Hi, I'm in college as a neuroscience major and one of my major career goals is to develop an experimental setup to test the authenticity of past life memories, using the kind of newfangled brain-imaging technology the scientific establishment takes seriously these days. Given the data I've seen from the likes of Stevenson and Tucker, I can't foresee such an experiment failing if it's organized and carried out properly. I've come up with some possible designs of my own that I like, but if anyone has any cool ideas, but doesn't know how to/feel like putting them into action themselves, then I'd love to hear them! I'll even credit you for the idea someday if I publish the results and still remember where I got it from by then, lol. Inspire me.
Best experimental designs to prove validity of PLM's?
- Thread starter Jack E
- Start date
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
Jack, I've thought a lot about you and your quest over the past two weeks while interacting with my guide. Let me give you an example of my experience with my first problem - a blood clot. My guide let me know about it be "telling" me that my left-femur would break and slice my artery leading to my death. After writing that into my journal,he told me"Or something like that" so my "Proof" was out-the-window. What happened was me realizing I had a blood-clot in my right leg that did IN FACT happen by flat-lining twice before getting another task to do this time around. Now is that a "hit", "possible", or a "miss"? With a PhD in psychology, I have some pretty firm "scientific" teachings that needed to be redirected.
I think I'd just be glad I found out about the blood clot in time! Which leg it's in would be the least of my worries. Given that the psychic reading (?) and the presence of the actual clot are almost surely independent of one another, I wouldn't judge it on the scale of "hit" or "miss", I'd say you "got lucky". That said, any method of finding out about something like that is as good as any other; whatever works, right? Serendipitous coincidence stories like this are always very cool, and they do make you wonder sometimes, but ultimately I can't chalk them up to more than coincidence. Here's hoping that good fortune continues to follow you.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
Your answer illustrates the question.
[Added]> I first responded via cell phone while bouncing around in transit. What I wanted to say was that your Guide, or what you may call the directing energy, will perform the task intended right under your nose without you being able to have "scientific" proof, but the proof is there for the one who received it.
You are not going to get what is "not allowed" by a force that controls everything IMO. I had several chats with my guide this week, talked about my condition, my demise, and what I could do if I stayed "in physical form" for a few more months. They were warm and friendly chats with no fear where I left the decision up to him after he told me of three tasks to address in the few months I have yet to live. No sadness at all, perfect with long communication and understanding, but outside of "scientific" proof or explanation.
The knowledge of reincarnation, to me, is whole-brained with the non-language part(s) being frustrated in expressing what they know plus being hard to be "examined scientifically".
When I told a friend that "I could make it as long as I had my head and right hand" in 1970 and then end up that way in 1971 gives a pretty small possibility of serendipity. The fact that my injury happened (to the minute) on my THIRTEENTH wedding anniversary MAY have been, but not both.
This just took a serious turn. If you feel there's something wrong with you physically and it's life-threatening, get medical help immediately. A prognosis of a few months to live is not something to take lying down, unless your doctor says nothing can be done. Either way, praying for you, that's scary even if you pull through. Is it still the clot, or something else?
John Tat
Senior Registered
Hi Jack E If you are serious about what you want to do then you need to stop analyzing things on a physical level.. reincarnation and memories of previous incarnations of our spiritual selves is not on a physical level so an experiments you devise that will measure physical activities will fail.. Our physical brains and all of the memories of that physical entity die with the death of the physical body So there is no point and it makes no sense to explore a new and totally different brain and entity about previous incarnations of our spiritual selves.. In other words what you have talked about is a waste of time
Think about this... There is only one continuous memory that is of our spiritual selves.. He never dies he goes on and on and his memory is only his.. one memory ..not those of Tom, Dick and Harry the physical entities he has occupied.... I call my spiritual self BB to make it easy for me He is a separate entity that never dies ...It is impossible for you to get to BB's spiritual memories or any other spiritual selves memories.. What you may be able to get are spiritual memories that have leaked through to physical memory.. Your problem is... once that has happens they become physical memories no different to any other.. as a result you will learn nothing of any real value because how will you know which are imagination and which are real memories? Unless you can invent a machine and hook someone up to it and observe when a spiritual memory enters the physical brain and how that happens and what effect it has on the brain there is little you can prove.. If you are smart enough to invent such a machine you would be hailed as a genius because that would prove many things to science and you would win many awards including a noble prize
All The Best
Think about this... There is only one continuous memory that is of our spiritual selves.. He never dies he goes on and on and his memory is only his.. one memory ..not those of Tom, Dick and Harry the physical entities he has occupied.... I call my spiritual self BB to make it easy for me He is a separate entity that never dies ...It is impossible for you to get to BB's spiritual memories or any other spiritual selves memories.. What you may be able to get are spiritual memories that have leaked through to physical memory.. Your problem is... once that has happens they become physical memories no different to any other.. as a result you will learn nothing of any real value because how will you know which are imagination and which are real memories? Unless you can invent a machine and hook someone up to it and observe when a spiritual memory enters the physical brain and how that happens and what effect it has on the brain there is little you can prove.. If you are smart enough to invent such a machine you would be hailed as a genius because that would prove many things to science and you would win many awards including a noble prize
All The Best
No one has to root for me, I won't be offended, although I don't see why anyone who supports reincarnation shouldn't be excited about the prospect of finally attaining widespread relevance. I also don't see why modern neuroscience doesn't represent a massive way forward in the field of PLM research; those PLM's have to be downloaded into the new brain at some point, most likely before birth, or else they wouldn't be accessible to recall. So if we can look at them and show that they're made of the same kind of brain patterns as regular, genuine present-life memories are, that should go a long way to establishing their authenticity. Like basically everything I say, it's really a simple proposition; if A, then B, therefore C. I'm not sure why keeping it simple and parsimonious is so hated here. No telling if it'll work yet, but it's the farthest thing from doomed.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
LMAOROTF
, Here is the reality that you need to hear before you go further: After reading this last just before shutting the computer down and without time to reply I was trying to decide if you were in High School or College and if my PhD was before you were born or before your parents were born! It now appears to be sometime when your parents were young - with that settled, maybe we can move on to more serious things that might upset you, actually I know that they will upset you - But you need to know these things before you crash/trash your dreams.You have so many screwed-up things in your "scientific" methodology that it is difficult to find a starting point. 1 - You do not have an open mind about your topic. 2 - Your methodology is based on only one part of the empirical data that exists. 3 - The data, 1%, 99% statements about USA reincarnation beliefs shows a lack of research, or bias. 4 - You skim-read and miss sooo much information that is clearly presented to you. 5 - You seem to not understand "experimenter bias", how to deal with it, nor desire to do it.
So, with a closed-mind and strong biases and intolerance of opposing views, you intend to USE "scientific methodology" that you don't really understand or seem to be able to research, to try to produce an "unbiased proof" - WOW - good luck with that!
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
I think that I have the answer to Jack's reluctance in taking me serious, in the past week I've had two pacemaker surgeries, two heart stoppings, surgical issues, and several conversations with my guide. Then to see his comment about being serious was sooo under stated, really funny to me
Now he sees me as a crazy person to avoid - good defense on his part while demonstrating his inability to do any open-minded research unfortunately.
Now he sees me as a crazy person to avoid - good defense on his part while demonstrating his inability to do any open-minded research unfortunately.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
Jack, I seem to need to interact with you since my grandchildren and I are having "issues" and I NEED to do something "positive " for a recent generation - gad, I am a bit daffy I guess!
Anyway watch this video about how experimenter bias is nearly impossible to remove and how you have to include it in your research design, and, good luck with that!
An example I used in my research design was to video record my subjects starting with questions of their handedness (right or left), testing their eye dominance, and determining their NLP representational system modality and then simply talked with them about anything they wanted to talk about while recording their face. I then had these videos transcribed. Then I had an assistant view the videos and call out eye movements as I read the transcript and put the code for that movement direction on the transcript to be analyzed later.
This resulted in the chi-squared probability of the null-hypothesis of p. <0.0001 despite including one subject having an assistant calling out directions in her perspectives rather than the subject's perspective, that I discovered later.
I listed 111 references in the documentation and worked on my degree and project for nearly a decade while putting my life back together, it was a place to hide from a harsh reality.
I want to add that I do not want a teacher/student relationship as the setting of oneself as a teacher shuts down the "learning" of the one doing the "teaching" and I seek more learning from our interaction.
Anyway watch this video about how experimenter bias is nearly impossible to remove and how you have to include it in your research design, and, good luck with that!
An example I used in my research design was to video record my subjects starting with questions of their handedness (right or left), testing their eye dominance, and determining their NLP representational system modality and then simply talked with them about anything they wanted to talk about while recording their face. I then had these videos transcribed. Then I had an assistant view the videos and call out eye movements as I read the transcript and put the code for that movement direction on the transcript to be analyzed later.
This resulted in the chi-squared probability of the null-hypothesis of p. <0.0001 despite including one subject having an assistant calling out directions in her perspectives rather than the subject's perspective, that I discovered later.
I listed 111 references in the documentation and worked on my degree and project for nearly a decade while putting my life back together, it was a place to hide from a harsh reality.
I want to add that I do not want a teacher/student relationship as the setting of oneself as a teacher shuts down the "learning" of the one doing the "teaching" and I seek more learning from our interaction.
What was the experiment in question of yours testing? I don't think you specified that. Something to do with PLM's? Or was it like a meta-experiment where you just recorded conversations and measured the effects of experimenter bias? I cannot tell from how you described it. Also, the mention of your grandchildren seemed like it would remain important, but then it never came back after the first sentence - did I miss something?
As I understand it, Ken was saying he had good intentions towards his grandchildren, and he wanted to share some of those same good intentions towards yourself.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
Sorry about leaving that detail out of my post. The parts of NLP that interested me the most centered around the use of eye-movement and sensory-modality. Knowing what the eye-movement told the "observer/counselor" what sense was being used/accessed by the association with the words being spoken. For example, and my initial check to determination whether they were "normal" or "mirrored" in brain function, I'd ask them "how many window are there on the front of their residence?" Try that, ask someone, if they look up-left they were "normal" or "most-common", and if they looked to their up and right they had a "mirrored" or reverse orientation.
This knowledge can be used to pace the subject, catch false statements, help hypnotize them, and to literally change their feelings about something, yes actually change their beliefs and "history". That is where I discovered that I could and actually did reach that level of ability and got afraid to use it, realizing that a lot of people had already learned that subliminally already. I wanted to test the eye-movement theory "scientifically"! The result that there is less than 1 in 10,000 chance of it not being "fact", I think it is valid and avoided "experimenter bias".
My grandchildren were a prime reason for my guide's decision to survive, I didn't care either way. I had no fear of death at that point and just filled with awe and reveling in the good feelings ob having a great chat with my old friend/guide/guardian angel. It turns out that I completely misunderstood the actions of my grandchildren and now have to eat some humble-pie rather than take the drastic actions I had planned.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
In looking at other studies just now I found this and am more than angry about how "science" is so screwed-up. Notice in their studies that they did not test for normal/mirrored orientation, they did not include vocal sensory data, statements including sensory words like Saw, Felt, etc., their testing didn't even test the NLP claim that lying is detected when their usual up-left or up-right eye movement direction is NOT used and the opposite direction IS used, there is a statistical relevance to that - that was NOT what they even tested for - Grrrrrrr.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Ken,
You may have another reason to hang around for a bit longer. I noted their keynote finding: "In short, all three studies provided no evidence to support the notion that the patterns of eye-movements promoted by many NLP practitioners aid lie detection."
Do you have options in terms of critiquing their methodology, etc. and being heard on the issue? Unfortunately, I have found that scientists often operate with an agenda that can only be detected by other scientists (who are able to see where they had their "thumb on the scale" experimentally). I have become very disillusioned with the scientific community myself, though science was my primary area of interest when younger. Humans keep dreaming blissfully that there is a wonderful circle of wisemen and wisewomen somewhere that are perfectly unbiased and fair. The scientific community was the latest recipient of their worship in this regard. Some live up to this ideal, many do not. The best that can be said is that they are far ahead of the press in terms of being unbiased and fair, but that is faint praise.
Cordially,
S&S
You may have another reason to hang around for a bit longer. I noted their keynote finding: "In short, all three studies provided no evidence to support the notion that the patterns of eye-movements promoted by many NLP practitioners aid lie detection."
Do you have options in terms of critiquing their methodology, etc. and being heard on the issue? Unfortunately, I have found that scientists often operate with an agenda that can only be detected by other scientists (who are able to see where they had their "thumb on the scale" experimentally). I have become very disillusioned with the scientific community myself, though science was my primary area of interest when younger. Humans keep dreaming blissfully that there is a wonderful circle of wisemen and wisewomen somewhere that are perfectly unbiased and fair. The scientific community was the latest recipient of their worship in this regard. Some live up to this ideal, many do not. The best that can be said is that they are far ahead of the press in terms of being unbiased and fair, but that is faint praise.
Cordially,
S&S
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
So true, it's difficult to be certain of your own biases and "spin" of things, combine that with the output of others, and it becomes a difficult knot to unravel! As for NLP, I was fortunate enough to take my instructions from the founders of NLP (Nero-Linguistic Programming). It is now a basic way of preparing athletes and military training I think.
Like Jack's statement about his emphatic belief that the percentage of humans that have or will experience other physical lives (reincarnate) is small, like the percentage who remember, while most of us on this forum see his views as odd.
Voltaire said
Doctrine of reincarnation is neither absurd nor useless. "It is not more surprising to be born twice than once."
and here is something that is relevant.
Thanks, I understand it now. I didn't know what NLP was, so that explains much of my confusion. What I gather is that you conducted this experiment to figure out how to alter thought processes through hypnosis, eventually attained that ability, and then (wisely) became afraid to use that power. That is pretty cool, for sure, although I'd use it sparingly as well. The primary effect of hypnosis is definitely proven to be an increase in suggestability, and that's the reason why I view regression as a dangerous game; hypnosis does not appear to aid with accurate recall of hidden memories, from what anyone can deduce, but as you point out, it is proven to make you more willing to believe whatever hogwash you're told, that much is certain. So what you describe about changing people's minds definitely isn't outside the realm of what we know about hypnosis. Finding a p<.00001 is quite impressive; how did your study fare in the peer review process?
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
The study was to determine if eye movements had no correlation with sensory-based mental access, a null hypothesis. Nothing about hypnosis in the study.
This personal method we all create for ourselves in our life-experiences can be observed, recorded, and used to gain trust, being led to understand things as being true because they are presented in forms and sequences that match our particular "belief" strategy. If done properly the client will "remember" things that never happened and/or disbelieve something now that they believed before - scary stuff indeed. I became pretty good at it in removing some "bad" memories, as I said, the power scared me and I tried using other methodologies, but found them less exciting and slower so I had to change vocations.
The more I did it the better I got, and then I realized that a lot of people had learned how to do that subconsciously while most therapists that I knew did not know this themselves and my thoughts of the whole profession faded. I just use it a little bit now out of habit after thirty-five years.
Note about the statistical outcome, that is why I left the bad data in my study, If I corrected the direction calls of my assistant on that one subject or eliminated that subject, my p. score would have been unbelievable, near p.<.000001
You are mostly right about that IMO since our natural urge is to comply, after failing to provide or know something, an answer is given without being factual - I learned that from a police investigator hypnotist.
My doctoral committee didn't say very much, not even sure they really understood how the result could be useful, just complying with requirements and my doctoral committee's demands for quality. The ability to "change history" is a chilling technique that involves learning a person's mental process on validating something - "knowing something". If I ask you "how do you know things" you will probably respond that you don't know the mental processes involved, but if you understand what that person is doing mentally by knowing what their eye-movement is telling you, you might learn that they "picture it" then get a "feeling" followed by another visual test or it"sounds right" or something leading to some sensual satisfaction. I once saw a video of someone asking another person in a group "how do you know you know" and her eye movements were quite clear as he asked her multiple times - each showing the same sequence. It wasn't an NLP video, as the questioner did not determine anything by her eyes, he was just trying to find out the process she used while not recognizing her answers if he had known what to look for!
This personal method we all create for ourselves in our life-experiences can be observed, recorded, and used to gain trust, being led to understand things as being true because they are presented in forms and sequences that match our particular "belief" strategy. If done properly the client will "remember" things that never happened and/or disbelieve something now that they believed before - scary stuff indeed. I became pretty good at it in removing some "bad" memories, as I said, the power scared me and I tried using other methodologies, but found them less exciting and slower so I had to change vocations.
The more I did it the better I got, and then I realized that a lot of people had learned how to do that subconsciously while most therapists that I knew did not know this themselves and my thoughts of the whole profession faded. I just use it a little bit now out of habit after thirty-five years.
Note about the statistical outcome, that is why I left the bad data in my study, If I corrected the direction calls of my assistant on that one subject or eliminated that subject, my p. score would have been unbelievable, near p.<.000001