[liviu (OP)]

Hello, my name is Liviu,

I would like to ask someone who have the time to read my personal journal (..., especially the omnix chapter) if the experiments I did can be called science.

Thank you for your time,
Liviu

[RD]

I’m able to use both senses and extra-sensorial abilities (especially telepathy), to investigate a wide range of experiences

Why do (alleged) telepaths need to ask the opinions of others when they could just read their minds ?


IMO anyone who claims to be telepathic is either a con-artist or is in need of professional psychiatric help.

Contact me to find how much my services weigh

Well, it depends, sometimes it can be a smile, sometimes a cup of water, other times a kind word, other times a sum of money ...

I vote for con-artist.

Update: I’d like to change my vote ... 

... then I caused myself the same symptoms(real)including stress, depression, phobias, paranoia, psychopath, insomnia, anger and a lot of mental disorders ... I was God for a period

http://www.scribd.com/doc/66829186/Liviu-Journal-Files

[grandiose delusions] are characterized by fantastical beliefs that one is famous, omnipotent, wealthy, or otherwise very powerful. The delusions are generally fantastic and typically have a supernatural, science-fictional, or religious theme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiose_delusions
 

[Bored chemist]

Perhaps he should get in contact with this guy.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=38166.0
They could set up a self help group.

[liviu (OP)]

@RD - I do not care about telepathy, I just want to know if the fact (and that indeed is a fact) that I was able to change different environments doing what the people in that environment do until I learned how they think and feel can be considered science.

Of course I am a con artist or a psychopat or a megaloman or whatever mental disorder you want, I just wrote that I tried those things. Otherwise how would I know how a person with those problems thinks and feel?

@Bored chimist - funny guy presented there, I know that type of manipulation, is based on emotions, I tried that too. Can I ask your honest opinion about me?

[Bored chemist]

My honest opinion ties in with RD's.
I think you need serious psychiatric help.

[liviu (OP)]

Your thought is a predeterminated thought and I can never change that. The actual truth is different, if I will stand in front of you you will have a total different opinion about me.

You are not the first and definetly not the last who will say that, but that is not the problem. The problem is that if I will meet 1000 people (including psychiatrists), they will have 1000 different oppinions about me. How can you decide then, who is right? I will tell you: because you have a predetermined thoughts, you will chose the one who will give a verdict that resonate with your oppinion. I already tested that on 1000 people ten times, that is 10.000 people, I would not do it again, because the result will be identical.

Even this forum post is an example: I have asked exactly the same questionon on almost a hundred similar forums. Can you guess what was the result? 100 hundred different perspectives.

The reactions will always be different depending on the age of the persson who respond, sex, education, location, time, etcetera. That is what I'am telling you, that I know how everybody thinks and feels about anything. My only question here was.. if this is a science?

But one thing is sure, I always respect an honest man and his oppinions. So, if this word (telepathy), or even the entire journal acts like a barrier for your mind, blocking it to answer to my question, I will respect your decision.

The journal is especially wrote the way it is wrote to produce this kind of reactions and like any other poison for mind, the brain is fighting to eliminate that. I am only interested in people who can bypass that.

Now, can you answer to my question? Thank you in advance and I apologize for any inconvenient I've might created.

[damocles]

OK then Liviu. I will try to avoid all of the personal issues and jump straight to your question. In my opinion, what you have been doing can NOT be called science. Why not?

Well science is about the natural world and its regular, repeatable phenomena. It must be objective. In the case of science involving humans in any way, it needs to be subjected to double-blind testing. I do not think that your phenomena are. I do not think any test can be devised with proper double-blind protocols.

I would also say that, in my opinion, not all knowledge is science. I do not think that something has to be labelled "science" to make it seem respectable (e.g. "political science", "economic science" are inappropriate descriptors, to my way of thinking).

I will not use this forum to pass judgement one way or the other on you or your work, only to directly answer your original question.

[Bored chemist]

"Even this forum post is an example: I have asked exactly the same questionon on almost a hundred similar forums. Can you guess what was the result? 100 hundred different perspectives."
Did all the science fora pretty much agree that telepathy is nonsense, and what you are talking about is not science?

[liviu (OP)]

@damocles @bored chimist - thanks for the answear. I see on the other forums the answer is the same, but your answer, damocles, is the simplest to understand. I didn't planned almost none of my experiences and neither I do not think I can repeat most of them (I didn't planned to have so many car accidents, but it happened anyway).

I do not care about telepathy, I named it that way so this thing that influenced me can have name. It can have any name.

Here is some examples:

*I walk on the street and I feel that my right foot starts hurting me, I look arround and look and look until and see in the crowd an old lady crying about her leg. I help her take a pause and calm her leg. Her leg is not hurting anymore, my leg not hurting. We move on, I in my direction, she in her direction.

*I am at a party. My neck starts tu hurt me, I go outside and on the back alley a gang is beating a young boy. I go there and I get beaten too, of course(real life is not hollywood, if you stick your nose where you are not supposed to, you suffer the consequences). After that I get the boy to a hospital. When he get out, I spent years motivating him and advising him not to hate those people because he will become just like them. The boy is get over the incident and starts seeing on his own life. We move eah other on our own ways.

See, this are just examples, I called it telepathy just to have a name for it. How do you called it? It does not come to me whenever I command, but I can follow different clues from real life and find it when I want. That is my "sience", but is not general science because is nothing stable about it, not even I can use it like a toy, just the way I like.

I got in so much life situations, accidents, etc, that this experiences helped me to learn to foresee a person's behaviour or life, based on very few information about that person or about the environment he/she live in (from my own life experiences). I do not care how people categorize me, some say I'm a good friend, some say just that I helped them, some deny, some say I'm crazy, some hate me, some love me, some say I'm a con, some say I'm a "god".. I say I'm whoever you want me to be if that makes you feel better. Everybody characterize me based on location where they meet me, the time, the environment, the political or religious context, but anyone will change his opinion if I will show him a different "me". So,there is no way to satisfy all the people or to have all people have the same oppinion.

So if there is not science, I still wonder what the proper name will be (beside mental illness, crap, alienation, or any other dull oppinion), because it is a certitude that nobody will have this kind of real life knowledge and nobody can replicate it.

Thank you for your time, I appreciate your concerns and your constructive advises.

[Bored chemist]

"See, this are just examples, I called it telepathy just to have a name for it. How do you called it? "
Any of a number of things.
Confirmation bias, coincidence...

However, when I was a student, "continuing to believe in something when all the normal people don't believe in it" was called psychosis.

[Kryptid]

However, when I was a student, "continuing to believe in something when all the normal people don't believe in it" was called psychosis.

Having one or more unconventional beliefs should not be counted as a justification for calling a person psychotic...

[Bored chemist]

And yet it is.

[Kryptid]

I guess when Albert Einstein first formulated his theories he was being psychotic then? Not like everyone else at that time believed what he believed until he was proven correct by observation and experiment. "Normal" is subjective and relative anyway (pun not intended). What others believe should not necessarily be used as a measuring stick for whether your own beliefs are rational or correct.

Sorry for derailing your thread, liviu.

[liviu (OP)]

@bored chemist - wakingin the middle of the night and writing on a piece of paper "in 27 months X will have a baby, male", without knowing X yet and after years hearing on a bus conversation "did you hear that X had a baby boy" it is no coincidence. X is the full name, like John Doe.

About psychotic, well, it goes like this:
Just like I wrote in the journal, for humans, everything is based on proof, and there are four kind of paths that they always follow -  the path of majority, which clearly goes to an infinite loop (that's why if you go back in time 30.000 years ago, you will see no difference between the majority from then and majority from now), the path of a group of people, the path of one man and the path that no man chooses.

Many years ago, when I was just a little boy, I hypnotized all the people from a camp that there is an object on a sky, in the middle of the day. All I did was to point the finger on the sky and said "Look at that amazing thing on the sky". At first there where a few who agreed me, but in a couple of minutes everybody got to see that inexisting thing. When a tourist drove by and asked what they are looking at they told me and he replied that there is no such a thing on the sky. Was that tourist a psychotic? Yes, because he didn't agree the majority. Am I a psychotic? Yes, I will never deny that, because the majority thinks so. If I'll stand next to you, neither you will think I'm psychotic, but if other people wil join us, the chances will increase because they will influence you.

Recently I've seen on tv a lot of mentalists doing the same experiment.

Everybody will be found mentally ill, if they will go to a psychiatrist, because there at least one thing in everyone's life that the majority will not agree. I don't care of majority thinks about me, because I don't have to keep the appearences, because I will never candidate for presidency or something like that. And I hope that I will not have to manipulate people again, I don't like it.

I have a curiosity @bored chimist - if I'll go to an exact number you chose of psychiatrists, let's say, 17, and all of them will say that I'm normal? What will you say then? Are you willing to bet that their result will not change your oppinion?

@supercryptid - don't worry, you didn't derailed anything.

[RD]

...I was God for a period

http://www.scribd.com/doc/66829186/Liviu-Journal-Files

Believing in god may or may not be a psychotic symptom, but believing you are/were god is unambiguous.

[liviu (OP)]

@RD - I was quoting what people said about me. When someone came to me and said "I want a bigger sallary", I showed him how to get a bigger sallary; when someone said "I want a girlfriend/boyfriend", I gave him/her a solution; the same with people that where molested or raped, I helped them to get better, with no pills, no medicine, not even tea.

So, when they got better they said "you are a god", just that, almost nobody said "thank you". The same is with telepathy, is just a word I gave to this "guessing" of things, I had to name it somehow. From now on, I will write "God" and "telepathy", quoted, so other people don't get stuck in just words and miss the important point.

I got the answer to my question: It is NOT science, this "guessing" that I did or do with things. People say it is just chance and coincidence, so that means that is just a coincidence. But I like to use this "guessing" and these coincidences to help people hoping that someday, maybe, someone will ask me how to find an important thing that will change the world, like cure for cancer. And just by using this "guessing" and this coincidences I will help him find that thing. I always find the right path for people to follow in order to find what they are looking for, if it is the right thing for them (most of the time they ask to win the lottery, that is not the right thing - everybody winning the lottery).

Thank you for all your replies and I appreciate your concerns, now I will go to psychologists forums, religious forums, art forums and entertainment forums to check other oppinions too.

[Bored chemist]

If you can find 17,000 psychiatrists who think that not only are you currently normal, but that you were normal even when you believed you were God I will be surprised but I will assume that they are all wrong.
The point is not that you were called a god; the point is that you believed them enough to quote them.
The question of what is and what isn't psychotic is defined as much by the society that you are part of as by anything else.

[liviu (OP)]

The thing about you is that you choose to see only one part of the glass and there is nothing in the world that will make you see different.
The thing about me is that I choose to see everything: the bottom part, the up part, the entire glass, the material from which is built, the size of the glass, the form of the glass, absolutely everything.
My journal is not about telepathy or me being god, is about people and how they see, think, feel and do things. It is about my unique ability to see, think, feel and do things like any other man. I can see, feel and think exactly like you, but you cannot see, think and feel like me and that puts me in advantage. I didn't said for any of you that you are right or wrong, but the fact that I know what part of the glass you see, makes you predictible. So, we will never know if you are right or wrong, but we always know what part of the glass do you see.

[RD]

... The thing about me is that I choose to see everything: the bottom part, the up part, the entire glass, the material from which is built, the size of the glass, the form of the glass, absolutely everything.

If you do know "absolutely everything" * about "the material from which is built", you will be able to tell us all the chemical elements the glass contains.

So, we will never know if you are right or wrong, but we always know what part of the glass do you see.

A chemist [bored or otherwise] could analyse a sample of the glass with a mass spectrometer and tell us all the different chemical elements it contained. Then we would see whether your analysis by extrasensory means was "right or wrong".


[* see delusions of grandeur ]

[Bored chemist]

"but the fact that I know what part of the glass you see, makes you predictible."
If that were true then you could predict our answers and so there would be no need to ask us anything.