Proof That Psychic Ability Is Nonsense

Of the thousands of people who rake in the dollars because of their psychic ability, not one is on the public record before the fact in predicting this.

http://wcco.com/topstories/local_story_213191448.html



Is it you think all psychics suck and are fake because you didn't find one so far that predicted this bridge collapse ?


No. I think all self-proclaimed psychics suck because they haven't predicted ***anything*** with any specificity that can help anyone else.
After 9/11, all kinds of psychics claimed they predicted the event. Fine. Where were they before the event? What so-called psychics do usually is either one of two things. First they predict with such little specificity that their predictions will as a matter of unfolding national events come true. Hey, I can play that silly game. I will right now predict that a plane with crash in the Western United States in the next month; I see the letter "K" and the number "4", and I sense anguish in Dallas. Time will tell whether Dallas is a person or a city or if the plane is a Boeing 737 or a Piper Cub. Secondly, they predict the same thing with such regularity that the prediction will come true in the same way that the clock must strike 12 at least once a day.



I certainly allow that there is much in life that cannot be explained and may be beyond what science can ever tell us. I also happen to think that there is something to be said for karma-- that one's past behavior or wiring leads to predestined events. You see this on the highways everyday where choleric people had car accidents more so than others who take it easy.

Other than that, I would have to disagree that there is anything predestined about the bridge falling, for example. In a parallel universe, if there were better contractors and better inspectors and money available for timely maintenance, it would not have fallen. The laws of nature are implacable. So, all things been equal, gravity, rust, the vibration of a 100,00o cars will take its toll and bad things in the absence of human intervention will happen.

The basic difference philosophically between you and me is that you think the future is "real"-- that we are riding on a ribbon of time to encounter a future that was witten in the stars a thousand years before the ocean's rolled. My view is that we live in the subjunctive-- if I do this, that not this will happen-- and that there is no future-- there is only now. The future is created in real time as we make choices, and since those choices I make multiplied by four billion are infinitely variable, the futures we can encounter are also infinitely variable.

None of this is provable, of course, but I think my theory makes more sense and also forces me to assume that I can take responsibility for myself much more so than by presupposing fatalism.


I am open to be persuaded by a simple test. Predict an event that will save at least one person's life, making sure that your prediction is publicably verifiably before the event.

Feel free to post your prediction on this thread, answering the standard journalistic questions of who, what, when, and how.

So, yes, I don't need this bridge collapse to prove to me that psychics are frauds that play of people's credulity. Their own track record has established that beyond a shadow of a doubt.


There are certainly people that are highly intutional and animals like Oscar, the fuzzy feline of death,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=470906&in_page_id=1770

that have senses outside the ranges of other people or animals, even. But this has nothing to do with the paranormal. It is merely people or animals with refined senses sensing what is happening in the present. I am talking about sensing what hasn't happened at all. I haven't seen any proof of that.



Yikes. I can understand a skeptical point of view, but skepticism without understanding the scientific method leads to sheer silliness.First of all, there is no such thing as "proof" except in math and alcohol. There is evidence, evidence, and more evidence. An inability to predict a large disaster is evidence, not proof, that people aren't good at predicting large disasters.(The same thing applies to believers, too. You can't present smoking-gun PROOF that psychic phenomena exist, either - you can only present what you believe is evidence.)As you can see from other peoples' posts, not everyone believes that psychic abilities should predict disasters (or at least, not large-scale disasters that won't directly put them in harm). To them, your position that an inability to predict a large-scale disaster disproves psychic ability is a straw man.Now, that said, I believe people who claim that they can predict a major disaster before it happens should put up or shut up, so to speak, if they want to be taken seriously. The hits should not be explainable by chance nor by simply having a keen sense of the obvious, nor by being so vague that any number of events that were bound to happen could "fulfill" them.


I can respond on two levels. First is that in studies of non-locality (Google it or YouTube it) science has indeed proven that psychic connections exist between people whether they are aware of it or not. This was a first.
Second, psychism has little to do with predictions. Psychism has to do with being sensitive to a person's aura or "vibes" and understanding something about their condition. The impressions that come through may or may not deal with conditions in what we call the future. What the future "is" is still a mystery.

Even Einstein remarked, "Time and distance are not conditions in which we live, they are modes in which we think."

Psychism is not to be confused with mediumship which may also deal with a person's condition, but the source in mediumship is a celestial one -- perhaps the person's guides and teachers or loved ones. In this, mediumship can be far superior to psychic impressions.