D_Plew wrote:
I think that lottery is a neat idea. It's like a charitable fundraiser... only the charity is someone rich enough to waste money on lottery tickets.
Neat.
Ever thought ...
Sort:
Mar 25, 2020
0
#24
TheYear9876 wrote:
If a psychic ‘ saw’ a plane was going to crash and he alerted the airline and they cancelled the flight how could the Psychic have ‘seen’ what he ‘saw’?
First come, first serve?
Mar 25, 2020
0
#25
Jesuisowlie wrote:
morphyblanca1 wrote:
Your figures are made up. You are the one who made yet another one of your assumptions. I Never said you would believe, just that the article existed. In fairness to you the article came after you posted this. But I wonder why you doubt subjects that you make no effort to study. In example it's supposedly the pineal gland responsible for this and there are legitimate scientists who think so. A species of fish has it's eyes connected to it's pineal gland. Things like this are not enough to convince me either but there are no grounds to say impossible by the same token. You show an affinity to majority opinion but nothing more. It is a huge concerted effort on your part to impose your opinion on forums without ever just saying there could be a much larger picture maybe. Your forums depend on nasty vehement deniers to marginalize other opinions. Notice how your claiming ridiculous instead of saying there isn't enough evidence to support it? That is not the scientific formula. For all that you know, it is despite this, absolutely impossible to have a fair and constructive conversation with you. If you judged this of yourself, I would not be judging you. Chess is the perfect example of this fallacy. If there were a 32 man table base, then the majority would discover their movement to be faulty. What cannot be proven with can still be true and what many people think is proven can also be false. There has been talk of psychic ability for thousands of years and it won't just go away with the wave of your hand.
WTF?
Right, this is some awesome writing source material here! This level of character is neat.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#26
morphyblanca1 wrote:
Elroch congratulations your post has just substantiated my own. I'm now a known psychic because I told you everything you would do and you proceeded to do it despite this."No they really don't" https://www.thecut.com/2018/07/so-are-psychics-real-or-what.html Yes they really do but are ostracized for it. "Yes, over 10 years after. How many lottery tickets do you think are bought by "psychics" worldwide in an average year?" 2 years after it's dated 2011. I have posted 11 years after. There are no statistics to support psychics buying tickets on a large scale. There are a majority of frauds but this doesn't eliminate the possibility. "You surprise me. I would have thought a fish having its eyes connected to its pineal gland would leave no room for doubt." This was believed to be scant evidence of the pineal playing a role in seeing. "Que?" You promote secular scientism not science. "For sure. Seems to have leapt to a different topic though." Meaning that unlike a teapot in space, there is a large percentage of people who think the mind has unproven capability. "There has been talk of dragons too. Psychic dragons, however, are just silly." This is absurd to say as a comparison of something that has been documented wondered about so long. Corrupt and biased theory's are on par with psychic dragons. The correct answer of course is that there is not the instrumentation or control setting to measure such a thing if it exists as it could be involuntary. The way you talk to people makes it much to tedious to bother with. https://www.silive.com/coronavirus/2020/03/did-psychic-sylvia-browne-predict-the-coronavirus-12-years-ago.html something like this is makes it more than a teapot and there are enough predictions like this to warrant investigation. That's unbiased.
Hi.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#27
m_connors wrote:
Well, I don't think anyone saw that coming, either.
Lol, same.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#28
Fionn-McCool wrote:
in fact, come to think of it, it’s very rare to see the headline “sidekick wins lottery” also. it’s quite extraordinary.
Neat, true.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#29
Not a new premise, what would you do, if you could, to stop Hitler? Then, think the same about Trump.
Mar 26, 2020
0
#30
TheYear9876 wrote:
If a psychic ‘ saw’ a plane was going to crash and he alerted the airline and they cancelled the flight how could the Psychic have ‘seen’ what he ‘saw’?
Spooky ...
Mar 26, 2020
0
#31
Hey Elroch, instead of wasting time with you, a picture is worth a thousand words. Sorry to hear about your malfunctioning pineal and conscience. Now why don't you come out of that fort you built out of aliens and anthropology charts and stop being a nerd.
Mar 26, 2020
0
#32
22/11/63 is a novel by Stephen King about a chap who returns to 1963 to stop Lee Oswald shooting Jack Kennedy . Its a love story too.
Worth a read , and no spoiler!
If someone "saw" a plane was going to crash and alerted the airline---that person would be investigated.
Mar 26, 2020
0
#36
Yeah, but if I could see the future with regularity, then I'd have done it in such a way that I'd be happy with however that investigation turned out 
Mar 26, 2020
0
#37
Elroch wrote:
... why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
If at any point in the future humans are able to travel through time, then why don't we ever have visitors from the future?
Mar 26, 2020
0
#38
TheYear9876 wrote:
If a psychic ‘ saw’ a plane was going to crash and he alerted the airline and they cancelled the flight how could the Psychic have ‘seen’ what he ‘saw’?
People usually explain it with multiple timelines. When you alter what would have been the future you create a branch with your universe traveling down a new path, and the old one has the plane crash as you saw.
lol im looking at these chat s and thinking "hOw pEsSiMiStIc aRe ThEsE pEoPlE???"
Your figures are made up. You are the one who made yet another one of your assumptions. I Never said you would believe, just that the article existed. In fairness to you the article came after you posted this. But I wonder why you doubt subjects that you make no effort to study. In example it's supposedly the pineal gland responsible for this and there are legitimate scientists who think so. A species of fish has it's eyes connected to it's pineal gland. Things like this are not enough to convince me either but there are no grounds to say impossible by the same token. You show an affinity to majority opinion but nothing more. It is a huge concerted effort on your part to impose your opinion on forums without ever just saying there could be a much larger picture maybe. Your forums depend on nasty vehement deniers to marginalize other opinions. Notice how your claiming ridiculous instead of saying there isn't enough evidence to support it? That is not the scientific formula. For all that you know, it is despite this, absolutely impossible to have a fair and constructive conversation with you. If you judged this of yourself, I would not be judging you. Chess is the perfect example of this fallacy. If there were a 32 man table base, then the majority would discover their movement to be faulty. What cannot be proven with can still be true and what many people think is proven can also be false. There has been talk of psychic ability for thousands of years and it won't just go away with the wave of your hand.
WTF?