Gamma- reality list checking

November 22, 2004

,

I will respectfully request that we end these character judgements Here and Now.

There is so much interesting science to discuss without needing to discuss Other People.

All the best!

-----Original Message-----From: P. Dal Cerro, Ph.D. [mailto:gauge2_99@...] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: Re: Gama Waves articles and info on the pRoshiEd: Bruce was the author of the article, not the person who posted the message, which was me. I don't argue with what you say in the least. My argument is in taking a phenomenon--distance healing--which may or may not have some scientific evidence to support it--and presenting yourself as a practitioner of the thing and promoting your skill at it on one's website, then wiggling out from under the point my engaging in polemics and intellectual subterfuge. A parallel example exists re: recent discussions regarding gammawaves. Recent research suggests that Buddhist monks averaging tens of thousands of hours of meditation training show increases in gamma wave frequencies. No sooner is the ink dry on the article than Val is here to tell us that "his' system anticipated these results by a decade (not mentioning that he describes his system as 'comprehensive, meaning, one would assume, that it trains across the entire spectrum anyway--probably an attempt to lay claim to the whole of NF.) And of course the somewhat simple minded implication would be that Val has found a way to substitute a little NF training for tens of thousands of hours of serious mindfulness traing. But then, "there's a sucker born every minute."SDC > Hi Bruce,> I'm not selling any products so hopefully am not viewed as having any alternative agenda. The flaws in the Columbia study are certainly significant, but it is not the only study showing mental effects on physical reality. Beginning with sons' new publications showing brain changes to Tiller's work on effects of intention on physical matter, there's certainly credible work suggesting the possibiity of effects at a distance. Quantum physics provides a strong theoretical foundation for such effects. The zeal to dismiss any study showing effects outside the prevailing paradigm, which by and large is governed by Newtonian cause and effect principles, appears to be overly defensive to me. Just because a study is flawed doesn't mean the subject being studied doesn't exist. As a psychologist trained in the scientist/practitioner model, I think it is important to remain open minded to possibilities. For what it's worth. Ed Hamlin

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.797 / Virus Database: 541 - Release Date: 11/15/2004

November 22, 2004

:

With all due respect, this is an open forum, provided as a service

for individuals interested in learning about NF, theory and

applications. It offends me personally that Val, who operates his own

fee-based user group that forbids disclosure of NCP secrets to non-

members and enforces secrecy by threat of banishment, feels compelled

to be logging on to open groups like this to troll for customers.

Then, when Pete tries to block his doing so (I assume this was what

was meant when someone said he doesn't get emails from here) he has

someone post for him.

SDC

> > Hi Bruce,

> > I'm not selling any products so hopefully am not viewed as having

> any alternative agenda. The flaws in the Columbia study are

> certainly significant, but it is not the only study showing mental

> effects on physical reality. Beginning with sons' new

> publications showing brain changes to Tiller's work on

> effects of intention on physical matter, there's certainly credible

> work suggesting the possibiity of effects at a distance. Quantum

> physics provides a strong theoretical foundation for such effects.

> The zeal to dismiss any study showing effects outside the

prevailing

> paradigm, which by and large is governed by Newtonian cause and

> effect principles, appears to be overly defensive to me. Just

> because a study is flawed doesn't mean the subject being studied

> doesn't exist. As a psychologist trained in the

> scientist/practitioner model, I think it is important to remain

open

> minded to possibilities. For what it's worth. Ed Hamlin

>

November 22, 2004

,

Excellent suggestion! Let's focus on the science of our emerging field and share

these data with our members. Those from our group who want to indulge in this

sort of " discussion/personal debate " might want to do it through their own back

channeling.

RC, PhD

>

> From: " CM Van Deusen " <adriancmvd@...>

> Date: 2004/11/22 Mon PM 01:14:23 EST

> < >

> Subject: Gamma- reality list checking

>

> ,

>

> I will respectfully request that we end these character judgements Here

> and Now.

>

> There is so much interesting science to discuss without needing to

> discuss Other People.

>

> All the best!

>

> Re: Gama Waves articles and info on the pRoshi

>

> Ed:

>

> Bruce was the author of the article, not the person who posted the

> message, which was me. I don't argue with what you say in the

> least. My argument is in taking a phenomenon--distance healing--

> which may or may not have some scientific evidence to support it--and

> presenting yourself as a practitioner of the thing and promoting your

> skill at it on one's website, then wiggling out from under the point

> my engaging in polemics and intellectual subterfuge. A parallel

> example exists re: recent discussions regarding gammawaves. Recent

> research suggests that Buddhist monks averaging tens of thousands of

> hours of meditation training show increases in gamma wave

> frequencies. No sooner is the ink dry on the article than Val is here

> to tell us that " his' system anticipated these results by a decade

> (not mentioning that he describes his system as 'comprehensive,

> meaning, one would assume, that it trains across the entire spectrum

> anyway--probably an attempt to lay claim to the whole of NF.) And of

> course the somewhat simple minded implication would be that Val has

> found a way to substitute a little NF training for tens of thousands

> of hours of serious mindfulness traing. But then, " there's a sucker

> born every minute. "

>

> SDC

>