ESP

Cijadrachon cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Tue Jun 23 14:01:27 EST 1998


K C Cheng <kccheng at postoffice.idirect.com> wrote:
>F. Frank LeFever wrote:

>> Consider: we 
YOU
>need great electronic amplification to detect  brain-generated electrical activity even when electrodes are right on
>> the scalp!
Well, then I guess you still have a lot to learn....  
(Like we all...)

But when you learn more about it you wil learn that energy does not
stop there mystically, but continues.

>> It is irresponsible of you to assert or even to suggest as a
>> possibility that elecrical fields of one brain can influence activity
>> in another brain several feet away--to say nothing of several miles
>> away--
Yeah, especially as that has been asserted thousands of years ago in
so many cultures on all continents I ever heard of apart from Africa
(and there it might just be my lack of knowledge), and that it can go
hundreds and thousands of km.
So that on a level it would be rather rediculous to assert that, which
would be like someone popping out of the bush and stating with pride
that he or the people he is with asserted that 2 and 2 are 4.   
But I guess some are simply out for international embarrassments.

>... neurons, I believe.
Your generaliziation of neurons, your not watching glia and body cells
and so on in this context MIGHT not be correct.

>>>>

>The rest has been discovered and proven by me. 
Long version?

>> for how this could occur; preferably a rationale with testable
>> hypotheses (i.e. predictions)
...about how you you fart down to the last deatail and how the brain
perceives the tones and pictures and all the rest changing when
searching for a T.V. station manually using some button...

Funny thing being there are those who might actually sit down and
waste years trying to come up with a rationale with testable hyptheses
about how one farts and predictions...
While others simply eat some beans and wait a bit in a chair outside
at sunset to then demonstrate others certain obvious things...

>I never suggested that.  Instead, I used the term "boosted:" amplified
>for others to detect millions miles away. =

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>  ... like radio stations
I find it more similar to T.V.

>> >having their own  broadcast frequencies,  man detects brainwaves of
>> >fellow men and women because their brainwaves are at the same or
>> similar frequencies.
Might be mistaken but don't recall the same, though my brother was
fairly similar and not so stressing for my brain to run.
Found that interesting.

I still did not get how you are getting thoughts, though.

Long description?

And how many percent of the thought stream of the other one do ou
estimate you tend to get?

What distances?
What changes are there with what distance (roughly)?

And what would you say are in average the differences between men and
women and maybe certain peoples?

>> Would you care to say what these are?  
Taboo.

>(F.)
>>Naively, I would think that  someone whose DOMINANT frequency at the moment was 8-10Hz might not
>> detect someone with a higher frequency (e.g. 40Hz?) or lower...
Aah, yes, that is naively.  Let me explain it naively: You have more
than one area of the brain and an entire body, too, and different cell
areas are often seeming to use pretty different energies - maybe not
to confuse each other too much - , it are not just frequencies, that
is just some sort of close Westie-word, but it is far more stuff and
for all I know most of it is not named in the West  though some of the
major ones are named withing slang or old language.
You can alter energies as can a trained other person. (And maybe some
who can do it by nature?) So the connection does not necessarily have
to be established by one alone the whole time.
And if I train long in certain ways and the other brain is fairly used
to me giving it certain (magical) perception energy shift orders, then
it is easier to do that. I do not know about long distance
communications apart from what I heard from others,
and therefore cannot say how things are there concerning that, but it
might be similar.

>> Anyway, what we normally exhibit is a complex mixture of frequencies,
>> with much variability from moment to moment.
Sorry, don't know that one in English, sort of from certain children
stories:  Hexe Schrumpeldei zur Hexe Schrumpelmei: "Geschwindigkeit
ist Zauberei!"  ;-)
Meaning you have to be fast....though with the delay by the gap
between both brains I do not see how even with parallel processing
reading the thought steam is possible:

Cheng  and maybe others: How do you make inner stages for that?


>> Sounds like it needs a lot more work before you present it or any of
>> its components in public.  
Let me guess YOU are the public?  I do not mind to hear what people
are working on even before it is finished, to the opposite.

>Sounds like you have not done the basic groundwork in neurophysiology yet, even at a bibliographic or didactic
>> level.  
Sounds like neurophysiology has not done the basic groundwork of magic
yet, not even at a historic or telepathic level. 

> I have read some of kccheng's earlier misleading replies
>> to innocents posting inquiries in this newsgroup...)
Many have different theories and all can be mistaken, wether it are
theories about memory systems or replies to others or something else.
How you know that they are innocent is a riddle to me. And I guess
that if people are not stupid, then of ten partially wrong answers
they might still able to draw quite some value, noticing the
contradictions and selecting intersting aspects.
If it really bothers you I guess you could correct wrong stuff.

> Just like this one,  any time you see me giving out  "misleading" =
>replies,  please point out. I'll explain myself  to avoid  "misleading"
>the  "innocent."

Certain people have a tendency not to exactly say what is wrong and
why and to maybe say how it is instead.

>Blessed are those who are humble. 
Why?  

> Down with nuisance. =
Down to where?

At least with nuisances reaching a feverish degree that would be
interesting...   

Except that there are nuisances that are sort of funny to observe,
too.

...Did not read the rest yet, in case it is not explained there: What
is ESP?

Have you ever had brain area perceptions in context with telepathy?
Or headaches in specific areas?

And do you happen to know anything intersting about the term "second
face"?



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list