Forums IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ Beyond Human The Amazing Randi's $1 Million Dollar Prize Offer

Dear Friends,

There's a lot of buzz about developing paranormal abilities in this forum.
Due to a train of thought in another interesting thread, it occurred to me
to post this offer by the magician James Randi (The Amazing Randi) of $1
million dollars to anyone who can substantiate their paranormal abilities.
Of course, far be it from me to imply that anyone would steep so low as to
use her paranormal abilities on something as mundane as winning a monetary
prize. And, I know ... you have nothing to prove to anyone else.
But, the world would like to hear from you if you are legitimate,
and one great way to enlighten the rest of us poor souls is to take Randi
up on his offer.

The offer is posted at:

http://www.randi.org/research/index.html

BTW ... in the many decades this offer has been made, no one has won the
prize yet. At the link, there's a long list of applicants who have tried.

Best to all,

HF

This is my opinion only so don't take me seriously.

The problem with a contest like this is most paranormal abilities just can't be "proven."

There's always another "logical" reason that could be the cause of something happening and you can never prove that it was the result of the psychic ability. If I cure someone's tumor using Reiki and some scientist sees me doing it and does the before and after tests, there's no proof that that it was the Reiki that cured it. It really comes down to the judgement of the person. He can decide that it was the healing or he can decide the tumor was going to go away anyway on it's own or he can decide the body healed itself or he can decide it was the results of drugs taken months ago finally kicking in or he can decide it was a misdiagnosis in the first place. You can't prove the Reiki did anything.

When you use a paranormal ability you don't effect the world around you. You effect the world within you, which is what you're directly after to begin with.

In the movie, "What the bleep to we know" they said that...

"Given that we are only aware of 2,000 bits of information out of the 400 BILLION BITS of information we are processing per second ... when we argue against new knowledge... how much of our "awareness" is arguing? How can we know everything about all the things that we don't know?"

This information was also presented (maybe slightly differently) in the Photoreading course.

What does this mean? It means that I can do something and other people can't see it happening! A psychic presents an event and this event happens in a part of the 400 billion bits of information that the researchers brain picks up but because they are only consciously aware of 2000 bits of information per second, there's a high probability that they won't be able to sense it.

Visible psychic phenomenon really can't be observed unless the participants are willing and open to the possibilities. John Edwards (the biggest d**ch in the universe ) can't read someone who doesn't believe it's possible. Skeptics can't be read- to THEIR satisfaction. After you deal with hundreds of people like that it's gotta get old and no amount of money is worth it.

I'm sure Sylvia Browne (or someone else on that level) can read a skeptic and get them to "prove" it to themselves that it really happened but a person like that ALREADY HAS a million dollars, or more. They already have all the publicity they can handle and are probably sick of it and are going the other way in their lives - trying to spend more time doing what they want to do- and that doesn't include being in the presense of skeptics.

Besides, if someone really does take that challenge and does win it, Randy will make more than a million publisizing it to the world and any real psychic knows this and knows they can make far more than a million ACTUALLY USING their powers in their own way, on their own time.

There's a much believed "lightside" rule against using your powers to make money. If you help someone for a fee, that's fine. Going for fame or publicity has a price. Any real psychic will know that it's not worth it. And if you are really psychic you'll know in advance or not what's going to happen and if the guy's just going to shoot you down then you're not even going to try anyway.

Once again- this is just my opinion. I can't prove any of it.

It may very well be that these things being tested are slippery phenomena. But it is more likely, in my mind, that their lack of reliability in these circumstances means that they don't exist. At least they don't exist in the way we like to describe them.

I like to act as if they do exist. Who knows? Maybe they do? But when push comes to shove, I'd have to say, well, probably not, but their analogues certainly do exist. That is, there are phenomena out there that tend to convince us that we have psychic powers and what-not.

It's no coincidence that in the area of self-help you find a lot of people wanting to believe. They are in pain and looking for answers. They want an attractive answer. And once someone gives them what they want, they'll hang on for dear life.

To me, that isn't self-help. That is looking for a guru or belief system in which you can lose yourself. To paraphrase Stephen Gilligan, self-help can often be an insidious form of self-hatred.

The Amusing Randi is a well-known welcher. I wouldn't waste my time with him.

[It may very well be that these things being tested are slippery phenomena. But it is more likely, in my mind, that their lack of reliability in these circumstances means that they don't exist. At least they don't exist in the way we like to describe them.]

That's exactly right! If a psi ability can't be performed on cue in any and all circumstances in a way that someone else can verify it and measure it - then scientifically it really doesn't exist.

When I was in college I met a woman who had "perfect pitch" - meaning if you asked her to sing a note, like an "A" she could do it and you could verify it using a tuned piano. Or if you played a note on an instrument she would know what it was- A, Bb, C#, whatever. She demonstrated this ability in front of all the faculty and practically half of the school over the course of the 4 years she went to college. STILL, there were people that said there was some trick, perfect pitch doesn't exist, that doesn't prove anything, she memorized the notes, on and on and on. Finally, by her senior year she was so sick of people asking her about perfect pitch, asking her to show off she said she couldn't do it anymore. Her music professors hated her because she had something they didn't have and her grades sucked even though she really should have been teaching them. In her senior year she told all her professors she was "lucky" and guessed the right answers and said that perfect pitch is really just a theory. Her grades went up and everyone started treating her like a normal person again.

Luckily, this woman was my roomates girlfriend so she felt comfortable telling me "the truth." She told me that every note has overtones that your ear can't hear but your body can feel. Not only did she know what note was being played but she knew what all the overtones were. Not just with individual notes, but chords too, and not just with one instrument, but with a whole orchestra- people have no idea what they're really being exposed to when they hear orchestra music. What you actually hear is just the tip of the iceburg.

Being around her was absolutely intoxicating. She talked about stuff no one else talked about, stuff no one really cares about. But then my roomate was a d**k to her and she was gone.

That's the way the world treats people with gifts. They're jerks to them and they go away.

No one's going to win that contest. Those that could have, have already gone away. Either that or they just turn to the DarkSide and just start scamming people.

Hi,

The Amazing Randi is like the members of the Flat Earth Society, who refuse to believe the Earth is round, or the man who wrote a book about the Moon landings being faked. He's so convinced that anything psychic is a fraud no proof would be sufficient to win his prize. In fact no science is accepted universally. Look at the ongoing debate about global warming and on evolution. There is disagreement even in the scientific community. Randi's $1,000,000.00 (if it exists) in perfectly safe in his bank account and none of us should take his offer seriously. He makes the offer for self promotion only.

Richard

Dear Coldrayne,

While I appreciate the sharing of your experience with someone with
perfect pitch, I would like to point out that this human ability has
been scientifically studied since the early 20th century by musicologists
and psychologists. For example, consider the nice summary of what we know
about it at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_pitch

Perfect pitch happens to interest me greatly as a scientist, because I am
also a musician, and I've researched some aspects of perfect pitch myself.
In my experience, the negative attitudes against those who exhibit perfect
pitch do not come from objective investigators of this ability (who
easily recognized it as legitimate from the very beginning), but from
jealous musicians who don't have this ability. From a scientific
standpoint, I can assure you that we acknowledge perfect pitch as a
legitimate ability which can be objectively demonstrated and explained,
and we have also developed methods whereby anyone can develop this
ability. It is not mystical at all, and with time and training, anyone so
interested can develop it.


Best to you,

HF

Dear Friends,

What bothers me is a prevailing attitude among most of the regulars of
this forum (at least those who are kind enough to write) that somehow
scientists and their kind are closed-minded fools who are out to push some
baseless view of the universe. I wonder where we as science educators
have gone wrong to impart such an impression, and I take this issue very
seriously, even personally, because it is part of my mission in life to
promote what is good and true in life, and somehow, we are being perceived
as doing the opposite.

I know that the anonymity of the Net offers the opportunity for some of us
to express things which we would probably not voice face-to-face, things
which are quite irresponsible, irrational, and downright hurtful to our
progress in thought. I urge us to be careful in our thought-processes,
and if we write something down for the rest of the world to see, may it be
done out of a completely fair, honest, and loving spirit. Let us remember
that there are impressionable young people who might read these words, and
the sentiments which you express not only reveal your true colors but also
more importantly may affect her for the rest of her life.

While I don't have $1 million to offer to anyone, I hope I have come
across in my participation in this forum as a decent, open-minded,
respectable, level-headed individual, and given my training and access to
testing methodologies and facilities, I would be more than happy to
seriously investigate any legitimate "paranormal abilities" which anyone
has. Contrary to what has been voiced in the above responses, these
abilities can easily be tested in a fair, honest, and objective manner
(just think about it, folks!), and I will personally provide intelligent,
mutually acceptable protocols to serious applicants. I can assure you
that I don't have a personal agenda, as some accuse James Randi as having.
And I will be thrilled to be able to prove the objective reality of any
paranormal phenomena, because I know that if I can, I would be hailed as
the next paradigm-shifter of this age. If anything, it's in my decided
best interest to prove these abilities are legitimate, so, please, I beg
you ... help make me (and you) famous and contact me!

Looking forward to it,

HF

P.S. I believe skeptics like James Randi play vital roles to help prevent
citizens of our current age from being deceived by the many cons and scams
out there. For example, my good friend "Anti-Guru" B. Premanand travels
throughout India debunking Siddhi magicians, who would otherwise
shamelessly deceive their fellow human beings and enslave them to
ideologies which do not serve us well anymore. For example, consider what
he has easily uncovered about these unscrupulous cons who use deception to
ensnare and take advantage of the innocent:

http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/yuktibaadi.htm

I like how he put it: "I am also happy that my visiting West Bengal has
helped hundreds of youths to start thinking."

I can assure you, he has received much more venom by the Siddhis than
you're spitting at Randi. But without skeptics and debunkers like them,
our civilization would quickly collapse back to the dark ages where
superstitions and irrationality ruled. Whether these are the same tricks
used throughout time by Siddhis is impossible to verify, but I believe
that only now do we enjoy the intellectual freedom to expose those who are
the true deceivers and hurters of humanity. Why bash science's ability to
discern the actuality of a matter? Why stubbornly hold on to untruths which don't
serve us well anymore? It's time to become truly enlightened, folks, and to
become truly free from baseless trances rooted in deception.

OH ... and again, believe me, I would all LOVE to confirm the legitimate
expression of any paranormal ability, so don't hesitate to write me if you
have such an ability or know someone who does. If you're legit, we will
together change the world. On the other hand, if you're a deceptor, I'll
quickly be able to figure you out in an objective, fair manner, as well as
openly post the protocols and results on this forum. Thanks!

I think the major problem anyone has with your methods HT, is that it is destructive testing.

Anyone with any TALENT would be ripped to shreds, not unlike going through an IRS audit, a cavity search, a deprogrammer, or something similiar. Why would any sane person subject themselves to that?

Most are born with a gift and share it with the world for Love not money or fame.

" Do Good in Secret" is my advice to any who consider your offer.

Dear jeffdengr,

I hope I've come across as fair and decent. Everyone I know in my circle
of scientific associates is also. No, I would not be destructive at all.
On what prejudicial basis do you make that claim? Why be the willing
instrument of the very separation and antagonism which you correctly seem
to oppose? This is the kind of misinformation which bothers me, and which
I'm striving to correct. I wish you knew me in person. You would find
that I'm as well-mannered, courteous, nice, fair, and objective as I try
to convey myself here. If you're ever in the Chicago area, I would love
to meet you, and we can hopefully bridge a gap which is non-existent in
actuality.

Best,

HF