|
|
Post by stewart edwards on Oct 19, 2011 6:16:24 GMT 9.5
Tamrin I have told you where to go to find the scientific research that skeptical scientists themselves have reperformed and failed to disprove. There is little more that I can do. I'm sorry I thought you were trying to make a point by offering some evidence. You haven't even confirmed if the organization I tracked down is the one you blithely mentioned by a different name. As it stands, I could go to a lot of effort and find nothing (and, judging from your track record reporting items here, I'm guessing it would indeed be a wild goose chase). Still, my finding nothing would not prove the research does not exist (absence of evidence, etc.). If you wish to make a point, you need to back it up. I am interested, as such research has the potential, if solid, to turn much of the intellectual understanding of the world on its head (but I'm not holding my breath). Tamrin, again you seriously disappoint me. |
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Oct 19, 2011 12:14:04 GMT 9.5
Tamrin, again you seriously disappoint me. Stewart, who appointed you for me to dis-appoint? |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Oct 19, 2011 12:22:15 GMT 9.5
Tamrin, as the flag bearer for a range of matters, you attract some expectations from your readers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2011 16:43:49 GMT 9.5
The question concerned Stewart's appointment not Phillip's.
Phillip has put more on the table here than Stewart, even though it is Stewart who raised the issue of these experiments. Stewart made the claim so he needs to come through with the goods.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Oct 20, 2011 6:05:34 GMT 9.5
Phillip has put more on the table here than Stewart, even though it is Stewart who raised the issue of these experiments. Stewart made the claim so he needs to come through with the goods. It is an odd sort of debate where the affirmative side says to the other side, "there is evidence somewhere, which I am requiring YOU to find." This stance goes beyond being "odd" when one recalls recent instances where the same position has been taken and the other side has indeed either tracked down or differently interpreted the alleged evidence and it has been seen NOT to support the affirmative argument (e.g. the non-carbon-based lifeforms and mistaken hospital admissions arguments). |
|
|
|
Post by stewart edwards on Oct 20, 2011 6:37:42 GMT 9.5
Phillip has put more on the table here than Stewart, even though it is Stewart who raised the issue of these experiments. Stewart made the claim so he needs to come through with the goods. It is an odd sort of debate where the affirmative side says to the other side, "there is evidence somewhere, which I am requiring YOU to find." This stance goes beyond being "odd" when one recalls recent instances where the same position has been taken and the other side has indeed either tracked down or differently interpreted the alleged evidence and it has been seen NOT to support the affirmative argument (e.g. the non-carbon-based lifeforms and mistaken hospital admissions arguments). Tamrin, You really are showing your true colours recently. There really was a time when I looked up to you, but now I am wondering why you appear to me to be acting like a tabloid journalist. Tamrin, print of these recent communications and put them to one side, mark your diary and come back to them in 6 months time fresh, and ask yourself from looking coldly at them, are you really doing yourself any favours. Yes your mates here will brown nose you, but I know that you are a better man than this Tamrin, I can feel it in my bones. Let me help you:- 1. I told you where to look to find evidince of telepathy with animals which skeptical scientists failed to disprove. 2. The non carbon based lifeforms Tamrin, reread my words carefully, go on do it now, then ask yourself if you are being honest and resasonable. 3. The "mistaken hospital admissions" well you are arguing against the opinion of a qualified psychiatrist and 4 psycologists who had such faith in the system that they would not have been misdiagnosed. Unles you are more highly qualified and experienced in mental health in the USA then Tamrin quite frankly you have proved nothing, except that you disagree with highly qualified mediacal professionals. Again I pointed you to where you could verify this. Character assassination may sadly be routine stuff by masons Tamrin, but you are a better man than that. It is a pity that you have fallen to the level of sadly too many of your brothers. You were, in my opinion, a better man a decade ago when you didnt resort to such gutter tactics. Remember also with your position in the masonic world your behaviour will be emulated by those around you. I am shedding a tear for you Tamrin. I hope that one day I will regain the respect that I once had for your pioneering approach to the masonic world. |
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Oct 20, 2011 12:04:10 GMT 9.5
I do not intend to sift through all this abuse: Others have been following the threads and can form their own judgment. One point I would however like you to clarify: I told you where to look to find evidince of telepathy with animals which skeptical scientists failed to disprove. Where? You mentioned one organization which does not appear to exist. I found one with a similar name and asked if it was the same group: You didn't answer. The research reported by that group could have been confused with the research you dimly recalled, so I asked if that might be the case: Again, no answer. Go figure!? |
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Oct 20, 2011 14:27:07 GMT 9.5
I do not intend to sift through all this abuse: Others have been following the threads and can form their own judgment. One point I would however like you to clarify: I told you where to look to find evidince of telepathy with animals which skeptical scientists failed to disprove. Where? You mentioned one organization which does not appear to exist. I found one with a similar name and asked if it was the same group: You didn't answer. The research reported by that group could have been confused with the research you dimly recalled, so I asked if that might be the case: Again, no answer. Go figure!? Tamrin, you really are getting tiring, nit picking away, I did answer you and I quote Tamrin all you are doing is making me think less of you for your behaviour. Which is sad. You are indeed correct when you say that "Others have been following the threads and can form their own judgment" and it is all permanently recorded by back up servers for posteity ready for anyone to look at in the years to come and to form their own judgements. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2011 17:06:57 GMT 9.5
It is an odd sort of debate where the affirmative side says to the other side, "there is evidence somewhere, which I am requiring YOU to find." Some call it chutzpah. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2011 17:15:58 GMT 9.5
Tamrin, you really are getting tiring, nit picking away, I did answer you and I quote Is CIWF (Compassion in World Farming) the same as the untraceable group you named CWFT (Compassion in Wildlife Farming Trust)? Until you answer that question Phillip, I and other here have nothing to work with. |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Oct 20, 2011 17:23:37 GMT 9.5
... I and other here have nothing to work with. I find Google an excellent source of leads on all sorts of subjects |
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Oct 20, 2011 19:09:30 GMT 9.5
Tamrin, you really are getting tiring, nit picking away, I did answer you and I quote Is CIWF (Compassion in World Farming) the same as the untraceable group you named CWFT (Compassion in Wildlife Farming Trust)? Until you answer that question Phillip, I and other here have nothing to work with. Smithee, fair comment, all that I can say is that it appears to be. I have my conference papers but that was back in 2006 and things can and do change and I have not kept up to date with them. You could bung them an email and ask for their conference papers from their 2006 London conference on animal sentience. While most of it is obviously related to farm animals dogs came into it, iirc, as they are used on farms. I am sure you will tell me if since their conference, and the handouts given there to the 600 or so attendees, skeptical scientists have now been able to disprove the original research (something which iirc at the conference they were rather proud that skeptical scientists who had tried to disprove, by repeating the tests using double blind tests etc failed to do). IIRC without checking the specifics of the conference papers the test essentially involved monitoring dogs at home, while having their owners out and about, eg at work, and then giving the owners phone calls to tell them to go home to see how the dogs reacted. It was a bit more elaborate than this, but in essence it tested whether the dogs knew when their owners had decided to come home. You should have heard the audiences silence when the speaker talked about how the dogs reacted when the command to go home, changed to going back to work etc, it really was quite breathtaking. As the owners could be many miles away it really does offer pause for thought. While you are at it if you have the time reflect deeply on all of the evidence on animal sentience, for theirn lies the keys to understanding how to communicate with animals, which if like me you ever find yourself in a field of cows, surrounded by them, with a bull and calves, could come in handy  (I actually wrote an account of this on TriTalk some months ago and to my amazement people found it funny ;D) |
|
|
|
Post by stewart edwards on Oct 20, 2011 19:39:47 GMT 9.5
Further to my last post for those who are interested in laughing at me  Scariest thing of my life Went for a stroll on a right of way through a field that appeared empty, a long field, but when I turned the corner I saw this heard of cows in the distance. No great problems after all it isnt the first time I have walked through a field of cows and bulls. Anyhow this cow stares at me over the distance, while the others start wandering up to the opposite field edge all a long way away from me. Good I think for they are giving me space. I loose interest in all but the one that is staring at me (and pretty much now on my path in the distance as he went the oposite way to the others) as I edge closer to the barbed wire fence. A little later I suddenly realise that the cows have snuck around behind me and have mounted a rear attack action against me. I stop and they surround me. With my back to the fence I look straight in the eyes of a squad of precision lined up - shoulders and eyes literally inches in front of me, with more either side. And that big General cow was still staring at me from a distance. So there is me wondering "what the eff.... he.. should I do". So me being me, I start talking to these troops and then to the General. I tell them that I just want to get out of their field and point first to me and to where I want to go. I look to the general and repeat. And the cows on my right side give way so I cautiously turn and step forwards. (seriously) They escorted me very closely behind and at the side right out of that field, and once I was safely out, the General and his lieutennants gave me the eye that says "dont come back" while a couple of the others stuck their heads over for a pat Turns out that somewhere in that field are 3 calves, and that General was I am told a bull. But he didnt get close enough for me to notice and his horns I am told are stumps - hence not obviously a bull from the distance. While no agression was shown to me, it was very clear that this was not simple curiosity and that they did not want me there and they would have put the army to shame at how effective their precision was. I did get the impression that had I shown any agression I would have been well and truly trampled. Now the advice on the bbc etc is to carry a walking stick:shock: For me my Dr Dolittle impersonation worked. Anyhow the point of all this, after a good goggle search it appears that cows may be getting more commonly protective over the past 30 years and that "incidents" may be a bit more numerous than commonly reported on (so probably simply more reporting over past 30 years). Just wondering if any one here with personal experience of cattle and how to walk through their fields? (normally cattle just keep out of my way). Curious cows I have experience off, but this was military precision and a distinctly different "attitude". I realise that with calves there was protecton going on. Sadly my immediate thought on leaving the fields went in this order - I appologied to them and explained that they had scared me - I noted due respect to the still watchful General and his lieutennants - I spoke kindly to the now friendly cows that wanted a pat, and then a little while later I though of - burgers. Seriously I thought of burgers Feel free to take the pis* but I could use some constructive advice on how to handle cattle. |
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Oct 21, 2011 1:34:14 GMT 9.5
The best advice I can give you is not to trespass on other people's private property.
|
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Oct 21, 2011 12:00:36 GMT 9.5
I really enjoyed your story Stewart, I could smell their breath Maybe we should all talk to animals more often than we do. Maybe they can read thoughts or feel thought energy. Maybe to cows were thinking Manburgers and you read their minds ;D |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Oct 21, 2011 13:09:59 GMT 9.5
How do those humans that experience telepathy know when it is their own thought.... Any progress on this? |
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Oct 21, 2011 19:01:29 GMT 9.5
Is CIWF (Compassion in World Farming) the same as the untraceable group you named CWFT (Compassion in Wildlife Farming Trust)? Until you answer that question Phillip, I and other here have nothing to work with.
You could bung them an email and ask for their conference papers from their 2006 London conference on animal sentience. While most of it is obviously related to farm animals dogs came into it, iirc, as they are used on farms.Stewart, While I feel you are asking others to do what ought properly be done by you as the herald of this allegedly sound research (especially as you state you already have the Conference papers!?), I have contacted the CIWF, saying: Greetings, I would like to obtain the research paper from your 2006 Conference concerning telepathy by dogs. I would be grateful if you could supply a copy. Thank you, Philip On their contact page they state they usually try to respond to queries within 48 hours In the meantime the following may be of interest: [/size][/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by paul on Oct 21, 2011 19:31:36 GMT 9.5
It looks like the poor dog did not get the benefit of a double blind experiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Oct 21, 2011 20:05:24 GMT 9.5
I would expect the timed footage of the owner and that of the dog were compared after it was taken, rather than live. If so, at the time of filming each of the two parties were "blind" with regard to the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Oct 21, 2011 20:11:06 GMT 9.5
Stewart, While I feel you are asking others to do what ought properly be done by you as the herald of this allegedly sound research (especially as you state you already have the Conference papers!?), I have contacted the CIWF, saying: Greetings, I would like to obtain the research paper from your 2006 Conference concerning telepathy by dogs. I would be grateful if you could supply a copy. Thank you, Philip On their contact page they state they usually try to respond to queries within 48 hours Tamrin Given that I attended the conference, have the conference papers and notes, and know someone else who attended the conference, there is absolutely no need for me to contact them to ask them for what I already have. Think about it. I was offering you an opportunity to find out more. I rather suspect though that they will tell you that there was no conference on the telepathy of dogs. It would have been better as I suggested if you asked them for the papers on the conference on animal sentience, for in there you should find the info that the speaker talked about on telepathy in dogs, with notes to the supporting research. It is a subtle distinction, but an intern may not find a conference on telepathy on dogs [as there wasnt one] and you may then chose to use this as "evidence". Pity you did not ask for what I suggested you asked for. Anyhow lets hope that you get someone who knows the conference are responding and not a fresh faced school leaver. Henka Difficult to trespass on a public right of way. Could I suggest Tamrin that as you appear to me to be so blinded by debunking everything that does not fit your worldview nowadays that taking a little more time to read what is written before you react may serve you well. I look forward to when the old Tamrin returns. The one that inspired me. |
|
(I actually wrote an account of this on TriTalk some months ago and to my amazement people found it funny ;D)
