'Everything he knows'? Would it not be more correct to say everything he believes or asserts?Cite one objective fact from all of his work which shows that any kind of remote viewing, reincarnation, etc is proven fact. (The 99.99recurring% factual, since one must allow for the infinitely vanishingly small possibility that he might be right.)Quote
Following I quote an article from Collective Evolution; Cancelled TED Talk: Physicist Contracted By CIA Shares Everything He Knows About ESP – published 20th Dec 2016.
It doesn't matter how superb qualifications are in one or more fields, this does not automatically make them correct about anything supposedly, or said to be 'psychic' etc.Quote
Russell Targ is a physicist and author, a pioneer in the development of the laser and laser applications, and a cofounder of the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) investigation of psychic abilities in the 1970s and 1980s. SRI is a research and development think tank in Menlo Park, California. Called remote viewing, his work in the psychic area has been published in Nature, The Proceedings of the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE), and the Proceedings of the American Association the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
I have every admiration and respect for his work in science, technology and practical research , but without objective etc info about anything psychic, I do not accept that aspect of his beliefs. Why should I or anyone take it on trust alone?Quote
Targ has a bachelor’s degree in physics from Queens College and did his graduate work in physics at Columbia University. He has received two National Aeronautics and Space- Administration awards for inventions and contributions to lasers and laser communications. In 1983 and 1984 he accepted invitations to present remote-viewing demonstrations and to address the USSR Academy of Science on this research.
A physicist's 'proof'? Why isn't it part of our knowledge base? What is its objectivity?Quote
He is author or co-author of nine books dealing with the scientific investigation of psychic abilities and Buddhist approaches to the transformation of consciousness, including Mind Reach: Scientists Look at Psychic Ability (with E. Harold Puthoff, 1977, 2005); Miracles of Mind: Exploring Nonlocal Consciousness and Spiritual Healing (with Jane Katra, 1998); and Limitless Mind: A Guide to Remote Viewing and Transformation of Consciousness (2004). He also wrote an autobiography, Do You See What I See: Memoirs of a Blind Biker, in 2008. His current book is The Reality of ESP: A Physicist’s Proof of Psychic Abilities.
Am I supposed to take his words on things psychic etc because of the number of books he has written? Why? The phrase, 'jumpin on the bandwagon' springs to mind, but that would be being cynical, so I won't use it!
Admiration and respect for objective scientific work, but you wil not find an objective fact which has become a Theory about anything psychic etc.
100% brilliant. Such work to improve safety, technology, etc should earn the respect and admiration of all.Quote
As a senior staff scientist at Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, Targ developed airborne laser systems for the detection of windshear and air turbulence.
And that is a desperately, crying shame. See above re bandwagon.Quote
Having retired in 1997, he now writes books on psychic research and teaches remote viewing worldwide.
Well, that shows there is progress indeed towards objectivity and rationality and a growing acknowledgement of the difference between fact, fantasy and the grey area of don't knows. If they had titled their talks with the words 'we believe', i.e. clearly indicating that they are not objective, there would have been no reason to stop them.Quote
Below is a planned talk by RusseLl for TED that was cancelled by TED. Not surprisingly, some of the most interesting TED talks have been cancelled, author Graham Hancock’s “The War on Consciousness” was banned, and so was scientist Rupert Sheldrake’s, titled “The Science Delusion.”
Fascinating they may be to those who want to believe such things exist, but again, I request an objective fact that has stood the test of time.Quote
When it comes to topics within the realms of parapsychology, like ESP, they often fiercely oppose the belief systems of many, despite the fact that publications in peer-reviewed scientific literature have examined this topic for more than a century, with some fascinating results.
Last Saturday, I tried to see enough of Strictly Come Dancing to make it worth my while watching, but it is just too hard, so I turned off and turned on radio 3, where I found I had tuned in at the beginning of a performance of Holst's The Planets, with Prof Brian Cox talking about each planet before that planet's movement. It was excellent, and he was pointing out, tactfully but strongly as always, the FACT that our planet is a small dot and why is so much time spent on arguing belief systems.
However, since they have not come up with one objective fact yet, there are many good reasons for this.Quote
Obviously there is something to this, otherwise the CIA and other agencies around the world would not devote decades of research to studying this topic in depth.
For many years, I read all the stuff available on this subject. I was lucky enough though to have sceptical antennae and always looked for the falsifying info - very scarce when I was younger. Not so now fortunately.Quote
Enjoy! Interesting stuff to say the least.
Okay - just give me one objective truth about this subject!!! Should be simple, shouldn't it?!!Quote
For article and Russell Targ's TED Talk see: [www.collective-evolution.com]
The only thing I find ‘irrational and bizarre’ to how people will deny the truth when it is staring them in the face.
Have you tried presenting this subject on a forum where the majority are sceptics? I have always maintained an interest and a presence on four different forums and have learnt a great deal about what is true, false, or not known.