that thought has a tangible power, enabling human beings to be creators of their own world.
The only such effects we see like this is on a quantum level. Even then it is minimal. The evidence does not support such effects on a macroscopic scale. Really I think it sounds like new age metaphysics trying to call itself science like how Intelligent Design is really creationism in a lab coat.
I disagree with the title, science fiction is more fiction than science. This would be like saying Jedi can move things with there mind. And then take Mages answer, make it sound more aggressive, and there you have my answer.
Really I think it sounds like new age metaphysics trying to call itself science
You said that really well, Mage, and I couldn't agree more. The commitments that scientists within a particular discipline take on are the same across the board as far as methodology and verifying results. On this front, Noetics isn't really science at all. The article linked to in the OP was also very very biased. I mean, good for her for being mentioned in a Dan Brown novel - that's more than I can say. But this doesn't provide any actual credence to the field, and it's pretty much universally rejected by "real scientists." It's hard to blame people for feeling like they have a connection to the world around them. We want to be important and significant in a measurable and real sense. But the simple fact is, we're not.
Shortly after the bombing of 9/11 the whole world was so focused in on the tragedy, and so many people thought about the same thing, that there was a perceptible change in things happining at the WTC's that people in Noetic science picked up. Also, the scientists that conduct these types of tests, have been able to prove that a person has a soul. They put a person, who was willing and about to die, into a chamber that was completly air tight, pressure controled and climate controlled. They also put a extremly sensitive scale, to use a completly unworthy word, on the floor and waited. At the instant of death, the test subject became noticably lighter. In a completly controled environment, and with no way for the weight to escape, the man became lighter. This proves that not only do humans have some part of them that is invisible, can pass through solid objects, and is connected to them until the exact time of death, but it also proves that it has mass, and therefore could our perception of the earth.
I will try to find a less biased article, until that juncture in time, I want to ask you this. If you people are so opposed to archaic ideas that people have (namely religion) than why are you also opposed to a ground breaking new form of science? It has been extensivly tested and proven. If you are against moving backwards, why are you also against moving forwards?
Shortly after the bombing of 9/11 the whole world was so focused in on the tragedy, and so many people thought about the same thing, that there was a perceptible change in things happining at the WTC's that people in Noetic science picked up.
Evidence?
Also, the scientists that conduct these types of tests, have been able to prove that a person has a soul. They put a person, who was willing and about to die, into a chamber that was completly air tight, pressure controled and climate controlled. They also put a extremly sensitive scale, to use a completly unworthy word, on the floor and waited. At the instant of death, the test subject became noticably lighter. In a completly controled environment, and with no way for the weight to escape, the man became lighter. This proves that not only do humans have some part of them that is invisible, can pass through solid objects, and is connected to them until the exact time of death, but it also proves that it has mass, and therefore could our perception of the earth.
So, now the soul is physical? I don't think so. When folks become lighter moments after they have died it's due to a number of physiological changes. I believe you lose 20 or so grams from the air escaping your lungs. Again, where is your evidence for this article?
I will try to find a less biased article, until that juncture in time, I want to ask you this. If you people are so opposed to archaic ideas that people have (namely religion) than why are you also opposed to a ground breaking new form of science? It has been extensivly tested and proven. If you are against moving backwards, why are you also against moving forwards?
All I can do is quote Mage, new age metaphysics trying to call itself science
So your saying your not in control of your own mind?
Try not to derail this topic. I am simply saying that I do not possess the ability. Just because I can't lift 300 pounds of weight doesn't mean I am not in control of my mind. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.
I will try to find a less biased article, until that juncture in time, I want to ask you this. If you people are so opposed to archaic ideas that people have (namely religion) than why are you also opposed to a ground breaking new form of science? It has been extensivly tested and proven. If you are against moving backwards, why are you also against moving forwards?
Pseudoscience breaks ground? Since when? There is a consequence of thought here, though not the one you are referring to. The tests are not true, a non biased test could prove that. Now I just need to find a few people willing to die so I can retest this...
Try not to derail this topic. I am simply saying that I do not possess the ability. Just because I can't lift 300 pounds of weight doesn't mean I am not in control of my mind. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.
I'm not, I'm simply pointing out an error in your claim. If the world is nothing more than a creation of your mind and not the result of some external source, then it should be possible to alter the world around you simply by thinking it. if you are in control over your own mind and your own mind is creating this world than you should be able to control it to alter the world so you can lift 300 pounds. If you can not this would indicate you are either not in control of your own mind, or there is more to this world than just it being a creation of your own mind.
Honestly this seems to be the sort of pseudoscience born of seemingly solipsistic ideas. Our minds are no more in control of the world than a dog's mind, or a chimpanzee's mind. Humans have almost identical brain function, with the exception of an enlarged and more fully developed frontal lobe. Even if this area of the brain could control reality, we would still see other animals with more evolved frontal lobes being able to alter reality before our eyes. So far there is absolutely no scientific evidence to back these claims, and they are NOT science in any sense of the word.
I'm not, I'm simply pointing out an error in your claim. If the world is nothing more than a creation of your mind and not the result of some external source, then it should be possible to alter the world around you simply by thinking it. if you are in control over your own mind and your own mind is creating this world than you should be able to control it to alter the world so you can lift 300 pounds. If you can not this would indicate you are either not in control of your own mind, or there is more to this world than just it being a creation of your own mind.
Maybe the world I create does not want me to be able to exercise my mind in those ways, or want me to lift 300 pounds.
Just because I am living in a world entirely my own, does not mean I do not have consequences and restrictions.
There are some theorems you can understand, but doesn't mean it is possible at will. There are restrictions.
I REALLY wish people would stop trying to use the word 'theorem'. So far I've only seen it used once correctly in this forum and that was in an instance where someone was correcting someone else. If you have to improperly use technical jargon to sound like you know what you are talking about you probably don't have a clue.
On Topic:
Maybe the world I create does not want me to be able to exercise my mind in those ways, or want me to lift 300 pounds.
I suppose that could be a (highly unlikely) possibility, however if indeed you HAVE created such a world of your own volition then you would have the ability to alter it. If you are unable to do so then it is an extremely strong indicator that you are NOT the creator of such a world and are bound to a world which you do not have control over in such a manner.
