James Randi tests Psychometry

Back


Psychometry put to a test in 1991. The show was JAMES RANDI: PSYCHIC INVESTIGATOR make in the UK in 1991

Channel: People & Blogs
Uploaded: July 21, 2007 at 5:29 am
Author: riedsa

Length: 00:07:01
Rating: 4.91
Views: 61964

Tags: Randi Psychometry

Video Comments:
OurCelestialOrigins (October 15, 2008 at 9:59 am)
Another great book that can give clairity on these sorts of matters is Mechanistic and Nonmechanistic Science written by Richard L. Thompson, phd in mathematical probability.
In the book he elaborates on how one cannot be able to explain phenomina such as the above in simple mechanistic jargen without taking into account the great nature of the "self".
Again I point to the ancient Vedic text known as the Bhagavad Gita As It Is.
Be well friend
ancientcian (October 14, 2008 at 9:30 pm)
he cant prove that it does not exist, only that in that instance, under normal, monitored circumstances, that that woman could not do it. not much, but its something. he recorded, he tested, and he concluded. thats less that can be said for any pseudoscience. being a spiritual man myself, i dont deny that there is greater things out there or things that we cant explain, but i believe that science can record them, and i believe science is a spiritual search, the same as any form spirituality.
antivert (October 14, 2008 at 5:16 pm)
You may be right, that psychic phenomenon are too subtle to be discovered or measured.

In this case, the psychics have absolutely no basis for performing any sort of "service" whatsoever. If they can't perform, they can't perform.
OurCelestialOrigins (October 14, 2008 at 8:11 am)
Yes, you may think that it may be a way of just denying actual proof to give validation to this sort of thing, yet what makes you think that things like this can be substantiated with such a simple test.

The research of subtle perception is not something that can be so easily observed by using tests in the same likeness of material tests. The factor of consciousness is not on the same observational platform as the rest and must not be ruled out.

I suggest reading Bhagavad Gita As It Is
LookMaNoBrains (October 12, 2008 at 10:06 am)
loooooool another fraudster owned!!!
randi's the man !!!
ancientcian (October 12, 2008 at 7:16 am)
with that logic, you can prove anything, ever.
OurCelestialOrigins (October 10, 2008 at 1:50 am)
Unfortunatly a lot of faith is needed to get good accuracy with these kind of experaments
because the beleifs of the people around influence the field of consciousness and thus influence the result.

If you doubt me, research the observer effect.
ancientcian (October 12, 2008 at 7:07 am)
isnt that kind of a way around of revealing the truth? i mean, if thats true, then it could never, ever be proven or disproven, because if it doesn't work, the person could just say "i guess you just dont believe enough". quite frankly, thats a ridicules theory. an idea that has no proof that has no excuse that has no proof. its foolish.
Z1Z12 (September 27, 2008 at 10:26 pm)
I think polite critisism is okay and indicates an intelligent person who is not narrow minded or fixed in their opinions. When I was in the forces we had two officers, one was charming, polite and approachable, the other was rude and agressive. Which one would you go to for help or advice? Which one's OPINION would you respect?
skakke74 (September 27, 2008 at 11:39 am)
Do you think James Randi would have taken that risk? What if some of them would come forward after the show and thell the press? James Randi is far to intelligent to do such a stupid thing. Why can´t you just accept the real world?