Parapsychology from a test subject's perspective.

[anonymous]

Here is an interesting perspective on parapsychology from the perspective of a test subject.

From "Remote Viewing The Real Story" by Ingo Swann

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/2.html


Chapter 11 ENCOUNTERING THE PARAPSYCHOLOGY POWER SYNDROME

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pa...StoryCh11.html

Who had power, and why, had fascinated me at least since my high-school years. I had collected and diligently read everything I could locate.
I had never planned to utilize my accumulated (and clearly only avocational) knowledge of power -- largely because I was of the opinion that having power over others was usually a disgusting affair and business. I am still of that opinion today -- an opinion based on even better evidence than I had back then in 1971.

It must be established within the relevant contexts of this book that if I had not been subjected to INDIGNITIES, then I fully believe that I would have quickly passed through parapsychology and returned to my life as an artist and a hopeful writer.
The experimental results would have quickly passed into parapsychological quasi-oblivion, into which most of parapsychology passes anyway. Our cultural mainstreams see to THAT in strategic ways, and parapsychologists have never figured out how to outwit those ways either strategically or tactically.

Chapter 20

NEW YEAR'S DAY 1972

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pa...StoryCh20.html

So, on New Year's Day, 1972, I designed and imposed on myself the following policy decisions.

One

I would never CLAIM anything, any ability. And indeed, I had so far never done so. All I had done was said I would TRY other people's experiments, or try experiments of my own design if such opportunities came about. To this date I have never once claimed I could do anything psychic -- even though many since have attributed such claims to me. Even some of my closest past colleagues who should remember better than they do -- should remember the sometimes bitter disputes which raged over this precise topic. Well, not once have I claimed anything. Never. All I have ever said was that I'd try, or let's try this, etc.

Two

As a trained scientist during my higher education years, I firmly appreciated and supported the major scientific methods, mainly those which are designed to protect (hopefully) against error and mistakes. Almost everyone forgets that I as an "artist living in New York" was also a biologist with a perfectly good degree based on almost straight A's while in college. In fact, almost all of my formal education was very good. So I decided that I would work only with qualified scientists, and with only two exceptions have maintained that position for twenty-five years by now.

Three

I decided that I would never demonstrate anything to anyone, not even to scientists I might chance to encounter and who might demand demonstrated "proof." What I would do is try their experiments. So to get me to work with them they first had to present me with an experiment, and it was always to be considered an experiment only regardless of any outcome. Although I have stood before audiences, some of them quite large, I've never demonstrated anything -- with the exception of one momentous instance in 1988 just before I retired, and which I'll narrate some distance ahead. The only other psychic I've known who never demonstrated anything was the noble Mr. Harold Sherman. When I had the very good fortune of meeting this remarkable man and his wonderful wife, Martha, we became devoted friends in the first five minutes.

Four

I decided that the results of experiments, whether negative or positive, would speak for themselves, and that it was up to the experimenters to defend their experiments and the results whatever those might be. If I never claimed anything, then I never need defend anything. Let the RESEARCHERS take not only the falls, but the glory too if there was to be any.

Five

However, based upon my knowledge of what proper experiments consisted of, it would have to be I who ultimately decided whether they were worthy and workable experiments or not. If I could not myself decide that, then I would consult with independent sources who could advise in this regard. Even so, I would not attempt or take part in any experiment, or even work with any researcher that I did not like.

Six

I also decided that even if the experiment was a good one, I would not take part in it if I intuitively felt I would not succeed.

Seven

Becoming publicly accessible and give "readings" was out of the question, even if I had wanted to do so anyway. And I didn't want to.

Eight

I decided that if doing so was feasible, I would try other people's experiments for free, if those experiments met my criteria. I would hold out for money only if money had been raised for the experiments and which money included salaries for the experimenters, at which time my participation should be paid for.

Nine

I decided that I would never talk to media types -- unless I could scold media for treating psi phenomena in a negative, shabby and demeaning light. Please note that certain circumstances along these lines have changed today. But back in 1972 media chose only to demean psi phenomena as irrational.

Ten

I decided that I would never, under any circumstances, talk or interact with a skeptic or enter into any debates with them. I decided that if I needed to, I would attack them, their credentials, and make every effort to reveal their fundamental stupidities. This meant that I would utilize their own tactics against them, and show the public why it should not believe too much in them. After all, I had not for nothing studied the history of anti-psychic skepticism from the early days of Anton Mesmer down into the present.

*

Please note again that the decisions just above were particularly relevant back in 1972. It is now 1996, and the existence of psi and psychic phenomena are now generally accepted as real.
Twenty-five years ago they WERE NOT, and were vigorously condemned by the scientific, academic and media mainstreams as hallucinatory and/or the products of deranged minds.
Various formats of psi are still referred to that way -- for example, in the DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS published by the American Psychiatric Association.
And, it's worth pointing out, that it was because of this prevailing condemnation that the intelligence community of the early 1970s had enormous qualms about getting mixed up with things that were so "controversial."

*

Eleven

I decided that I would never seek to emphasize or aggrandize myself or other psychics, but would seek to distribute the knowledge that psychic potentials are indwelling in our species, and thus in everyone.

[anonymous]

A Partial Listing of Research and Experiments in Which Ingo Swann has Participated

http://www.rviewer.com/IngoSwann-ResearchOverview.html

1971 Began active participation in parapsychological laboratory work

1971 Research with Clive Backster, New York (plant consciousness and psychokinetic effects of small samples of graphite).

1971 Research with Dr. Gertrude Schmeidler, City College of New York (psychokinetic effects upon continuously recorded temperature).

1971-1972 Research with Dr. Karlis Osis, The American Society for Psychical Research, New York (out-of-body consciousness and perceptions).

1972 Research with Dr. C. Silfen, The American Society for Psychical Research, New York (temporal and spatial perception aspects of remote viewing potentials).

1972 Research with Dr. H.E. Puthoff, Stanford Research Institute (psychokinetic perturbation of a superconductor-shielded Josephson effect magnetometer).

1973 Research with Dr. H. Crane, Dr. H. E. Puthoff, and R. Targ, Stanford Research Institute (project Scangate [CIA-funded]: systematic utilization of non-physical targets that 'refer' to real-time situations [remote viewing by geographic co-ordinates]).

1973 Research with Dr. H. E. Puthoff, R. Targ and H. Sherman, Stanford Research Institute (experimental psychic probe of the planet Jupiter in attempting to identify distance measurement of expanded consciousness).

1973 Research with Dr. W. Harman, Stanford Research Institute (experimental prophetic correlations, an experimental effort at world-wide predictive trend analysis correlated with adept/inept dimension alternative future histories.

1974-1988 Research with Dr. H. E. Puthoff, Stanford Research Institute, continuous in-depth research funded by government clients (CIA, DIA, DOD, Army Intelligence). The operative nature and directions of this long-term research activity were classified in 1975 by the participating sponsors, and remain classified as of the year 2001.

1974 Research with A. Twitchell, Dr. J. Mitchell, Dr. J. Wingate, and Dr. G. Schmeidler, American Society for Psychical Research (precognition, an attempt to ascertain consciousness variable in predictive ability).

1974 Research with Dr. G. Schmeidler, Dr. S. Krippner, and Dr. J. Mitchell, New York (an experimental remote viewing probe of a distant planet Mercury.

1975 Research with Dr. R. Miller, Atlanta, Georgia (psychokinetic effects in a diffusion cloud chamber).

1975 Research with Dr. M. Vogel, San Jose, California (psychokinetic effects on electrical reactions of a plant).

1975 Research with Dr. E. May and C. Honorton, Maimonide Medical Center, New York (a dynamic PK experiment with Ingo Swann).

1975 Research with Dr. J. Vallee, Dr. A Hastings, and Dr. G. Askevold, Institute for the Future, Palo Alto, California (cross-country remote viewing experiments utilizing computer conferencing).

1976 Research with Dr. W. Roll and G. Solfin, Psychical Research Foundation, Durham, N.C. (long-distance remote hearing experiments).

1976 Research with Dr. S. Krippner, Dr. J. Mitchell, and H. Sherman (cross-country remote viewing of the planet Mars).

1977 Research with Dr. C. Tart, University of California at Davies (direct clairvoyant viewing of internal state of an ESP learning machine.

1974-1979 A special interest in utilizing audio-visual methods for presenting psychical and consciousness phenomena, including artistic expressioning. Produced five slide shows in association with J. Turchuck:
Cosmic Art
The remote viewing probes of H. Sherman and I. Swann of the planets Jupiter and Mercury.
The beauties of Kirlian and laser light photography demonstrating mental interference patterns.
Parapsychology in art.
Death - A Concept Reborn; clinical death and recovery experiences.

1989 Retired from active government research and from public appearances.

1989 Research with Dr. Elmer Green (and group) in the voluntary Controls Program at the Menninger Foundation, Topeka, Kansas: Physical Fields and States of Consciousness: Consciousness, Body Electricity, and Psychophysical Learning, and Anomalous electrostatic Phenomena in Exceptional Subjects.

1990 onward: Began occasional research with Dr. Gerald Epstein involving volitional control of mental image management, accessing subconscious imagery, decoding information content of biomind imagery, and entering into transdimensional imagery.

1998 Research with the Laurentian University Neuroscience Research Group, Dr. M. A. Persinger, Professor of Neuroscience and Psychology, and Dr. W. Roll. This research consisted of a full MRI of head and brain; complete neuropsychological, cognitive, and personality assessments; near-infrared and Glial Matrix functions associated with remote viewing; electroencephalographic correlates; study of possible mechanisms for long-distance mental imaging; neurophysiological process enhancement by experimentally generated complex magnetic fields. Novel equipment (the 'Octopus') detecting brainwave activity above high beta.

Year 2000 Second research sequence with Dr. M.A. Persinger and Dr. W. Roll at the Laurentian University in Sudbury, Canada. The research included extensive EEG analysis of brainwave frequencies between 40-60 cycles per second during repeated clairvoyant, telepathic, and remote viewing tests. Specific frequencies were found to be consistently active during repeated testing. Experiments with novel equipment designed to apply selected brainwave frequencies outside the skull showed that certain frequencies enhanced para-sensory perceptions by several magnitudes.

[Sandy B]

Having read Ingo Swann's e-book, I found it opened my eyes to the politics of parapsychology. I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise, I see that sort of stuff happening in Universities too. Some of the best researchers struggle for funding because they don't have the political skills to get it.

I also found his observation that most test subjects get burnt out very quickly something to keep in mind. Swann had the good sense not to become a victim of such research.

On a personal note, I do like the fact that he never agreed to be called a psychic. When I was first reading this book a few months ago, I thought his reaction to the word was just the typical emotional reaction people get when they start to notice psi functioning taking place. I couldn't say that word for months without feeling sick. I would cry if anyone used it to describe me. I still don't like it very much. I've corresponded with others who have had the same reaction.

I think in Swann's case, it may have started off as the standard emotional reaction to the word, but he must have realized that it made good sense not to let himself be labeled that way. I think if you let yourself become known as a 'psychic', you become less of a person, especially to researchers.

I have an ongoing argument with a researcher who insists that words like psychic and medium are necessary and useful. I keep telling him they are politically incorrect. People have different degrees of psi functioning, and separating some from the herd by giving them arbitrary designations just seems wrong somehow.

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by Sandy B

I think in Swann's case, it may have started off as the standard emotional reaction to the word,...

What is the standard emotional reaction to the word?

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by anonymous

What is the standard emotional reaction to the word?

Anonymous,

Everyone that I've corresponded with has initially had a very negative reaction to being called a psychic. Mind you, most of them have been from backgrounds that are not very open to such things. I haven't come into contact with many people who have actively sought out such experiences.

I actually couldn't even use the word at all for quite a while, because I just wanted to cry at the mention of it. I've been told that isn't uncommon.

The first time I heard someone refer to me as a medium, I threw up. I was listening to someone I knew talking about such experiences on a radio show, and he mentioned me. He didn't even use my name, he just said that a medium had had this particular experience. But I was the person he was talking about, and I freaked out a bit.

It isn't logical, but those words can be scary and upsetting.

Sandy

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by anonymous

Here is an interesting perspective on parapsychology from the perspective of a test subject.

From "Remote Viewing The Real Story" by Ingo Swann

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/2.html

. . .

Uri Geller took the opposite approach to Ingo Swan's. Where Swann would only participate in scientific experiments and refused to do demonstrations, Geller, while he did participate in scientific studies, was, for the most part, an entertainer.

Ingo Swann took the approach he did for personal reasons, mainly because he did not consider himself a psychic, he only learned about his abilities by accident. He was present when some psychics were asked to try to produce "energies" to expose infrared film. He was asked to try it and was able to, and one thing led to another... Swann's main concern it seems was to avoid being caught up in publicity of the type that was unleased on Geller.

Geller's approach was much more influential. He probably introduced more people around the world to paranormal phenomena than any other psychic or scientist.

In "The Geller Effect" by Uri Geller and Guy Lyon Playfair, Playfair points out that Daniel D. Home, Eusapia Palladino, Leonora Piper, Rudi Schneider, Eileen Garrett, all gave copiously of their time to scientific investigators.

But none of them are well known today for their contribution to science or even for their abilities as a psychic.

In another thread I reasoned that it is unfair to criticize spiritualism for making a religion out of mediumship because science, the "rightful" method of investigation, had never accepted the phenomena. At least spiritualists educated the public rather than misled them the way mainstream scientists who tried to deny the phenomena did.

For the same reasons, it would be wrong to criticize Geller for making entertainment out of his paranormal abilities rather than devoting his life to scientific investigations. By working as an entertainer he did more to educate people and had more influence on society than one would expect to come from scientific investigations.


Further Reading:

"Uri Geller: Magician or Mystic?" by Jonathan Margolis
http://uri-geller.com/books/magician-or-mystic

My Story by Uri Geller
http://www.uri-geller.com/books/my-story/ms.htm


"Remote Viewing The Real Story" by Ingo Swann
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/2.html

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

No one thinks Uri Geller has real psychic abilities, do they? If so, then apparently no amount of debunking is sufficient to disabuse people of that notion.

~~ Paul

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by anonymous

Further Reading:

"Uri Geller: Magician or Mystic?" by Jonathan Margolis
http://uri-geller.com/books/magician-or-mystic

My Story by Uri Geller
http://www.uri-geller.com/books/my-story/ms.htm


"Remote Viewing The Real Story" by Ingo Swann
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/2.html

Also

"The Geller Effect" by Uri Geller and Guy Lyon Playfair
http://www.uri-geller.com/geller-effect/tge0.htm