Why? Why not? /Does anyone further believe that humankind will evolve so that in the near or distant future that a large percentage of people will be able to communicate with each other telepathically? Does anyone contend that telepathic communication will be as normal as talking is presently?
No I don't. To transmit a message there must be a medium by which that transmission take places, such as electro-magnetic waves, electrons running down a wire, or sound pressure waves, etc, etc. Well we can already do the sound thing biologically, and running around with wires hanging out of our heads is not telepathy, so that leaves the requirement for a biological method for transmitting and receiving electromagnetic waves.
Some animals such as the electric eel can generate an electric pulse which is transmitted through the water, so it is conceivable that this pulse could be encoded by the brain controlling the muscles in some way. However this pulse would not work in air as air is a highly insulating medium and requires something like 3000V to jump a 1mm gap.
I don't know how a transceiver radio generates a radio wave, but I'm guessing the human brain would need an inductive loop as some form of antenna to start with.
The alternative is to utilise some form of NewAge/Satanic/magic moonbeams methodology as some believe that already have.
Here's what I think about that:
Did it come through okay?
“Use It or lose it” … There was many abilities which we once had that has been lost due to not using them. I think telepathic communication is one of these abilities. Before verbal communication was created, telepathic communication was all we had. As soon as our verbal communication began improving, our telepathic abilities began to decline.
If we do not believe telepathic communication is impossible, we will never use them, and that ability will be lost. While we are focused on some things, we are not focusing on other things. Those other things and these become lost to us.
No, but I wouldn't rule out the *possibility* that some (albeit very few) do have some kind of innate ability to communicate on this level currently.
But, it is impossible because the brain simply does not work that way, for anyone. And, anyone who claims such things are lying.
How do you know that? Science does not understand anything about what 85% of our brain is doing ... Sooo science says that we are not using 85% of our brain ??? really ???
I think that all this says is that Science understands only15% of that which our brains are capable of.
SO how can you say with any certainty "Our brains don't work that way"?
Because, unlike yourself, my nose is not buried in the Bible.
Jerami, you are one of the many believers here in which anything that is written in a post in regards to science is completely ignored because you have no understanding of anything scientific.
No, science does not say we are only using 85% of our brain, that is utterly false.
Try reading another book for a change and stop insulting our intelligence.
The brain simply does not work that way and does not appear to be evolving in any kind of direction that would allow it to act like a wifi hot spot. It appears little more than science fiction.
Of course. That's why several telepathic people have been researched under scientific setting, even by the CIA.
Just because there's no discernible 'system' or visible energy at work, doesn't mean the phenomenon doesn't exist. We'd be fools to think it doesn't work. Nearly everyone, for example, experiences the strange coincidence of two friends picking the phone up at the same time, from some unknown impulse, to speak with each other.
In fact, seeing as 90% of the universe is made of dark matter, of which we know nothing at all, all we can surmise is that the visible universe is just the tip of the iceberg.
Men who stare at goats?
Hence, we are fools for not excepting something that has never been shown to exist. Okee dokee.
Yes, while ignoring the many, many more times they pick up the phone when the other does not. The possibility and the probability that will occur are positive, albeit small.
Statistical reductionism.... hummm.... ok, there's a chance that two people will pick up the phone at the same time. In my study of stats, I found it sort of ironic the way stats helps with describing things we know, but just because we don't know or have no data to use, something becomes irrelevant. That is fair enough in a world where ends need to be met, but on the other hand, I still think it foolish to discount things just because there's no constantly reliable evidence... but each to their own on that one, I guess :-)
Possibilities and probabilities, along with evidence are things science "foolishly" uses to describe the world around us.
Religions and beliefs are what describe that which has no evidence, and we have already observed, with great losses these past many centuries that which has no reliable evidence has provided us.
I don't know why you're hung up on the word foolish :-)) Reminds me again to select words carefully.
I don't disagree with your second paragraph above. On the other hand, it's my experience that there's a huge divide between a belief, and an experience of something. In a sense belief is fantasy, as it's possible to believe anything, give or take.
In terms of direct experience, since I was a child I've been a medium (yes, conversing with 'dead' people), and also saw into people's minds. I've spent a lot of time studying 'normal' subjects(maths, economics, electronics, physics) to get the other view... and yet, the fact that I see that consciousness survives the body, and that the physical world is the tip of the iceberg, doesn't really contradict science. Science and maths, as much of religion, does a really rotten job of telling you who you really are.
Life's a gas like that!! :-))
Uh, you used it twice in two separate post to describe those who don't accept blindly that which others purport to exist.
And yet, if you actually have studied physics or biology, you'd find your assertions do indeed contradict them.
Science explains the world around and sometimes that does indeed include explanations about who we are.
It really explains nothing about who we really are, as conscious entities. All the intellectual rigmarol falls away, or belief systems, and when the whole thing turns into a pile of ashes...
then freedom :-))
Sure, it does. Why can't it? What is to say that humans are not candidates for scientific study in all aspects of who we really are?
When I was a child, my best friends were twins. They used to tell me that they could *talk* to each other without speaking. I thought this was rubbish.
One day, I was playing on the medlock (a green belt where we lived) with Jayne. Teresa, her twin, had gone horse riding.
After stealing apples from the neighbours trees and having a good old time, Jayne told me that she *had* to find Teresa, something was wrong. Jayne told me that her head was hurting. She said she felt like her head was being "crushed". Also, her left hand was tingling and that she had no real feeling in it.
We went to Jayne's house. Her parents had just received a phone call from the stables. Teresa's horse had kicked her in the head, and when she fell to the floor had trampled her hand.
How the hell could a nine year old kid know that her sister, was not only in trouble, but where she was injured?
This has always baffled me.
Were those kinds of incidents consistent throughout their whole lives or was this just one incident?
Folks tend to focus on a single incident while ignoring many others of similar nature that had no such results. Not baffling at all.
I haven't seen either of them for about 20 years, so don't know if this continued. But undoubtedly, whether this was an isolated incident or otherwise, it was uncanny. There is absolutely no way that Jayne could have possibly known about her sister and her injuries without having some innate, completely unexplainable ability to communicate with her when she was absent and miles away.
I'm not saying it was telepathy, but honestly, I don't know what it was.
The term is called, "coincidence" or most likely, it is a fabricated story or overly exaggerated. Probably not much truth to it.
Oh my gosh, yes! There has been a lot of research done on this. I'm sure if you do a search on the internet, you'll find lots of information.
Personally, I've proved it to myself by the things that have happened to me. Usually, if I know someone well, it's easy to mentally connect with them. I had a close friend once who use to work in the office with me. When he was moved to an office a mile away, I would still get mental images of what he was thinking about during the day.
For instance, if he came to work with a headache, or was sleepy that morning, or was worried about something, it would effect me as though it was happening to me. Then, I'd call him on the phone and ask him what he was thinking (it was what I was also thinking), and asked him to stop it because it was making me feel sick. It was like his pain became my pain.
I also think that you can do this with a stranger. I think you'd just have to concentrate more on it, but it's definitely possible that we can all mentally contact each other, if we really wanted to put the effort into practicing this, instead of always using verbal language...
I absolutely believe in telepathic communication..... unlike the haters
Just because someone doubts the likelihood of telepathy, does not make them haters. I would never say I believe in telepathic communication because to believe in something would require faith. I'd want hard evidence.
I don't believe in telepathic communication but I do consider that it *might* be possible- but only because of what I've seen and heard with others.
Wow, how incredibly narrow minded.
So, you absolutely believe in something that not only has never been shown to have an iota of validity or is even remotely possible, and those who understand this are haters. Hilarious.
by Eric Dierker2 years ago
I really cannot go into my religion in depth here. But I am very religious. I do not have a religion that you can put in a glass jar and monetize or scrutinize. But I am very religious.I believe in and practice a...
by andrew savage3 years ago
Have you, or anyone you know of, ever had a close encounter? When did it take place? Were there any drugs involved? Did you tell the authorities? What race of aliens were involved? Was the experience angelic or demonic...
by marcel2856 years ago
I for one, am a very open-minded person, theres nothing anyone could tell me that they believed in that i could disagree with or turn my nose up at. In fact, theres nothing thats had it's fair share of hype that i Don't...
by JessBraz21 months ago
Hello fellow hubbers!I have the day off work today (hurray!!!) I've been up since the wee hours of the morning working on hubs and going through some of the technical stuff in my profile and account to make sure I'm...
by DinoMommy9 months ago
I'm just wondering what people thought about them....
by Cromper4 years ago
I was just thinking to myself last night: does anyone actually believe in a god or anything like that? I know The Pope is an atheist in religious disguise, but there must be SOMEONE out there who actually believes in a...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.