, Michael Newton, Brian Weiss, etc. have turned to collecting indirect (yet highly significant) evidence. It is a mark of maturity that they are continuing to look for (and find) evidence of non-local conscious, because it is so difficult to pin down, rather than just taking the easier path and saying it’s all bullshit - and do something else with their lives.
Physician Pim Van Lomel and many others have been collecting NDE accounts from patients for decades, who can accurately describe specific operating room procedures or conversations that were happening in other parts of the hospital at a time when they were “dead," which they would have no way of knowing unless their consciousness “left the body” and they witnessed these events “directly.” (And the more involved NDE accounts, like Natalie Sudman and Nanci Danison, are really mind-blowing, if they end up being an accurate portrayal of “the larger reality”).
Jim Tucker from the University of Virginia, the Division of Perceptual studies (and his predecessor, Ian Stevenson, as well as many other researchers around the world) have been investigating claims of children’s recollections of their past lives, and verifying what they can in the real world. There is some compelling evidence within all this data (James Linegar is a particularly strong case).
Although many of the NDEs are quite compelling, I tend to put more stock in the hypnotherapy “life between life” regression experiences (done by Michael Newton, Brian Weiss and others) because this process seems to bypass all the religious iconography, which many researchers believe are “presented" to people during their NDEs in order to make them feel secure and comfortable during what must be a very disorienting process. So the images they see will often coincide with their various earthbound belief systems because it makes them feel safe. But the “life between life” experiences aren't "muddied up" by a lot of religious figures or any of the fear-based stuff. In other words, the people involved in the “life between life” hypnotherapy never encounter Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna, etc., or hellish environments using this method.
If you want to learn what the “life between life” regression data tells us about what happens to us in between our various incarnations, check out the work of hypnotherapist Dr. Michael Newton. (I read his books for free online, and he has some RUclips videos, as well). He has spent 30 years recording and compiling in-depth, highly consistent accounts from his thousands of patients, much of it confirmed with “material world verification” (like how they matched James Linegar’s past life memories with the historical record of WWII fighter pilot James Houston) about how the whole reincarnation process works. His evidence is all very revealing because it fills in the gaps of the sometimes vague and contradictory NDE data.
Unraveling the mystery of the true nature of our existence in not about belief; it’s about evidence. And the extensive ‘life between life” data tells us that we are all involved in a multi-lifetime “learning program” here on earth (and perhaps other places, as well). And that this earthly “reality frame” functions as our school, with one lifetime representing one school day. Then when we die we go back “home” to the “life between life place” (or heaven, if you will) to talk about what we did right or wrong in this lifetime, then make plans and get better prepared for the next one. At which point we’re born into our next life, our next “school day,” and so on and so on forth, as we continue to grow and perfect ourselves, spiritually.
Brian Weiss is another hypnotherapist who had pretty much the same experience happen to him as Michael Newton did (and has collected the same type of data from his patients). Both guys started their practices as conventional hypnotherapists, who helped their patients with things like quitting smoking, various fears and phobias, etc. And both were complete materialist skeptics who believed, as many of us do (or once did), that the physical world represents the totality of this reality. And anything to do with the “spirit world” or “non-physical realms” (or whatever you want to call it) is all just coming from people’s imaginations. Needless to say, once both men started delving into their patient’s past life and “life between life” experiences, they both eventually became completely convinced that this material world is only a part of (a subset of) a much larger, non-physical reality system.
Sure, it’s easy for the reductive materialist mindset to dismiss all this stuff as a bunch of New Age woo woo, but the evidence continues to accumulate, nonetheless. All the best!
***** "because it is so difficult to pin down, rather than just taking the easier path and saying it’s all bullshit - and do something else with their lives."
I agree. I'm a massive skeptic myself but I sometimes get the idea that when it comes to certain subjects and theories that may or may not be taboo, many skeptics often try to explain something away rather than actually research it. Peer pressure and fear of ridicule, while many may not admit it, also play a big role. I'm very interested in non-local consciousness and life after death myself and there are many bullsh*t articles out there yet there also mountains of evidence supporting the notion of continuity of consciousness after death. I don't know of any actual proof of an afterlife but there sure is a lot of evidence that keeps piling up and that is hard to ignore.
casualdespair Get your hands on the software and do the experiments yourself, or participate in University experiments. Do the experiments.
***** Ignaz Semmelweis: the doctor who lost his job and died in an asylum for suggesting (and proving) his colleagues should wash their hands in between patients to reduce deaths from childbed fever.
What a hostile crowd, it looks like the only reason they invited Dean Radin to do this talk so they can attack him.
I think individual employees of Google invite the speakers. I reckon the woman who introduced Dean invited him.
From the company which skews search results in favor of whatever agenda they are currently preaching.
Tesla seemingly worked almost entirely with the experiment -> observation cycle. He rarely had preconceived theories on what he worked on. He was amazing.
Like a believing, inspired and well educated Sheldon Cooper but without the stubborn insolent self determination of the regular normal scientist or non believer (or any one or combination who is determined to reject facts and reality). You are refreshing to me. Thank you.
My friend and I read each others minds. It began with the telephone telepathy but evolved. We had many experiences where one of us would be getting ready to go to the others house and we'd have a thought like, 'I should bring this video game'. It was so obscure sometimes that after a while we knew what was going on and expected the other to bring what they thought of. A moment when you are rushing out the door and the item flashes in your mind.
Thank you for your research! Wish more scientists would care about this matter.
Personally, I feel studying psi, and knowing how to use it will make humans very powerful, and that is what authorities around the world fear. Maybe subconsciously we all fear. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Psi exists. We all know that. Just like we know how to breathe. We may not be informed on so many things, yet we know. But we cannot really bring this truth of Psi up, as we all fear the true capacity of a human spirit with Psi in hand. .. yes we think it will be negative before it is positive. Is it another thing we all know?
There is something very unattractive about the skeptic questions that got asked at the end of this very well executed talk.
There is something about the nature of the questions that sounds very naive and highly unintellectual while posing as being exactly the opposite: highly intellectual.
It sounds like 15 year old kids thinking they're smart because they think they see past the problem while they can barely even grasp it.
That is not how proper thinking is done. Dunning-Kruger effect got real but Dean handled it with perfect patience and rationale. That's why I love that guy!
Really weak criticism at the end, not much more than frustrated emotional responses. I'm particularly embarassed for the guy at 1:24:28 ... he was too concerned with trying to get out his criticism that he didn't stop to actually listen and process what Radin was saying (which seems to be a VERY common thing people do in this subject).
The best counter argument anyone said was "well, you don't have a testable theory" which, while valid, doesn't actually say much of anything. The theory portion is definitely extremely important but denying results on that basis is so stupidly unscientific. Just maybe the most effective way to reach the theory is through empirical results? Ironically, it seems that it may be possible the only way to truly understand this phenomenon is to first believe in it... which brings up all sorts of questions I really never thought I would consider myself.
When we leave our ego behind, and test a theory from a new perspective, we can avoid following popular belief, and we can begin to understand the truth.
“The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not ‘eureka!’ but ‘that’s funny….’”
Isaac Asimov
Also, with the colored dots presentiment experiment, one must account for the time that light frequencies landing on the rods and cones are without color and it takes processing in the brain to assign these frequencies color.
What is really interesting is that if you look at the levels of significance and effect required for drug treatment studies, many drugs have way less significant and effective results than these psi studies. It is also clear that some of these people in the audience don't understand even basic research statistics. It reminds me of sitting and debating with freshman students in various sociology classes that I taught concerning data vs. their beliefs. It's to be expected. Most people are stunningly ignorant of how mathematics and statistics function. The only person who actually comes close to a really interesting question is the man who asks about free will. Of course, the studies only showed presentiment at an interval of one second prior to stimulus, meaning that any precognition is in a very compressed period of time. This matches very nicely with attitude versus behavior. You can measure someones attitude about a particular subject long before they have to engage in a behavior related to that subject. Then you measure the actual behavior at the time of action. We find that attitudes actually correlate very poorly with behavior over a significant period of time, but they correlate very highly in a short period of time. So, Nostradamus style visions are far less likely than some form of precognition a second before an event.
I believe (IIRC) the precognition shown in the presentiment is closer to a few or several seconds than it is one, but I could be wrong here.
@@savedfaves I wish Radin disclosed that; it's a pretty significant value.
Electric Universe. Everything is connected, from the atoms that make up your cells, to the largest galactic structures we can see so far. The more I learn about it the more everything starts to make more sense and I start to see connections between so many different concepts, including this idea of a connected human consciousness.
The bias of modern scientism/dogma is nowhere more evident than in the fact that so called supporters of "real" science would tout James Randi, a magician who has no idea what real science is, as some kind of scientific paragon. Yet at the same time would denounce the findings of a real, credentialed, educated scientist like Radin as "pseudoscience".
People like Dean Radin and the folks at IONS are at the leading edge of our evolving consciuosness!! I applaud them, and am deeply grateful!!!
I want to tell those who say this is dangerous, this is not dangerous to say psi exists actually is natural
Listen to all the materialists getting triggered. I have no problem with materialists at all: I DO have a problem with their (arrogant) assumption that they know "the truth".
Isn't that weird how their paragon of materialism _is_ *always* *_triggered!?_* "God can't exist because there are starving children and if God existed then He would feed them." They have one emotional appeal after another and yet our affections/emotions, the seat/facility of our affections/emotions should "never be a part of science!" "Atheism" = Horrific Double Standard.
I LOVE this guy, he is brilliant!
yeah he is worth studying
Thank you Dr. Radin for another fascinating talk. I'm personally having a hard time, though, stomaching how rude this audience is.
Thank you for this excellent lecture Dean Radin, it is refreshing to see up-to date psi research data, hopefully this type of research could come beck into fashion again for the umpteenth time over the past 150 years.
I have a large collection of historic parapsychological publications. Many are out of print and many are academic non-fiction studies involving trials and experiments spanning decades and involving many reputable and qualified researchers working out of universities from all over the world. I have read a lot of the theoretical conjecture proferred by Eastern and Western parapsychologically inclined scientists in order to explain the nature of the energy in psi.
What is particularly interesting in this lecture is the qualitative information received by the unconscious mind of a telepathic respondent to stimuli directed by a sender reaching the receiver before the event. It has been my theory, as someone who accepts chi, PK-energy, bioplasma as a quite real and directly sensorily detectable force, that this information is transported in a faster-than-light realm. Just like the invisible realm of electromagnetic energy and forces were not understood at one time, likewise, perhaps with the hypothetical psi-field's energy and manifestations of PK, telepathy and pre-cognition through direction of this energy into a force that seems to have the ability to at least convey information, or, with psychokinesis influence matter or energy.
Simply put, it is my contention that the 'psi-field', collective unconscious, the aether, quantum intelligence information energy field (call it what you like) that exists in faster-than-light dimensions and is tachyonic in nature (very possibly in consort and as a frequential harmonic of the E-M field ?). It Involves energy systems that are yet to be understood properly and even more difficult to measure and quantify in the current paradigmatic framework.
The implications of human to human pre-cognitive communication would mean that information can be sent faster than light which could have incredible connotations.
Coming up with a cohesive theoretical model sounds like a job for a hyper-dimensional mathematician, quantum biophysicist-philosopher.
It's strange that there is such a taboo on this subject in science. It doesn't seem like a farfetched idea to me that consciousness is received by, rather than generated by, the brain. I'm not claiming this as 'the truth', just pointing out that it's really not that weird of an idea. Our universe is full of invisible 'fields', why shouldn't the mind be made of them as well?
I've heard Dean Radin speak a few times, always on video, and what I like is that he does explain things in a fairly clear manner, and it asks a lot of him to be as on point as he is... with the energy of the crowd, skeptical or not, being a bit of a drain. You've got to give him credit for speaking to this particular crowd, knowing what he is getting into. In fact, that is the point. He has an outlook shaped by his experiences, but he is also, no doubt, asking for more people to follow suit and make inqueries. He encourages you to replicate the experiments. He has spoken to, contrary to this example, FULL lecture halls of scientists, whom he encourages to run their own experiments. Just listening to most of the question askers here in this less full room... the tension was evident, and the delivery, on part of question askers, was often not only defensive, but I've got to say a bit snappy, impatient and immature when it came to back and forth exchanges. Any of us can be defensive of course, but the fact that this defensiveness is there in such doses is itself part of the problem... and it is the subject of the talk.... the taboo in science. This illustrates the point. People keep highlighting the danger of making assumptions, and this is true, but also ironic considering the assumptions of the audience. If I had to pick a person in the room with a cool head, it would hard to find someone more apt to keep a cool head than Radin. Still, it isn't a character contest... its about data.
In that way, this talk reminds me in some ways of a number of conventional physicians when first introduced to energywork. Even NIH has studies involving positive results with Reiki at this point, but it is very strange for people to consider. I am not much of a scientist, but I am despite my creative skew, by nature skeptical and prone to over analyze things. I'm impressed with the PEAR studies (random number generator trials) out of Princeton... and in general with Dean Radin's seemingly reasonable approach to experiments. What would his talk have been like with a more inviting audience who was open beyond their current programming?... who actually gave a little good energy or atleast nuetral. We're all programmed, myself included, so that wasn't a put down, and I am not in any way claiming to be a scientist. In fact, don't look at me... I would refer someone to The field by Lynne McTaggart and The Intention Experiment, where she mentions Radin and a few others... and more importantly her efforts to collect ongoing data and her upcoming experiments with intention. Have a good day.
I've had an OBE, all of these experiments proves what I experienced. 1 in 10 people have had on OBE, 1 in 3 people have had a supernatural experience. I think because we are spiritual everything we do supervenes on nature.
Try this in the youtube search bar: Blind woman sees while out of body
WOW I had never heard of the NIH study about Reiki, thank you!
When you have first hand consistent experience of psi and you see the statistical significance from 88 university experiments, it is very encouraging to see the courageous scientists who dare go there while their dogmatic peers attempt to belittle and undermine their efforts and results. Some of the audience members are so threatened by the findings that simply warrant further investigation rather than blind acceptance or negation is quite telling. Science is great, scientists are a big work in progress like the rest of us.
How do you judge the 88 experiments with statistical significance against the thousands and thousands that find no statistical significance? Isn’t that just cherry picking the results you want to see and saying those take precedence over the results you don’t like?
We know from psychology that a lot of statistically significant results don’t hold up to replication. And in part, that’s the nature of statistics. A p-value of 0.05 (the general test for statistical significance) means that there is still a 5% chance that the result you received would have occurred just because of random chance and not because your hypothesis is actually correct. When you do enough studies, some of them will always be statistically significant. That’s why we look to the entire weight of the scientific evidence and don’t just assume that the results that we like are the correct ones.
@@justinoneill6351 From my understanding, the video explained that scientists don't dare to do studies on psi to avoid ridicule, which is why there were only 88 at the time. He pointed out that the field is so underdone because of the dogma that intuition cannot exist.
I love how the guy at the 1:19 mark is worked up into a frenzy, going on about bias, as he tries to throw all these experiment's away with a google search/article he found on the fly, like a typical gen zer. And I love how Dean Radin handles him. Yes, if you google the subject more in depth, and actually read the literature, the findings hold, even amongst skeptics
I’m a part of genz, we were still learning to walk when this was made. I don’t speak for all of us but we aren’t as close minded as you’d like to generalize us as.
question 1: do you accept or deny that mathematics is a language? question 2: have you read Seife's mathematical "proof" that Winston Churchill was a carrot? question 3: why, given the ambiguity of language, do you choose to refute the notion that attitude affects outcomes (this is what i understand psi to be)? q4: do you accept or refute "wavicles" and "non-locality" as well? q5: are you angry? q6: are you an "athiest"? and if so is that the basis of your griping? (q7 is my hypothesis)
+The double slit experiment where an electron is always a particle when observed but may act as a wave when not observed is another area where psi could be the link. I am a firm believer in morphic resonance and a connection to magnetic field influences, so i am always looking for information in this area.
Yeah, the double slit experiment makes me believe in God for lack of a better word.
He was asked why no one got the prize offered by Randi.
The answer is really that Rand is demanding that the experiments are double blinded. That removes relationship and thus also all psychic effects, with the exception of remote viewing. Relationship is essential for ESP and telepathy.
wow dont know how mr dean does so well handling these dillweeds and their mindnumbing questions
Dean Radin is the man! He's definitely got a lot of patience.
Thank you, Dean Radin. You're a blessing.
I am Telepathic person. I am maybe only one person in the world with this kind of telepathy.
I can exchange voice messages with people using telepathy , I can exchange video with other people,
I can exchange smell and bad and good filings with people around, people can move
muscles on my body from distance and much more.
Hi! Is that true? I would like to contact you. I am also telepathic, and I study physics in Hungary. Now I work as a software developer trainee.
periodically revisited. _JC
That's why I refered to the papers, so that you could check youself whether statistical methods that are used here are correct.
Great Man. Keeps to the facts. All his lecturs are fascinating!
For those searching published pares about these things, go to dean radins website and you can find blog post about evidence page that has a link list.
Funny you mention this: I actually am co-authoring a parapsychology paper at this very moment, with a theoretical physicist! But this is beside the point.
There is already a very large body of published scientific papers on psi, many of them in mainstream journals such as Psychological Bulletin, Nature, Science, Procedings of the IEE, etc. I will send you and AzureDrag0n1 some information about them.
I found this lecture to be very interesting and illuminating-but then I had a feeling I would....Thank you Mr. Radin.
Just last driving back from a friends I came a intersection as I approched it great fear came over me. So I started braking and as I was slowing down a car suddenly drove through the intersection. If I hadn't slowed I would have crashed into that car very hard.
Jesse Reiter So what you're saying is that you did not consciously see that car, therefore psi exists? How sure are you that you didn't unconsciously notice something? How can you prove that you didn't?
I saw the car coming toward me in his lane I sudanly felt panic enough where I hesitated to enter the entersection then he sudanly crossed in front of me all I would have done is slammed into his right side. Maybe he would haved crossed behind me but he saw me slow so he crossed in front. But I hesited
So you felt fear when you noticed a car that wasn't slowing down at a red light and you avoided that danger?
How often fear has save my life like when three odd beings tried to get me to leave with them with promise of sex with their sister I felt fear of not having what I was seeing matching with what I was hearing . Our 8 years later being crushed and the fear of death it's self coming for me and doing everything in the world to stay alive for 7 days till my fever broke and could tell death to take a hike. but the last 10 years was the worst. forcing my self to take chemo till It finally killed the hepC
yes fear real are imagined is a very strong motivator.
Could you please answer my question?
the topic of taboos in science is an interesting topic. Well done Google Tech for highlighting this issue.
I was in college in NY. My dad was in FL scheduled to go into open heart surgery at 4 pm. At 10:45 am, I was taking my chemistry final. I had just finished the exam, it went well and I had nothing to do for the last 15 min of class. Suddenly, my chest started hurting. I mean HURT like it was being crushed. I hunched over, arms cradling my center chest. It just went on, so I walked out of class to the hall. A few minutes later, it just faded away and I was fine. I continued my day taking more exams, then at 4:30 called my mom to give her my support while my dad was in the OR. She said, “Oh, he’s in recovery…they took him in early at 10:30 and he’s doing fine.”
I dreamed my sisters death before I knew she was sick. I dreamed the course of a 15 year career in aerospace, which ended with the last sequence of the dream. I dreamed of my son before I met his father, and the dream included a sentence that everyone said when they saw him, and the response I’d always give. When I saw HW Bush on TV during the first campaign with Reagan, I had a visceral dislike and said, “War,” though I had no reason…had no idea who the man was.
I KNOW these things and more all really happened, so I don’t require scientists to give me affirmation, but it’s nice to see them breaking away from restrained thinking.
The "Randi Fallacy" fails for two reasons: He requires 100% proof, on-demand, in 100% of cases; this is like asking a baseball player to prove home runs exist by saying you must make a home run when he says to, and any amount of failure means you lose. Second he only deals with those with media presences (as specified by the application standards), giving the fallacy a predication for frauds to begin with.
Taboos in science restrict inquiry, acceptable ideas
Informed consensus restrained
Reporting distortions
Taboo sustained
Worst poem ever
Butt Hurt There's nothing inside of you that is spiritual? How come malice comes from the heart? California Penal Code 188.
Really great talk.
I hope that he hasn't gone crazy since making this talk. He seemed so rational and on point here. Very impressive.
so many skeptics !People need to understand mind creates matter not matter creates mind . why do we need scientific proof to know what we are ? closed minds cant be creative ! i thought that it was interesting lecture ! and spot on !
This is amazing. These things should be studied and taught under regular coursework. Not only is this interesting to almost everyone but it will also give a better understanding of the things we don't understand.
Thanks for this Video Google
Very good video. Telepathy is real.
Extraordinary lecture. Concise, extremely interesting and informative. Dont know if it changed that much in those 14 years that have passed. Something so present, even if only in Symbology, should be treated with more curiosity and zeal by the científic community. Will sure read his works
Dean Radin workedon psi projects for the intelligence state. Imagine what may be known by those privy to that research.
>>Great video. It appears that Science is finally making a breakthrough on things which do not conform to conventional logic and rationality.>>
That's called quantum mechanics. Psi powers etc are just trash, attempts to grasp complex things using everyday misconceptions.
@IceAges14Aces What worries me even more is how information is being more controlled and that we may lose touch with the creativity that inspired this type of development in the first place. People need to think outside the box in order to make the progress beyond this point. Combing science and "spirituality" or whatever word you use for it is definitely an awesome idea. After all, humans are very limited as far as sense of sight, smell, hearing. Certain animals outclass us in sensory ways.
the google audience was disappointing in its lack of educated qurestions
And most of the seats are empty.
You expect too much from a marketing firm.
Most people don't squander their education learning about fictitious paranormal phenomenon.
Recently, Dr. Persinger (The God Helmet man) demonstrated telepathy in the lab. The interview is on Skeptico. He mentioned something about quantum entanglement on a macro scale. I was a bit surprised he brought this up because he is an atheist/materialist scientist. The way it works is 2 brains wear the god helmet and are on the same magnetic field. Also, in the past he has discussed the correlation of earths geomagnetic activity and Psi experiences.
41:09 I participated in that experiment!
What was that like?
This guy has so much patience dealing with these people asking questions that don't understand empiricism and just how science works lol
To the guy who brought up free will: It takes a special talent to sound like the nut while debating with the guy pushing psychic phenomena. Congrats.
+everynameistaken37 How did he sound like a nut, he made some fair questions.
I have been following mr radin for a long time. I am 100% sure he is telling the truth. What he says plus my own experience proves to me we all are connected .
Some rude questions at the end :(
Thank you for this guy! This should be more than enough to encourage education in this area. There are too many skeptics. With skepticism we will not be able to improve and learn as a race.
Skepticism is why we grow and learn as a race. We need to ask questions
Led Zeppelin nether received, not created their music. They simply stole it.
From whom?
So you're arguing that 100% of their discography is stolen. Do you see how idiotic you sound? Also, who cares if they stole it? Their execution was superb, never matched.
On being 70, lifelong learning, understanding, observation, experience, re-examination 247 365.
Scepticism is the bedrock of any science experiments.
In fact Scepticism is the soul of any curiosity and awareness of any conscious cognosentient being.
Love always.
Debunking James Randi challenge 1:00:00
hey i don't understand why you have do it so many times thought.
huntertony56 Think of it like music or movies. We want new content, that's what the humanities are all about, what we are all about. Parapsychology is more than just psi experiments. Do you ever watch those ghost hunter shows? That's parapsychology too.
Ehhhhh, not really. Parapsychology primarily concerns phenomena that you can examine experimentally. Hard to fit a haunted house in a laboratory to run tests on it ;^)
I have never heard of Dean Radin before seeing this, and I am very impressed. Unfortunate the Google employees were so dense and presumptive.
I remember yawning uncontrollably on January 16, 2008. I must have psychically sensed that this guy was talking.
+Liz R such power. much psychic
I remember yawning uncontrollably 8 months ago. I must have psychically sensed that you made a bad joke.
I psychically sensed four days ago that you were going to steal this bad joke, because yours are worse.
i sensed that one day, all of us will die
yea thats really cool. an important part of psi abilities tends to be when you are younger and not to bogged down by what society tells you to be, u know like media influences and science stuff. then the psi abilities become less powerful.
Try being born a natural hemokinetic user then try saying this is fake
OK... wait, I can't be born again as a hemosomething, the experiment is impossible to execute, another unverifiable claim by pseudoscientists.
Try being born a leprechaun. Also, I have 10,000 children.
scott williamson I was unable to access the link you provided. Is it correct or is the site maybe down? I'm very curious how he differentiated "many human beings can directly perceive the future. Not just predict it based on the past."
This statement seems to contradict itself "with weak but highly statistically significant accuracy"
In my own tests on myself I found my perception often created a pattern of connecting events that appeared to be predictive after the fact but not before. Other times I was not significantly different than randomness. Sometimes things occurred that allowed me to create an accurate model of prediction. I was wrong way more than right though. Bummer really. I tested my family and friends as well so I'm curious what tests he came up with. I was a kid and didn't have the resources to setup a double-blind study. I'll assume he did his experiments with both participants and researchers blind to the variables while testing and had a control group.
I'm also curious what explanations of mechanism he has given for his observations. What causes it? What mechanism causes time to not only give us a peek sometimes and not others but also what part of our brain accesses this? Has he named a cortex? Has he done MRIs? If I imagine the universe moving through time, are these predictions locally occurring? In other words, are there ever predictions of what's happening on Pluto? The Andromeda Galaxy? Is there a limit in space? 5 meters, kilometers, astronomical units, light-years? Is there a limit in time? Are the predictions limited to 5 minutes, hours, days, years, millinia, eons? Perhaps an inverse square law between the events with respect to time and space?
scott williamson "... in the prestigious Journal of Personality and Social Psychology"
Few more such "revelations" and this journal will be just as prestigious as TEDx is today.
BandytaCzasu Why do you think 90% of scientists agree with psychic phenomena when polled anonymously, but 99.7% of them don't do psychic research?
Also there are the fMRI and EEG correlation studies that show a very significant effect which goes in the direction predicted if psi exists.
Ok I'm outta here.
I could sit here for hours and spit out a superb philosophical rant, but I'll keep it short, sweet, & plain......The paranormal world is real, & I'll continue bringing true evidence before the skeptics & naysayers until there are none left.
-Dr. Sonny "Doc-Mach's" Kaminski
A.S.K.P.R.D.C.&G.
proof of telepathy starts at around 25:00.
For nice quite list of published papers, see Dean Radins website and on the blog see show-me-the-evidence post. It is not list of ALL published PSI papers but enough to keep you busy for awhile.
It's only the people who have not experienced psi that are skeptics and the rest follow
Science isn't science if it's not dogma-breaking.
Hello Dean Radin,
i am 12 minutes into this video and it has already impacted me....
The graph is amazing, a brilliant visualization. THANK you so much
Very cool, people of Google, thanks for posting. Dean Radin, Hal Puthoff, Russel Targ are such marvelous honest and open-minded researchers whose research is only recently breaking through to the mainstream for subjects that everybody is interested in, but are indeed 'taboo' because of commercial reasons and what not.. Keep it up.
Well said. The point is that for controversial subjects, as soon as we get an explanation, things get accepted but in the meantime, the evidence gets discarded. Funny old world, isn't it?
Have you pondered the reasons why such taboo? I believe the reasons are not just a skeptical thought by a large percentage.
So sad how few people are in the audience.
All these nay sayers are throwing all kinds of hypothetical questions...We will never evolve with these nit witts becoming that of science connasuers!! Dr. Dean...you the man!!
Aspirin/Breast Implants is simply a case of "playing it safe", the old "What if we're wrong?" situation. This doesn't mean that we should play it safe and assume people can see into the future "just to play it safe".
The rule I play by is this: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Aspiring "might help reduce heart attacks" is NOT an extraordinary claim.
This video puts the scientists in denial into a state of "Whoa! I had no idea. Why has psi been covered up by the controllers of information of scientific discovery?!"
Dyad meditation fMRI studies at 32:26 , for full discussion of the autonomic nervous system responses one would need to read the study I think.
Audio startle experiment at 41:03 ^_^ with other studies discussed before and after that one.
On a craps table suddenly the hard ten looked almost black while the rest of the hard nr's remained light grey. Next roll was the hard ten. Then the boldface look was gone and all the hard nr's were now light-grey. That one (among others), got me reading Radin.
Please keep in mind the error bars when looking at the graph. The old data shows a much higher deviation between data points in aggregate. The new data has much smaller deviation and focuses around a significant value. In other words, the old data was sloppy compared to the new.
Does this guy in the crowd really think he's going to flip Dr Radin's work by just implying that Dr. Radin's work is wrong. (Notice I didn't use a question mark, as it's not a question). This is a common argument of layman and skeptical people, which is it's unbelievable, therefore it must be wrong.
Also, I know a few people who work at Google that I used to work with and they've been wrong during the course of our tenure together, but continue to argue that they are/were right in retrospect, even though the evidence had proved them wrong....this guy could be one of them.
Exactly! :) And when there is flaws in scientific papers, they cannot be relied on either. It is why I love science.
Dr. Radin is a brilliant man, any opportunity to hear him speak on the results of his research is a blessing. It has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that extra-sensory perception and interaction is real and demonstratable. Anybody who disagrees with that needs to provide their own evidence to the contrary. The James Randi technique of ridicule, without ANY data, is pathetic and reminds me of the people a hundred years ago saying planes heavier than air will never fly.
How rigid your mind has to be to doubt psi?
Controlled protocol, or non-human lol
This should have a billion views