|
|
|
Alexander1304
Skeptic Friend
75 Posts |
 Posted - 05/30/2012 : 12:40:14
|
Hello all,
Lately I've read about the fact,that 2 theosophists,C.Leadbeater and A.Besant claimed to have direct observation of atoms and even some "mysterious matter" in human body(even "etheric double").Seems fantastic,but some people,as Stephen Phillips discussed before,actually believe that.As I told,I'm easily impressed,but,it seems that their claims were not proven by science,and since then nobody else claimed to observe directly atoms/"mysterious matter".
What do you think?Do we have good reason to regard it as nonsense?I especially have problem with vision of "mysterious matter" -our super sensitive devices couldn't detect it so far,and suddenly someone with clairvoyant vision sees it?..
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2012 : 14:47:16 [Permalink]
|
| Research has been put into clairvoyance but the results have always been negative. No scientific evidence of clairvoyance exist, as far as I know. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2012 : 19:47:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Alexander1304
Hello all,
Lately I've read about the fact,that 2 theosophists,C.Leadbeater and A.Besant claimed to have direct observation of atoms and even some "mysterious matter" in human body(even "etheric double").Seems fantastic, |
No "seems" about this, it is! And correctly you alarms are going off.| but some people,as Stephen Phillips discussed before,actually believe that. |
He's gullible. He's got a lot of company.As I told,I'm easily impressed,but,it seems that their claims were not proven by science,and since then nobody else claimed to observe directly atoms/"mysterious matter".
What do you think? |
What do I think? I'll save that for last. | Do we have good reason to regard it as nonsense? |
Yes "we" do.I especially have problem with vision of "mysterious matter" -our super sensitive devices couldn't detect it so far,and suddenly someone with clairvoyant vision sees it?..
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
|
About my thought on this. [b]Alexander1304[/] You are being very astute. Good for you. Skeptic's have a "Baloney Detection Kit", sort of inspired by Carl Sagan's idea that there's a lot of baloney out there, and we need a kit to detect it.
Claiming to be clairvoyant, when leveraged skillfully can make the claimant an awful lot of cash. Don't let it ever be any of yours. How much cash? It's relative to the number of gullible people they can attract and amount of scumbag in their DNA. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2012 : 21:00:09 [Permalink]
|
The idea that one can "directly observe" atoms is ridiculous, if it means being able to resolve two different neighboring atoms with the human eye. The highest acuity human eye resolution is about 0.3 arc-minutes, which would enable one to see two dots only 0.04 mm apart at arms' length as two dots instead of one.
The visual acuity required to resolve atoms individually (at arms' length) would be have to be almost 77,000 times more refined for Cesium, the element with the largest covalent bond radius. That'd be 0.0000039 arc-minutes. If an aperture of 8 mm gives normal people 0.3 arc-minute acuity, an aperture (pupil size) of 615 meters would be needed to resolve things 0.0000039 arc-minutes apart. If we bring those hypothetical Cesium atoms a mere half-centimeter away from the eye (100 times closer), you'd still need an eye the size of a small house to resolve them as two distinct atoms.
And that's in full sunlight. Less light requires bigger lenses.
Of course, we only have the one lens. Microscopes do what they do with a whole set of lenses. But that'd just swap sheer lens diameter for lens-set depth, so instead of hugely wide eyes, these people might have really deep eyes (heads like giant Alien creatures, perhaps).
No, it's just another ridiculous claim. If that's what they are claiming. I don't know how else one could "directly observe" an atom, though. Our skins and ears are buffeted by zillions of atoms of air every second, none of which we feel or hear. Our senses of taste and smell work when presented with (relatively) huge amounts of compounds, not individual atoms. Sight is the most plausible method of "direct observation" they might be talking about, but given what we know about optics, the idea of seeing individual atoms is utterly ludicrous.
On the other hand, as Carl Sagan was found of pointing out, the dark-adjusted eye can see a single photon, but photons aren't atoms and even if that category mistake were the basis for the claim, it'd be nothing special.
(A post-script for Star Trek fans: the whole optic resolution thing mean that, as the author of The Physics of Star Trek points out, a real-life transporter would require a lens 50,000 km across to go from low orbit to planet surface. That's almost eight times larger than the Earth.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 00:14:21 [Permalink]
|
| Are they claiming to see them with their eyes or with some kind of 6th sense? |
 |
|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 03:12:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Are they claiming to see them with their eyes or with some kind of 6th sense?
|
Without the aid of technology and credible evidence, both claims are ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 04:24:46 [Permalink]
|
| It's just that if they aren't claiming to use their eyes then pointing out the lack of visual acuity is a waste of time. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't atoms too small to be observed under visible light anyway because the wavelength is larger than any atom? |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 05:39:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
It's just that if they aren't claiming to use their eyes then pointing out the lack of visual acuity is a waste of time. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't atoms too small to be observed under visible light anyway because the wavelength is larger than any atom?
|
Absolutely. Can't even see a virus without an electron microscope, much less an atom. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Alexander1304
Skeptic Friend
75 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 07:51:38 [Permalink]
|
| Stephen Phillips claims,that they could see "etheric body" usind their "etheric vision",kind of subtle sight organ . And he distinguish it from clairvoyance/micro-psi |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 10:06:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Alexander1304
Stephen Phillips claims,that they could see "etheric body" usind their "etheric vision",kind of subtle sight organ . And he distinguish it from clairvoyance/micro-psi
|
Etheric vision is "remote viewing" and "creative visualization" relabled.
Neither is direct viewing of anything besides ones own imagination. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 10:24:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Alexander1304
Stephen Phillips claims,that they could see "etheric body" usind their "etheric vision",kind of subtle sight organ . And he distinguish it from clairvoyance/micro-psi
|
You keep bringing up "Stephen Phillips", why do you keep bringing what he thinks? Is he making these claims also or what? What is his connection with the claimants, C.Leadbeater and A.Besant? |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Alexander1304
Skeptic Friend
75 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 11:55:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by sailingsoul
Originally posted by Alexander1304
Stephen Phillips claims,that they could see "etheric body" usind their "etheric vision",kind of subtle sight organ . And he distinguish it from clairvoyance/micro-psi
|
You keep bringing up "Stephen Phillips", why do you keep bringing what he thinks? Is he making these claims also or what? What is his connection with the claimants, C.Leadbeater and A.Besant?
|
He built his theory based on their alledged observations |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 16:48:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Neither is direct viewing of anything besides ones own imagination. |
My etheric vision shows me nothing but baloney. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 16:50:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
It's just that if they aren't claiming to use their eyes then pointing out the lack of visual acuity is a waste of time. |
Actually, it was fun to learn the optical math.
Besides if they're claiming another sense mechanism, then they're just adding unsupported claims on top of unsupported claims. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Alexander1304
Skeptic Friend
75 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2012 : 17:22:35 [Permalink]
|
| This Stephen Phillips even corraborated with Buddhist clairvoyant in 2003 to investigate shadow matter particles(presumable in human body) and higher dimentions of superstrings/subquarks |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2012 : 05:23:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
My etheric vision shows me nothing but baloney.
|
Ha ha! And my physic powers predict a hyper link which I won't ethericly view. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
 |
|
Clairvoyant vision of atoms/"mysterious matter"?..
