http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/shermer.html
One
has to understand psychic phenomena holistically. Material gain is not usually
part of the psychic deal. As to pre-cognition, there have been empirically validated
cases where there was accuracy in the prediction - the Prof Gary Schwartz experiments
with Chris Robinson - who British espionage service M15 chiefs employed him for
his exceptional pre-cognition skills in catching terrorists in England relatively
recently. Chris Robinson is on record for advising US Embassy in the UK about
terrorist attacks in New York - before the 9-11 attack. The usual closed minded
response to deny credit to the prediction is to claim it was a 'fluke' - even
when the odds went into billions to one of the incident coming by chance each
time.
The closed minded skeptic is a product of his environment and shows he is unable or unwilling or both to transcend the environmentally induced Eurocentric perception of the world. It takes patience, skill and intelligence to rise above the 'boggle threshold' and overcome the negative programming which was part of the conditioning process in the environment where we grew up.
Let's face it if a closed minded skeptic was born into a family of anti-U.S. Moslem extremists somewhere in the Middle East with daily intense conditioning of those beliefs, it would be very likely he would see the world from that rigid, singular biased perception.
That is why I keep on repeating that to validate beliefs one has to apply scientific method - empiricism. There is absolutely nothing objective about closed minded skepticism - in fact, technically, anti-psychic skepticism is a 'belief.' And any belief which cannot be independently substantiated is inevitably subject to complete invalidation.
Example: The closed minded skeptic says, "Nothing happens when we die …" There is no objective authority to validate that statement. Where's the 'independent' objective evidence for that? Absolutely none! The skeptic is making a most heinous and egregious intellectual blunder when he cites 'subjective authority' for making that statement! That statement would be inadmissible at law and inadmissible in any informed debate.
I usually find that skeptics have not done the reading, the research, the investigating. Why have they not rebutted the great works of the physicists and other most brilliant psychics who walked this planet earth - these the last 100 years or so? Some of these scientists are cited in my homepage and also I have in Chapter 2 in my book A LAWYER PRESENTS THE EVIDENCE FOR THE AFTERLIFE www.victorzammit.com
Would these most brilliant scientists and others from around the world who used their scientific skills to investigate and then conceded the existence for the afterlife get together in a conspiracy to fool the people of the world? The level headed response would be of course not!
In my fairly intense investigation I myself experienced direct contact with those who passed on. There is nothing in this world to explain that the phenomena were physical in origin. I do predict that before too long, non physical energy - the most important discovery in human history - will be accepted by the majority.
Of course, there will never be sufficient objective evidence for those negatively prejudiced against impartially who do not want to accept the evidence.
Finally let me quote Dr Dean Radin, "… skeptics who continue to repeat the same old assertions that parapsychology is a pseudo science, or that there are not repeatable experiments, are UNINFORMED not only the state of parapsychology, but also about the current state of skepticism!" (p 209 THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE - The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena.)
Victor January 2004
Victor's Response
to skeptics' "there is no afterlife...."
The closed minded skeptic who stated: "There
is no afterlife … if psychics were real why don't they predict race winners
… Las Vegas results, terrorist attacks … " is into what psychologists
call 'rationalization to avoid cognitive dissonance.'
He's got rigid untested
ideas into his head - so that when he encounters information which is fundamentally
inconsistent with his entrenched cherished beliefs, he panics. The inconsistent
(albeit empirically validated) information creates dissonance -giving him too
much anxiety. So that to offset the anxiety and other negative physical and psychological
response -- such as acceleration of the heart beat, etc, to obtain homeostasis
(internal equilibrium ) he becomes irrational and goes into extreme denial, negativity,
sarcasm … rationalizing his cherished beliefs etc to save his ego. I notice
how emotional he gets on TV when he tries to defend his closed minded skepticism.
The closed minded skeptic is a product of his environment and shows he is unable or unwilling or both to transcend the environmentally induced Eurocentric perception of the world. It takes patience, skill and intelligence to rise above the 'boggle threshold' and overcome the negative programming which was part of the conditioning process in the environment where we grew up.
Let's face it if a closed minded skeptic was born into a family of anti-U.S. Moslem extremists somewhere in the Middle East with daily intense conditioning of those beliefs, it would be very likely he would see the world from that rigid, singular biased perception.
That is why I keep on repeating that to validate beliefs one has to apply scientific method - empiricism. There is absolutely nothing objective about closed minded skepticism - in fact, technically, anti-psychic skepticism is a 'belief.' And any belief which cannot be independently substantiated is inevitably subject to complete invalidation.
Example: The closed minded skeptic says, "Nothing happens when we die …" There is no objective authority to validate that statement. Where's the 'independent' objective evidence for that? Absolutely none! The skeptic is making a most heinous and egregious intellectual blunder when he cites 'subjective authority' for making that statement! That statement would be inadmissible at law and inadmissible in any informed debate.
I usually find that skeptics have not done the reading, the research, the investigating. Why have they not rebutted the great works of the physicists and other most brilliant psychics who walked this planet earth - these the last 100 years or so? Some of these scientists are cited in my homepage and also I have in Chapter 2 in my book A LAWYER PRESENTS THE EVIDENCE FOR THE AFTERLIFE www.victorzammit.com
Would these most brilliant scientists and others from around the world who used their scientific skills to investigate and then conceded the existence for the afterlife get together in a conspiracy to fool the people of the world? The level headed response would be of course not!
In my fairly intense investigation I myself experienced direct contact with those who passed on. There is nothing in this world to explain that the phenomena were physical in origin. I do predict that before too long, non physical energy - the most important discovery in human history - will be accepted by the majority.
Of course, there will never be sufficient objective evidence for those negatively prejudiced against impartially who do not want to accept the evidence.
Finally let me quote Dr Dean Radin, "… skeptics who continue to repeat the same old assertions that parapsychology is a pseudo science, or that there are not repeatable experiments, are UNINFORMED not only the state of parapsychology, but also about the current state of skepticism!" (p 209 THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE - The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena.)
Victor January 2004
No comments:
Post a Comment