Experiment 002 - Cognitive Future Building

paladius

paladius

Temporal Navigator
Hypothesis: The future is a manifestation of the present world collective conscious and subconsciousness'. Any future can be manipulated through the beliefs and mental trains of a group of individuals.

The Test: We, as members/users of the TTI, will suggest that a new member greet us on August 10th, 2007 in this forum. This new member will post for all to see a set of predictions that shall be verifiable for the remaining days of August 2007. These predictions shall be unique and charaterisic of true knowledge of events yet unfolded.

Your Input: As a contributor to this experiment, post a reply to this stating that you believe.
 
How could I test my own hypothesis if I were sabbotage the results? Im not doing this to trick anyone, I am doing this to test a theory.

The post clearly states that any prediction of the future should be unique and verifiable. Such an example might be "American Airline flight XXXX will be shot down with a surface to air missle on August 22nd, 2007". This statement, if posted on 8.10.7, and if verified on 8.22.7 would be enough proof for me.

I would not expect to hear un-unique statements such as "there will be conflick in the mid-east during the last week of August". That statement is too general and not unique.

And even I were to post accurate and specific predictions that came true, wouldnt you still be impressed?
 
"And even I were to post accurate and specific predictions that came true, wouldnt you still be impressed?"

This is my point exactly. If you were indeed the mysterious poster that was planning to post anyway
then why did any one have to believe? What kind of experiment would it truly be then?
Once you post the info and people read it and the ripple effect came into play would the events truly be the same anyway? Or are you looking to see if peoples beliefs in what you post actually cause "event altering" in itself?
 
Yes, and either. This is an experiment. Where it leads us, we don't now know. The goal is to see if "specific events" about the future can be posted on this website prior to the events happening.

How ever it may come about, it would interesting and require further testing if events posted on this site did manifest into reality.
 
I believe. There. Now I expect to see this guy on August 10th.
 
paladius,

Hypothesis: The future is a manifestation of the present world collective conscious and subconsciousness'. Any future can be manipulated through the beliefs and mental trains of a group of individuals.

The Test: We, as members/users of the TTI, will suggest that a new member greet us on August 10th, 2007 in this forum. This new member will post for all to see a set of predictions that shall be verifiable for the remaining days of August 2007. These predictions shall be unique and charaterisic of true knowledge of events yet unfolded.

Your Input: As a contributor to this experiment, post a reply to this stating that you believe.
Click to expand...

The experiment doesn't test the hypothesis. The hypothesis concerns three (undefined) terms - manipulation of the future, collective consciousness and (collective?) sub-consciousness. It proposes that we can manipulate the future using these two terms as the method.

The experiment calls for someone to make predictions - but the method suggested makes no reference to manipulation of the future, "collective consciousness" nor does it indicate how we would discriminate between some "collective consciousness" based outcome, outcomes based on other criteria or how we determine that the future was/wasn't "manipulated".

The experimental design does not define what is meant by "prediction" or the term "predictions shall be unique and charaterisic of true knowledge of events yet unfolded."

If you don't narrowly define your terms (or at least define them in unambiguous terms) you end up with vague "predictions" that are only subject to debate but which are wholly unsuitable for statistical analysis, i.e. it is an unambiguous "hit" or it is a "miss" based on the defined terms of the experiment.
 
Here's an example of another undefined term in your design.

You didn't define what "I believe" has to do with the experiment. But your instructions were pretty clear.

So, you posted "I believe"

Recall posted "I want to believe"

Pamela posted "I believe. Now there..."

Other than yourself, no one has followed your instruction to the letter. But if I can infer what you want from the statement (collective consciousness...think the Minuet in G) I can equally infer to some degree what the other posters meant:

You actually believe
Recall doesn't necessarily believe but would like to believe
Pamela doesn't believe but issued a challenge to your experiment

How do we now account for their input into the experiment? Like it or not, they did offer input and if mental input is the experiment, if it is real, then their thoughts will have some impact on the outcome - but how do you unambiguously account for their input?

Loose experimental design will sink any and all experriments. You have to look for "leaks" and "noise", determine how to fix them and how to filter them out if you can't eliminate them, and you have to figure out how to filter them out without significantly altering the data and, again, souring the experiment.
 
Darby, I think you are overlooking the basic objective. I will elaborate a little further....

In 1994 or 1995 I met a fellow who used to work for a governement think tank in Venturta California. I met this person at Ocean Beach california and actaully lived with him and some others in a nice big beach pad. This fellow, Peter B., was very unique in his knowledge and he showed me some very interesting (and slightly disturbing) things.

Peters experiences in Ventura were such that this group of people would create a news headline. Something unique and not general. The would write it down on apiece of paper in a conference room with no knowledge of actual or predicted sequences leading to this event. They all believed that they could make this fictional event happen in reality if they could get enough of the world collective conscious to believe that this event would happen. (There are a few posters on this web forum who I think know what I am talking about.) Apparently larger evenets require more brains to believe. This whole idea suggests that human thought patterns are an energy within itself that can have interaction with physcical materials. The Ventura group would plant news stories such as "tressure ship found off coast of ________ containing $50M of gold bullion". Within days, weeks or months, the Ventura group was having a success rate around 20%. Which is pretty impressive if you understand that these "predictions" were fabricated out of thin air in a conference room. One out of five event were comming true.

When I lived with peter we did smaller scale experiments and I being there myself, I can not honestly tell you that I do not think this is real. I believe.

The experiments we did ranged from local events, weather patterns, earthquakes. With the earthquakes we were having 40-50% success rates. We would predict a scale AND location for a new quake. we would mark them on maps and wait until the desired hour. Almost one out of two were predicted with accuracy in the magnitude and locations of these earthquakes. We were able to create 4-5 richter scale quakes where we chose to.

I went off to finish a degree and kept in touch with peter and his reaserch until December 1999, when he disappeared.

So, this forum, I thought might be a good place to revive some of this research and test the waters again. It does not require one to type letter for letter "I believe", in fact it does not even require a posted response. The energy comes from within the human mind. It is like teh elusive Ether flowing through the universe. I just figured that with people declaring "I believe this can happen and we can do this" in writting, that other readers of the post who may be less inclined to respond in a written post, would have more reason to believe in the experiment and the stronger the beliefs, the less people needed to manifest the event.

hope this helps.
 
Just as I thought. Know what really sucks is when people try to create bad realities instead of good ones and use individuals beliefs to do so as I have found several have attempted these things in the past. Especially on the weak, innocent, or immature.
I think that was the basic thoughts behind the new book "the secret" that just came out recently.
Although I do not agree with everything in the book a lot of good points were made.
I actually like Betty Eadies book "The Ripple Effect" better. That is one of the best books I have ever read.

I have a very powerful belief system as I have found out so I have to guard myself against such a thing and keep my mind on the positive things. Positive attracts positive and negative attracts negative. Our thoughts do indeed become things and our words do indeed produce fruit.. good or bad eventually.
Infact if certain things could be magnified you would possibly see things manifesting out of the air. Thoughts have frequency keep this in mind. For such inventions may even be made in the future.

However I have much wisdom in that area now.
Guard your hearts and your beliefs and do not let anyone try to manipulate you.
Keep your thoughts on positive things and good things and things that bring joy and happiness.
Do good to others so good may come back to you.

It is really that simple.

I don't worry so much about the future anymore. I put my trust in God ...not "time travelers".
 
Pamela,

you have great wisdom indeed. I like your idea about thoughts having frequency...any idea what range? Also, I like the idea of creating a future of good and happiness. So, maybe this expierment should be altered to see if the collective conscious on this forum can produce an outcome with a positive result.

Do we have the collective cognitive power to make a star shine as bright as the moon on the night of August 10th? This would require a large supernova explosion many, many light years away that would have happened many many years ago (from the perspective the light).

Do we have the power to create a burst of light from the heavens as bright as the moon that will last all night for the whole world to see?

I believe its possible.
 
"Do we have the collective cognitive power to make a star shine as bright as the moon on the night of August 10th? This would require a large supernova explosion many, many light years away that would have happened many many years ago (from the perspective the light).
Do we have the power to create a burst of light from the heavens as bright as the moon that will last all night for the whole world to see?"

Aug 10th again? Do you have that day off or something? lol
Wow. you really want to do it big huh? You want to cause a supernova explosion? How guy-typical of an idea is that? lol. You do realize the devastation in the immediate surroundings of that star don't you and its impact on everything else?

Let me guess....Eta Carinae ?
 
paladius,

So, this forum, I thought might be a good place to revive some of this research and test the waters again. It does not require one to type letter for letter "I believe", in fact it does not even require a posted response.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...the only government (sponsored) think tank that I recall in Ventura during that time period was Anacapa Sciences. The rest were military - who don't usually ask pals to join in with their research on a whim.

In any case the quote above is another example of faulty experimental design. If there are no parameters then how can you determine what might be the cause-effect relationship? One could just as easily say that the future caused the past effect (the headlines).

BTW: Art Bell ran this experiment about five years ago with his audience of millions. No effect reported. But the experimental design was pretty loose - for radio entertainment and not for scientific research.

I'm not questioning the experiment itself - just the design. If you want reliable results, something that can tell you that there is an effect and this or that was a likely cause, you have to tighten it up.

If a headline is posted here what would you consider to be a "hit"? That should be stated in detail before the headline is posted.
 
"I went off to finish a degree "

Can I ask what your degree was?

Also...should we contact NASA or should we just let it surprise them? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
PAmela, maybe you want to propose an event which is more feminine? I figured a burst of light might be inspiring to many people and if it came from an undeveloped solar system, no harm done. Those things do happen anyways, very rarely, but maybe we could push the time table for one to August 10th, or 11th, or 12th, etc. I have that whole week off. ;-)

If the burst of light still causes you anguish over little space bugs getting a tan, then maybe we can try to heart shaped clouds?

And Darby, yes, my friend was thrown out of the think tank project for some of his "questionable" behavior. He was slightly disgruntled about it all, as he had good life then, and a few years later was basically poor and without the status previously had. When I met him, he shared that knowledge and we started to experiement.
 
Back
Top