• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, 11 years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Any Evidence of Authentic Predictions?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Might I also add that while you think our minds are so complex and science can explain all of it quite rationally , you are forgetting one crutial point in this...we "typically" only use a very small portion of our brains , and scientists have yet to figure that anomally out. So let's suppose for a moment that a rare few of us actually know how to tap into that area that is normally dormant, oh that's right, we don't have to supose, because those wonderful scientists you are so fond of have done proper scientific studies that shows an area in our brain that we do not normally use lighting up when people meditate and/or visualize images, oh yes and even during "healing" sessions....so take that knowledge into your small quadrant of your brain that normal people use and chew on some new enlightened info for a minute. We will never grow as a race as long as we continue to allow ourselves to be limited in our scope of possibilities. (Btw, Albert Einstein said that). He also said "the intuitive mind is a sacred gift , the logical mind it's faithful servant.We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift"....you are a prime example of this very true and deep statement. Open your mind and listen to your inner voice on ocassion, you may learn something new. Wouldn't that be a wonderful experience?:)
Furthermore, I have looked at an overwhelming amount of info and what I have found is that science doesn't know and cannot explain everything yet, so when I experience something on more than a mere ocassion or two and then I test it and see it to be true then yes, I tend to not want to clutter my mind with more info from people who "think" they can explain it all away, especially if those people are pyschologists or psychiatrists...they are the least likely for me to listen to . Do you not realize that those very people who are accredited with our mental well being are the number one profession to commit suicide? Why would I read anything they have to say and take it for truth. (However in the past I read a lot of this subject and took courses in college on how the mind works, I know enough now to know "they" do not have a clue as to what is really going on.....YET.)
 
Yeah. I just want to point out that the idea that we use only a small percentage of our brain is completely wrong. Ask a neurologist. Or, if you don't know one, ask Google. Look up "brain use myth." I'm just pointing it out so that you don't start your thoughts out with an idea that's false. Science education is important.
 
Following the "letter" Angel is right as far as using our brain. Still, the flexibility of the brain surprised scientist as we learned more and more. Now, it's simply taken for granted. We are indeed in the infant stage of our knowledge. Somehow, every generation thinks we have or will reach the pinnacle. The all encompassing theory of everything. Only, thing is in a few years or months or centuries we find that we didn't know all that we thought we knew. Science is a series of disciplines and not a "entity." Today, I can see because of the "science" of my glasses. I forgot my blood pressure pills but not the coffee this morning so I misused the medical science today. :confused: I'm still drinking the coffee but I will switch to water this afternoon. I use science in my work when I research the mental and medical compliance of people. I drove to work today because of science. So, it's a wonderful thing or wonderful "gift" that mankind has tapped into. Now, let me tell you a little of the other part of life. I have lost people I love and hold dear. I have "felt" their presence and on at least one occasion actually had a visit. I have peace as I grow older because of my "faith" that the universe wastes nothing and that we are more than the sum of our parts. I know of a mother who lost a child in a senseless act of nature. Her faith in a higher purpose sustained her and she has eternal hope that no amount of "science" as wonderful as it is can match. She also has other children but the one she lost is never far from her. Being human is a wonderful and tragic ride. Some look at the world and see nothing beyond the by product of an evolutionary drive. Honestly, I don't see it that way. But, I do understand the feelings of those that do. Anyway, I do think there is a time to study and a time to research. But, there is also a time to reflect and go forward with your own inner life. After all, we can always play the "my scientist can beat up your scientist." "My God can beat up your god" But after awhile it's all noise and no signal is getting through.
Peace. :cool:
 
The brain does keep surprising us, and how it affects us is evidenced by some of the posts we see in this forum and by some of the ways people react to others (myself included). I just think it's important that we are aware of out own psychology and how it makes us formulate our thoughts and ideas.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Yeah. I just want to point out that the idea that we use only a small percentage of our brain is completely wrong. Ask a neurologist. Or, if you don't know one, ask Google. Look up "brain use myth." I'm just pointing it out so that you don't start your thoughts out with an idea that's false. Science education is important.
Click to expand...

You are correct. If there was some portion of your brain that wasn't being used then blood wouldn't go there and it would die and rot, or at least atrophy in your head. An unpleasant proposition.

Another way to look at the notion that we only use some small percentage of our brain is to realize that we are only aware of a small portion of brain activity. Most of the machinery is thrashing in the background to produce our consciousness and to carry on processes within the body that we are generally unconscious of. Imagine an entire movie studio and all that goes into making a movie. The viewing public is only aware of a very small portion of the studio represented by the movie emerging from it. I think we can view brain activity in a similar manner and rightly say that we are only aware of a very small portion of overall brain activity based on the portion that emerges as consciousness. There is a lot to our brains and our minds that we are casually unaware of by design. Weird things, from the perspective of the conscious mind can and do happen in there.

One thing to think about Angelo, is that the design of the human brain/mind system produces an isolation of human awareness from any direct experience of ourselves and the real world we find ourselves in. Therefore all of our observations are actually being made of a simulation (our consciousness) of something else (the real world.) Our perception of the real world isn't just filtered or skewed, it is a complete production. There are things occurring in the real world and in real world human interaction, that we are casually unaware of due to our design specifications, so to speak.

Strange things do happen and I think some of the inexplicable nature of these things can be attributed to the reality isolator (think photocoupler) design of our perceptional apparatus. Some strange events seem symptomatic of real world events beyond the capability of our brain/mind systems to correctly represent much less interpret. To dismiss all of it out of hand is a mistake though. Certainly there are stories like that have been shared here, that are simply inexplicable by any means.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Hamlet, Shakespeare
 
trainedobserver said:
You are correct. If there was some portion of your brain that wasn't being used then blood wouldn't go there and it would die and rot, or at least atrophy in your head. An unpleasant proposition.

Another way to look at the notion that we only use some small percentage of our brain is to realize that we are only aware of a small portion of brain activity. Most of the machinery is thrashing in the background to produce our consciousness and to carry on processes within the body that we are generally unconscious of. Imagine an entire movie studio and all that goes into making a movie. The viewing public is only aware of a very small portion of the studio represented by the movie emerging from it. I think we can view brain activity in a similar manner and rightly say that we are only aware of a very small portion of overall brain activity based on the portion that emerges as consciousness. There is a lot to our brains and our minds that we are casually unaware of by design. Weird things, from the perspective of the conscious mind can and do happen in there.

One thing to think about Angelo, is that the design of the human brain/mind system produces an isolation of human awareness from any direct experience of ourselves and the real world we find ourselves in. Therefore all of our observations are actually being made of a simulation (our consciousness) of something else (the real world.) Our perception of the real world isn't just filtered or skewed, it is a complete production. There are things occurring in the real world and in real world human interaction, that we are casually unaware of due to our design specifications, so to speak.

Strange things do happen and I think some of the inexplicable nature of these things can be attributed to the reality isolator (think photocoupler) design of our perceptional apparatus. Some strange events seem symptomatic of real world events beyond the capability of our brain/mind systems to correctly represent much less interpret. To dismiss all of it out of hand is a mistake though. Certainly there are stories like that have been shared here, that are simply inexplicable by any means.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Hamlet, Shakespeare
Click to expand...

Well said Rick. I don't dismiss anything out of hand. I just want people to understand that there are always other possibilities. It's never good to be close minded, such as when you think you had a psychic experience but refuse to see that there may be other explanations. It could be an actual psychic experience, or it could be something else, which is basically all I'm trying to say.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
I just want people to understand that there are always other possibilities. It's never good to be close minded, such as when you think you had a psychic experience but refuse to see that there may be other explanations. It could be an actual psychic experience, or it could be something else, which is basically all I'm trying to say.
Click to expand...

Those are good points. While some events defy rational explanation that doesn't mean any other explanation that gets imagined has more validity by virtue of that fact. Just because science can't explain it doesn't mean that superstition or imagination will supply a better answer, far from it.
 
Wow, this a long thread, started in 2006. Three books I'd recommendumm human consciousness are John r searle's mind: a brief introduction. He's a prof of philosophy at uc Berkeley. Very readable, and lots in a small little volume. Second is Susan blackmore's conversations on consciousness, an anthology of her actual interviews with, as I remember, about 25 leading scientists who study just what consciousness is: is it a freestanding thing separate, or is it a byproduct of the firing of the neurons only? Harder slogging is christof koch's quest for consciousness. The first two are especially just get comfortable and read and enjoy and really think about YOUR OWN perceptions, your own consciousness. We are indeed intriguing critters indeed. Kim
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Yeah. I just want to point out that the idea that we use only a small percentage of our brain is completely wrong. Ask a neurologist. Or, if you don't know one, ask Google. Look up "brain use myth." I'm just pointing it out so that you don't start your thoughts out with an idea that's false. Science education is important.
Click to expand...


I agree it's a myth we only use 10% of our brain. However, even though we may be using the whole thing biologically I have to wonder how many of us have plenty 'room' leftover in terms of learning new skills e.g learning a musical instrument, improving our math, a new language etc.
Probably we all really under-use our potential, which is a different argument.
 
@Angelo - agreed. i often wonder if this whole 'we only use....' thing came about by a misunderstanding about the 'potential' aspect as opposed to the quasi-physical aspect?
 
Gene Steinberg said:
One of the most debated issues is whether or not someone can predict the future. Such people as Sean David Morton have made ongoing claims of possible future events. So far, at least, as far as I'm concerned, I've not seen any evidence to demonstrate that accurate predictions are being made before the fact.
Click to expand...

I would be curious if Mr. Morton was able to predict that on December 20, the federal court would order him to appear for a February hearing on SEC charges that he defrauded investors of almost six million dollars (as UFO Watchdog so ably reported.)

For that matter, did Ed Dames predict that his Ukrainian marriage would not end on good terms.

But picking on these two is so easy that it is almost unfair.
 
I've predicted with 100% accuracy that there would be storms,
earthquakes, volcanoes, disease, wars, and nuclear accidents
and I predict the same in the years to come. Let me rephrase
that for more effect:

As the water bearer enters the house of our age ​
Saturn bears witness to Hades rage​
Mountains cast fire and the Sun's walls crack ​
While sick men quarrel amid clouds of the Stormbringer​
- nostradumbass -​

So there you go. Just make it vague enough, throw in some bits of myth and
doom, format it as a bad poetic quatrain, and presto ... the Prophet speaks!
 
The closest thing I know to an actual "kind" of prediction that came true ( not political or economic) was a book written years before the sinking of the Titanic that described almost exactly the events that happened. The book was "Futility; or The Wreck of the Titan".
Much as I dislike using Wikipedia as a reference, here's the link: Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .
The similarities are so alike it's eerie.

----------------------------------------------------------
Although the novel was written before the Olympic-class Titanic had even been designed, there are some remarkable similarities between the fictional and real-life counterparts. Like the Titanic, the fictional ship sank in April in the North Atlantic, and there were not enough lifeboats for the passengers. There are also similarities between the size (800 ft long for Titan versus 882 ft 9 in long for the Titanic[2]), speed (25 knots for Titan, 22.5 knots for Titanic[3]) and life-saving equipment.
Beyond the name, the similarities between the Titanic and the fictional Titan include:[4]
  • Both were triple screw (propeller)
  • Described as "unsinkable"
    • The Titanic was the world's largest luxury liner (882 feet, displacing 63,000 long tons), and was once described by newspapers as being "practically unsinkable".[5]
    • The Titan was the largest craft afloat and the greatest of the works of men (800 feet, displacing 75,000 tons, up from 45,000 in the 1898 edition), and was considered "unsinkable".
  • Shortage of lifeboats
    • The Titanic carried only 16 lifeboats, plus 4 Engelhardt folding lifeboats,[6] less than half the number required for her passenger and crew capacity of 3000.
    • The Titan carried "as few as the law allowed", 24 lifeboats, less than half needed for her 3000 capacity.
  • Struck an iceberg
    • Moving at 22½ knots,[7] the Titanic struck an iceberg on the starboard side on the night of April 14, 1912 in the North Atlantic 400 miles away from Newfoundland.
    • Also on an April night, in the North Atlantic 400 miles from Newfoundland (Terranova), the Titan hit an iceberg while traveling at 25 knots, also on the starboard side.
  • Sinking
    • The unsinkable Titanic sank, and more than half of her 2200 passengers and crew died.
    • The indestructible Titan also sank, more than half of her 2500 passengers drowning.
    • Went down bow first, the Titan actually capsizing before it sank.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know what to think of this book.
 
I was listening to a lecture by Dean Radin during lunch break. There was a recording he played, a part of an interview by Sir Alec Guinness about his prediction of James Dean's death.

I had totally forgotten about that anecdote and actually I had always thought that wasn't a claim the great british actor had made himself but a claim that had been made about him.

In the interview, Guinness said that while James Dean was showing him his new car, something "almost like a different voice" came over him and told him to warn the younger american actor that if he kept the car, he would be dead by the same time a week later. Guiness said that he gave that warning, and Dean didn't listen. A week later James Dean had his fatal accident in said new car.

I just googled to see if I could find the actual interview, but didn't find anything. I'll just post the link to the Radin lecture:

"Survival of Consciousness" with Dean Radin and Julie Beischel (part 1 of 3) | IONS Library | Institute of Noetic Sciences

The interview can be found at about 57:00 min.

It seems that Guinness never made any other claims about "psi"-related stuff, but my feeling is that if this had been a one-off experience, he wouldn't have said anything. If I imagine something like that happening to me for the first time, I'd say nothing, out of fear to sound like I've gone crazy. Only if that had happened before and the warning had turned out to be correct, would I consider that.

But maybe he was the kind of person who would say something like that just on the spur of the moment. Or he did have other premonitions, but those weren't that remarkable and didn't involve other famous people, so he kept that private. You never know with these creative actor types. If I remember right, Anthony Hopkins claims he has had similar things happen.
 
exo_doc said:
The closest thing I know to an actual "kind" of prediction that came true ( not political or economic) was a book written years before the sinking of the Titanic that described almost exactly the events that happened. The book was "Futility; or The Wreck of the Titan".
Much as I dislike using Wikipedia as a reference, here's the link: Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .
The similarities are so alike it's eerie.

----------------------------------------------------------
Although the novel was written before the Olympic-class Titanic had even been designed, there are some remarkable similarities between the fictional and real-life counterparts. Like the Titanic, the fictional ship sank in April in the North Atlantic, and there were not enough lifeboats for the passengers. There are also similarities between the size (800 ft long for Titan versus 882 ft 9 in long for the Titanic[2]), speed (25 knots for Titan, 22.5 knots for Titanic[3]) and life-saving equipment.
Beyond the name, the similarities between the Titanic and the fictional Titan include:[4]
  • Both were triple screw (propeller)
  • Described as "unsinkable"
    • The Titanic was the world's largest luxury liner (882 feet, displacing 63,000 long tons), and was once described by newspapers as being "practically unsinkable".[5]
    • The Titan was the largest craft afloat and the greatest of the works of men (800 feet, displacing 75,000 tons, up from 45,000 in the 1898 edition), and was considered "unsinkable".
  • Shortage of lifeboats
    • The Titanic carried only 16 lifeboats, plus 4 Engelhardt folding lifeboats,[6] less than half the number required for her passenger and crew capacity of 3000.
    • The Titan carried "as few as the law allowed", 24 lifeboats, less than half needed for her 3000 capacity.
  • Struck an iceberg
    • Moving at 22½ knots,[7] the Titanic struck an iceberg on the starboard side on the night of April 14, 1912 in the North Atlantic 400 miles away from Newfoundland.
    • Also on an April night, in the North Atlantic 400 miles from Newfoundland (Terranova), the Titan hit an iceberg while traveling at 25 knots, also on the starboard side.
  • Sinking
    • The unsinkable Titanic sank, and more than half of her 2200 passengers and crew died.
    • The indestructible Titan also sank, more than half of her 2500 passengers drowning.
    • Went down bow first, the Titan actually capsizing before it sank.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know what to think of this book.
Click to expand...


The Titan in a nutshell is about the hubris of humanity... funny how we have a habit of turning fiction into reality.

Anyway nice post exo_doc. Not to get off topic but the current theory as to why the Titanic did not capsize once the bow had gone under is that she was being trimmed.
This means she was being flooded on purpose to keep her upright.... the engineers did all they could for as long as they could. Being a ship nut myself I can tell you it is extremely rear for a ship not to turn over once she hits the stability point.. A ship the size and displacement of the Titanic should have turned over, they mystery for me is why she did not as her sister Britannic did turn over as she sank and quite quickly.

Anyway well off topic.

Peace all
 
stonehart said:
The Titan in a nutshell is about the hubris of humanity... funny how we have a habit of turning fiction into reality.

Anyway nice post exo_doc. Not to get off topic but the current theory as to why the Titanic did not capsize once the bow had gone under is that she was being trimmed.
This means she was being flooded on purpose to keep her upright.... the engineers did all they could for as long as they could. Being a ship nut myself I can tell you it is extremely rear for a ship not to turn over once she hits the stability point.. A ship the size and displacement of the Titanic should have turned over, they mystery for me is why she did not as her sister Britannic did turn over as she sank and quite quickly.

Anyway well off topic.

Peace all
Click to expand...

Titanic didn't capsize because Leonardo Dicaprio and Kate Winslet wouldn't have that really dramatic moment on the rear deck when it went under.....duh!:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top