Question about the supernatural act

[Aster]

Dear friends.

Why could a supernatural act not stand on its own ? Why does it need to be repeated in order to be determined (by mr. ignoramus)as a real or true supernatural/paranormal phenomenon or quality ?

I believe that setting people up for such rules is going against one of the most sacred belief systems of man. Religious doctrines like 'lead us not into temptation' can be heartfelt inner truths, no matter wether you are religiously, spiritually or skeptically engaged.

What I am trying to say is this. Suppose you unexpectedly do something supernatural that you know you cannot willfully repeat ever again. Rediculous example ? Your friend is blind. You suddenly feel empowerd by Jezus and you tell him that he can see; hence his eyes can see for ever more. Next time you try this on someone, it doesn't work.

To others, this is brushed off as a coïncidence. You may therefore subscribe to that point of view, but something inside will keep telling you that you are the one who was able to perform a supernatural act at least once.

These experiences, my friends, are the true examples whowing the nature of supernatural acts and abilities. The supernatural act may just be a one time thing. Perhaps with the sole purpose to allow oneself and other people never to forget about their true supernatural makeup and, woowoo, always remain close to their spiritual and religious higher being. On the other hand, the supernatural act is usually a given, and not something that can willfully be acted out and tested.

You, who just caused your friend to see, feel inside that this was something supportive of a supernatural act. It was something that came into being because of the help and doing of something that made you supersede yourself for one single moment; an act and an idea that will alienate you if you're not carefull.

Now, how can you ever prove that what happened was in fact a supernatural act ? The answer is you can't. For one because ignorent experts have no means to measure that one time act. Secondly, you are unable to reproduce it and thridly, a woowoo, people in general are no longer in touch with the supernatural being from which they are offspring.

Last but not least, to be tempted by money is the least of what should motivate us to want to prove the existance of the supernatural act. Money is a means to get somewhere but, woowoo, it also blinds us for the life in which higher plans exist for us all.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[shemp]

I just wish to point out a correction. His name is Mr. Randi, not Mr. Ignoramus. Perhaps you have confused him with someone you see in the mirror?

 

[geni]

Dear friends.

Why could a supernatural act not stand on its own ? Why does it need to be repeated in order to be determined (by mr. ignoramus)as a real or true supernatural/paranormal phenomenon or quality ?

Science has this habit of asking for things to be reproducible before accepting them. If the event is a one off how do know it really happened?

I believe that setting people up for such rules is going against one of the most sacred belief systems of man. Religious doctrines like 'lead us not into temptation' can be heartfelt inner truths, no matter wether you are religiously, spiritually or skeptically engaged.

The challange doesn't apply to innner truths but to real world testerble caims.

What I am trying to say is this. Suppose you unexpectedly do something supernatural that you know you cannot willfully repeat ever again. Rediculous example ? Your friend is blind. You suddenly feel empowerd by Jezus and you tell him that he can see; hence his eyes can see for ever more. Next time you try this on someone, it doesn't work.

To others, this is brushed off as a coïncidence. You may therefore subscribe to that point of view, but something inside will keep telling you that you are the one who was able to perform a supernatural act at least once.

Perhaps but you can't prove that.

These experiences, my friends, are the true examples whowing the nature of supernatural acts and abilities. The supernatural act may just be a one time thing. Perhaps with the sole purpose to allow oneself and other people never to forget about their true supernatural makeup and, woowoo, always remain close to their spiritual and religious higher being. On the other hand, the supernatural act is usually a given, and not something that can willfully be acted out and tested.

Incorrect dowsing and homeopathy (to chose just two examples) both claim to be something that can be willfully acted out.


Last but not least, to be tempted by money is the least of what should motivate us to want to prove the existance of the supernatural act. Money is a means to get somewhere but, woowoo, it also blinds us for the life in which higher plans exist for us all.

I am sure that these people would be very happy to recive a donation of $1000000 so if you can claim the money do so and help the starving children in Africa ( or whatever other charity you would like to support).

 

[Aster]

Hey, in the land of the blind one eye is king, Shemp.

I started off writing 'Dear Randi Sheep'...

Then I remembered a good lesson by teacher Earthborn; to always be nice and respectful to all skeptics if I want to be treated likewise. Sorry, I still flunked.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[wayrad]

Is it my imagination, or has Aster suddenly acquired a remarkable command of colloquial English?

 

[T'ai Chi]

How is an inner truth a truth if it is not an outer truth as well?

 

[geni]

How is an inner truth a truth if it is not an outer truth as well?

That depends on your defintion of inner truth.

 

[Aster]

inner truths

How is an inner truth a truth if it is not an outer truth as well?

By an inner truth I mean a truth you learn from the well of knowledge inside you. It is both mentally and emotionally experienced, you can feel it's consequence somewhere anchored inside your body. This, as opposed to what you can learn from the senses as an outside truth, which does not mean that both truths cannot be one and the same. Unless you are blind, outside truths have to ring true inside you, touch base with the inner well of knowledge. Otherwise some part of you will either not accept these truths of embed them inside an inner conflict.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[Aster]

geni

Science has this habit of asking for things to be reproducible before accepting them. If the event is a one off how do know it really happened?

I understand this very well and my post is challeging this viewpoint. It seems incorrect to assume science to be the only entity that can determine wether an act is genuinly supernatural. Science proves to be not effectively equipped to do so.

The challange doesn't apply to innner truths but to real world testerble caims.

I believe you don't understand what I meant here. To be tested after the supernatural act is like being led into temptation which, in essence, is leading you away from your natural path of spiritual growth. woowoo...

Perhaps but you can't prove that.

Exactly, and that will frustrate you, won't it ?

Incorrect dowsing and homeopathy (to chose just two examples) both claim to be something that can be willfully acted out.

I did write 'usually'; hardly ever write in absolute terms. Dowsers may very well be the exceptions to the rule but your point is where dowsers often go wrong. See, dowsing works most perfectly when there is no willful act interfering with the process which, unfortunately, is hardly ever the case. When conscious, there is hardly an escape from volition, see. Try it, and you'll know what I mean. The best results of supernatural act come about when we are being apparently unaware or actively, personally unconscious.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Aster:

First you are claiming that there exists supernatural events which cannot be willfully done or reproduced, thus falling outside the scope of the JREF challenge.

Then you claim that it is actually bad to do things willfully, for gain (esp. money).

Fine! Then what is your problem? You can't win the JREF price, and you don't want to. End of story.

Hans

 

[Aster]

mrc Hans

Fine! Then what is your problem? You can't win the JREF price, and you don't want to. End of story.

Don't be so hasty, Hans. I leave here as soon as I am basically convinced that what happened to me will not happen again. In other words I still believe that the awareness is there where the focus is, which includes the minds ability to correctly predict a future event. My motivation and also teacher Earthborn's : what happend once can happen again. The JREF prize is not my motivation.

I see JREF primarily as a debunking institute, out to debunk people who claim to have supernatural powers. This is fine in itself. On the other hand I see no evidence or discussion that supports the JREF statement that the foundation is committed to support and conduct original research into the supernatural, claims such as my own for instance, just because the fact that any such claim has to be reproduced which, in my opinion, rules out many a claim worth investigating for genuinity. Think about the potential of people and what the world can learn from them. What is it that makes people have (correct) preminitions, visions or clairvoyant dreams that pertain to the future ? What does that say about such a person, what does it say about reality and about the evolution of people in general ? It seems to me that JREFs attitude surpasses this and caters to the skeptic markets alone, indirectly suggesting that no supernatural act or ability can in fact exist outside their prelimitations. I think this summs up my reason to post this thread.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[Powa]

Aster, what's the point of even bringing up the one time supernatural events when you can't test or confirm them? We have no means of knowing whether they are real or not. Even if they were real, they are irrelevant to us, because they're unrepeatable.

 

[uneasy]

I understand this very well and my post is challeging this viewpoint. It seems incorrect to assume science to be the only entity that can determine wether an act is genuinly supernatural. Science proves to be not effectively equipped to do so.

You have to make one assumption there is SOME way to determine if an act is genuinely supernatural. Otherwise absolutely nothing at all can be determined genuine and there's no point in talking about whether anything is genuine or not.

So when you say it's incorrect to assume science to be the only entity that can determine whether an act is genuinely supernatural, you must believe there is something else that can do that.

That sounds great to me. First, I'd love to know what other means can determine whether an act is genuinely supernatural. Then I'd love it if someone could offer $1 million if anything is determined genuinely supernatural through those means. That would be great. The more the merrier!

 

[Beleth]

Why could a supernatural act not stand on its own ? Why does it need to be repeated in order to be determined (by [the JREF --ed.]) as a real or true supernatural/paranormal phenomenon or quality ?

Because there are people, such as dowsers, SB, and JE, who claim that their supernatural abilities are repeatable. So the JREF is going after this low-hanging fruit first.

It's far easier to investigate something that's repeatable. You can get records of what the situation is like before, during, and after the event. An unrepeatable, unexpected event is difficult to get a good "before" account of.

Maybe supernatural events are indeed one-shot things. But one-shot things are beyond the scope of the JREF Challenge.

 

[Chad Noles]

Aster wrote:

I leave here as soon as I am basically convinced that what happened to me will not happen again. In other words I still believe that the awareness is there where the focus is, which includes the minds ability to correctly predict a future event

I don't think anyone could guarantee it(whatever it is) won't happen to you again.You seem to imply that you had a vision of some occurance that later came true.If you experience a vision in the future why not write it down,with the time and date documented with a detailed description of your vision.If you have a detailed vision,list the times and dates of when the event will occur.Compiling a number of these premonitions will either show you that you have a "better than chance" history of these visions,or that it may have just been coincidence.The more detail you can record of your vision,the less likely someone may consider it a chance happening.

 

[Aster]

Chad Noles

You seem to imply that you had a vision of some occurance that later came true. If you experience a vision in the future why not write it down,with the time and date documented with a detailed description of your vision.If you have a detailed vision,list the times and dates of when the event will occur.

Chad. In 1979 I created a painting that shows in detail a burrial scene taking place outside the cemetary wall. In other words, the grave is situated outside of the cemetary. In 1983 I burried my brother in exactly such situation. So, I painted it, signed the painting and dated it. I had no idea that what I was painting was pertaining to any such event to come into reality. But it did under the most parculiar circumstances. In my previous posts I have been writing about this in greater detail and also put a photo of the painting and a photo of the grave and graveyard.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[Aster]

Uneasy

I guess I'm writing my posts for people like you

So when you say it's incorrect to assume science to be the only entity that can determine whether an act is genuinely supernatural, you must believe there is something else that can do that

Absolutely! And obviously.

First, I'd love to know what other means can determine whether an act is genuinely supernatural.

Instead of trying to find this in scientific or religious institutions, or secret societies, perhaps we should search for the parameters of what constitutes true supernatural acts inside ourselves and change our mentalities towards something what we could accept as a supernatural side of life. When we succeed to do this, science and even religion will follow.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[Aster]

But one-shot things are beyond the scope of the JREF Challenge.

I say put your money where your mouth is and start investigating and administrating supernatural claims of past and future, one shot, two shots experiences of genuine people, whatever, and be willing to inform yourselves and investigate with all means possible to determine wether this indeed could be determined as a supernatural act, wether scientifically proven or not. And then gladly hand over the million.

Rgds.,
Aster.

 

[Zep]

Folks, I seem to recall that the same thing that Aster talks about here has been on this forum before - some months back. Let me just go look for something...back soon.

 

[Rolfe]

Just another guy who wants to rewrite the rules for handing over someone else's money.

Never mind the bit about proving that you can do whatever it is under controlled conditions, just listen to the fairy tale and pay up. Yeah, right.

Even if a genuine one-off miracle were to occur, it wouldn't be eligible for the challenge. For reasons which don't surprise most of us. If Aster thinks that such an event should attract a prize, I suggest he goes and sets up his own version, with his own money. Then see how keen he is to part with it on someone's unverifiable say-so.

Rolfe.