psychic chess masters

That is not going to happen as the Horse is Psychic!

The sciency tv shows really are not very high quality (with a few exceptions). I prefer podcasts.

Rationally Speaking is the one I've been into lately. It's free on iTunes. 

Yeah I probably feast on too much hash from them. It inspires lazy thinking.

Rationally Speaking is particularly interesting because it is pretty heavy on philosophy. 

New Psychic message the subject of Bishop vs Knight thread coming soon.

If I were psychic, I wouldn't be wasting my time playing chess. I'd be busy conquering the universe.

I suspected this type of forum post would pop up soon when I was thinking about chess last year.

Whoa -- are you saying you caused it?  With your mind!?

Perhaps a common trait among all psychics is that they're lazy and lack ambition.  Maybe that's why we don't have any tangible evidence for it.

All notion of clairvoyance is in snide. I think if you want to understand anything close to the psychic element of chess, you look to the games of Capablanca and Frank Marshall, with slow, deliberate and mathematical precision they observe the defeat of their opponents--if you want to say its "psychic" then okay, but I prefer the term calculated mathematical--but there is nothing psychic at all, it is all the application of 1) deliberate tactics and 2) defensive counters by which all games are won, with the occassional won based mainly on a serious blunder by the losing side (but also highly common in all tournas).  But, really if you try to say the word 'PSYCHIC', you have to realize that all you really meant in all seriousness was the ability of one player of very high skill level to FORESEE exactly the developing strategy and tactical combinations of his opponent.  But to me it is less psychic, which indicates some higher function in a fakish pseudo-spiritual sense, NOT AT ALL applicable, but then, its more the aptitude and higher intelligence which determine who the winner woul be.  I think it is highly add at the mathematical ability of the player's brain: who can see the board as a whole and preview all of the most advanced possibilities for developments in 5, 10, 15, 20 moves from the present position.  This is nothing psychic, in fact the word psychic derides the human thinking mechanics in the process of calculating a 10-15 move strategy.  GMs or players who can play that well but haven't actually won a GM, for various reasons, are very extremely talented players who can calculate complexities in their brains that improbable most normal people, except maybe advanced mathematicians, astro-physicists, and maybe advanced computer programmers, can never even come close to. The interesting thing is that these guys were not destined from birth: no, they came into the game, decided that thet liked it, and progressed to a extreme high level of playing ability.  But the funny thing, its completely random, almost as if to say that anybody with enough training starting at the right age (which, as well, I will say is quite random, while I disagree with what has been said that to be a GM, you have to start studying in your teens with a teacher), or AT LEAST, starting with enough time to progress very high in skill level.  

I think a standard response, if you asked anyone FM to IM to GM is are they psychic or think they are in some way skilled in psychic ability, the standard response woul be, "God gave me this talent and I kept working on it until I could play very well."  Yes the obverse to the desultory inquiry of 'psychic' is a standard response that God gives the gift, and the student did the work required to ascend (and ascend is in all ways well-meant as the right word) to that level of play.  I think it would be neat to measure by PET scan the use of the brain of a chess master during a game to guage my proposition that they are using parts of the brain that often go untouched by normal people doing routine things.  But its a game, in which winning is always the preference, and in which more study undoubtedly leads to an increase in knowledge, how fabulous is that?

tl/dr, but I did skim it.  I think we likely agree.

I don't know what they are, but I certainly don't rule out aliens. When people see a brilliantly lit, craft-like thing in the sky, report it, the military has the thing on it's radar and sends a jet up to investigate/intercept it, then the pilot's radar also picks it up, then the pilot locks onto the object to shoot it down but all of the sudden the jet's instruments no longer work until the craft-like thing is out of range, then what could it be? 

When the U.S. military investigates the phenomenon, and the only conclusion reached is that these things are not a threat, whatever they are, then what are they?

When a formal investigation is done, the military sends a scientist to "debunk" the sightings and encounters. The scientist goes into the investigation quite skeptical, and comes out of the investigation reporting that his job was to make up something where no explanation can be found, and he actually believes that these things could be of alien origin.

Pilots, police, various military personal, small group sightings, large group sightings, people from all over the world have reported extraordinary, flying, craft-like objects in the skies for over half of a century with no reasonable explanation other than something completely alien to them, but to allow for an alien explanation is considered idiotic to you, estragon? Now that is funny. Go ahead and keep your mind locked up for this subject, estragon, since you really have nothing to add. 

I can't rule out aliens either, and it is certainly possible there is life or intelligence of some sort out there, somewhere.

However the whole UFO field is poisoned with true believers who treat any random anecdotal incident as truth, believeing and spreading the most preposterous nonsense matter-of-factly.

We do not have any evidence currently of alien visitiation, and the countless sightings, pictures and videos have been exploded many times over. You can watch the dramatic special-effect laden "re-creations" on the various bad tv shows, but then google for the real story and all the missing facts. It all paints a pretty dishonest picture. Someone is just making money off ratings and selling books.

When they come, and the evidence is irresitible, though, I will be the first to applaud the news, unless of course I have been incinerated by a phaser blast. But wait for the evidence. When its real, its going to be convincing enough, i think. Until then, you can pretty much dismiss all the psychobabble as a time waster.

Are these guys actually wasting time talking about aliens and UFOs like they were real??

this is un-f!@#ing  believable. 

Way to not read my post (unless you were referring to someone else)

It's true that the phenomenon has allowed for many dishonest people who try to get attention/make money. But there are too many reports to not only make the subject worthy of serious contemplation, but also to have no authority figure whose opinion on the matter would tie it up nicely with ribbons. 

Of course, calling people idiots for being open to an alien-hypothesis on the matter perhaps arises from ignorance.

You should stick to chess if the subject bothers you.

Okay, well my only rebuttal is that I'm quite shore all alleged and perceived UFO sightings have really been advanced government weapons and top-secret aircraft, sometimes arranged by intent and motive.  

The number of reports doesn't impress me, what would impress me is one quality report. And with all the cameras out there, it would seem to be an easier task.

And when people have hobbies like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M6vP8-SbU0 (faking videos) it just raises the bar for what I would consider interesting enough to even give passing attention to, let alone actually believe.

I don't know what you consider to be a "quality report", but the Iranian report from 1976 as mentioned by me previously, has ground witnesses, ground radar, and pilot radar corroborating the event.

(edited)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Tehran_UFO_incident