Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 165

Thread: Predictions for 2016.

  1. #11
    Oh, that's good. I was wondering about that. On first read though it sounded like it was saying that one is better than the other as in one is real and the other kind of prediction is not. But if you think it didn't mean that then thanks for sharing. You're probably right.
    HTML Code:
    For it is in giving that we receive.
    ~ St. Francis of Assisi

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by whoknows View Post
    Just my POV but I didn't see that comment as a negation of psychic predictions, but maybe that, that prediction, was made predicated solely observation of facts and trends.... Though as I said, this is only my POV... Far be it from me to put words in to another's mouth!
    You were spot on. Thanks for letting them know what the correct interpretation was.

    Predictions stem from many different sources.

    Some of it can be from a psychic event that leads to a prediction.
    Other predictions are based on prophetic sayings from olden times. (If one event is true of a prophecy, then the probability of the next event seems likely...etc)
    While some predictions are from inductive/deductive reasoning.

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning )

    -----------------------

    I probably should have left out a word or two to make things clearer. Luckily people caught on what was meant in proper context. Kudos to you.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  3. #13
    Oh thanks for clarifying that comment from your post. Good that you are not making fun of those who claim to get a "psychic" prediction on something but only those who get them really know what they're like.
    HTML Code:
    For it is in giving that we receive.
    ~ St. Francis of Assisi

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by A99 View Post
    Oh thanks for clarifying that comment from your post.
    You are most welcome to any clarifications.

    Quote Originally Posted by A99 View Post
    Good that you are not making fun of those who claim to get a "psychic" prediction on something but only those who get them really know what they're like.
    I am not known for making fun of others "psychic predictions". I don't have any issues with it.

    As for the last portion of that sentence, I think it is up for the rigorous debate as to whether people actually know when they are seeing some element of the future.

    I'll take the (easy) position that performance metrics will probably be all over the place over a wide sampling of psychics.

    ========================

    For example, if you ask any psychic who makes a (valid) predictions what they experience as they come into that knowledge about some event or trait that occurs in the future time frame. What would any number of them say?

    I predict some will say "they heard it", OR "They sensed the information", OR "It just came to me".

    But as a person who is very analytical I would beg the question of what are the key factors that differentiate a valid experience from an experience that proves to be invalid?

    ----------------------

    When it works, does it feel any different from when it does not work? (Key questions I would love to ask)

    If no differences, then the implications are it is a random cacophony of mental chatter that proves to be valid by mere chance.

    If there is a difference, then what is the factor behind that difference? What makes it properly tick? What conditions lend itself to the method of acquiring future information?

    -----------------------

    I have my own unique background experiences in that, so I look for key differences in high performance individuals. To see if there is more than one valid method.

    My general assumption is that the majority of people alive today experience predictive peeks into a future state of some event or affair. The frequency is the larger question at hand (for me). I do recognize that some people are fairly low performance and some are virtually non-performers.

    So far I have come to certain conclusions on the general topic (open to change upon new and insightful data). There are lots of questions I would ask. I think even low performance individuals would eventually glean what the potential missing elements might be.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  5. #15
    Interesting post Fore. Thanks for sharing!
    HTML Code:
    For it is in giving that we receive.
    ~ St. Francis of Assisi

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Fore View Post
    You were spot on. Thanks for letting them know what the correct interpretation was.

    Predictions stem from many different sources.

    Some of it can be from a psychic event that leads to a prediction.
    Other predictions are based on prophetic sayings from olden times. (If one event is true of a prophecy, then the probability of the next event seems likely...etc)
    While some predictions are from inductive/deductive reasoning.

    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning )

    -----------------------

    I probably should have left out a word or two to make things clearer. Luckily people caught on what was meant in proper context. Kudos to you.

    Ha!

    And some predictions can even be made by a flip of a coin!!! Any prediction is just that!

    ...a thing predicted; a forecast...

    For 2016...?

    I think we'll see even more extreme Earth changes, far worst storms, wild temperature fluctuations, maybe more (*)sun activity(*), and above average Earthquakes.

    As well as increased social unrest, political expansions or should I say growth in government.



    *Many here have been following Suspicious0bservers' 3min New. Have any of you noticed that it seems there is an un-natural protection of some sort in regards to the Earth, wrt CMEs not hitting us as much as normal . . .eh, maybe its just me thinking that!

    ...

  7. #17
    Image analysis expert Marvin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Heart of America
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by whoknows View Post
    Just my POV but I didn't see that comment as a negation of psychic predictions, but maybe that, that prediction, was made predicated solely observation of facts and trends.... Though as I said, this is only my POV... Far be it from me to put words in to another's mouth!

    Maybe I am confused, but my comment was not to negate "Psychic predictions are REAL predictions too." I was commenting on "Non-psychic prediction: Hillary Clinton will be our next President. (duh)"

    But it brings up an interesting question, what is a "valid" psychic prediction? What senses must be employed or not?


    M


    Mmm, yes, very curious, very interesting...

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
    Maybe I am confused, but my comment was not to negate "Psychic predictions are REAL predictions too." I was commenting on "Non-psychic prediction: Hillary Clinton will be our next President. (duh)"

    But it brings up an interesting question, what is a "valid" psychic prediction? What senses must be employed or not?

    M
    I consider predictions not necessarily needing to be psychic, and lean toward trends that societies are headed - cause and effect sort of thing.

    "Valid psychic prediction", would have to say... Someone claiming they had a vision that pointed a specific event, and hit that date within a few weeks. Example: 8.0 earthquake Mexico City on Feb 13th, 2016. If a 6.8 hit Mexico City on Jan 26th or March 3rd, "maybe" they called it... If the claim was, in 2016 Mexico City has a major earthquake with no specifics and it happens in Sept 2016 - maybe simply because they named a city.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
    Maybe I am confused, but my comment was not to negate "Psychic predictions are REAL predictions too." I was commenting on "Non-psychic prediction: Hillary Clinton will be our next President. (duh)"

    But it brings up an interesting question, what is a "valid" psychic prediction? What senses must be employed or not?


    M
    I think, what makes a "valid" psychic prediction is knowing [accurately] when it is related to the future.

    All else is basically "chance" and randomized external confirmation (in my view).

    It is my belief that low performance (and virtually non-performers) listen to their internal mental chatter. Some of the internal mental chatter is just that, internal chatter. Only a sliver of it is actually derived from future insight. How frequently they perceive an instance of internal mental chatter that "springs forth" with future data is the issue.

    The other issue is when the individual experiencing it, recognizes and knows (with certainty) that it relates to a future reference point.

    --------------------

    Most lower performance individuals (from my observation and personal guessing) appear to hear an abundance of mental chatter in their own inner mental world. Some of that chatter is randomly isolated, ruminated upon as a curiosity, and then shelved having nothing more to with their immediate present. Later on, when that artifact actually becomes a present reality, they charge in saying they knew about it.

    Technically they did, they just don't know it until after the fact has presented themselves.

    ---------------------

    The lower performance individual are usually divided into different kinds. Those with [a] reoccurring circumstance that almost mimics "a system" of controlling the phenomena which induces the proper access to future information. For these it is, difficult to control and usually the circumstance of its initiation is random or on intervals.

    Consider it more of a state of "inducement" rather than "control".

    In that category you'll have most mystics who will go through a long chain of processes that in reality have nothing to do with predicting the future....but allows them to attain a state of "circumstance" where it is triggered.

    "A system of inducing the phenomena without actually understanding it."

    --------

    The other lower performance individuals are usually the types who engage in other unrelated psychic tasks, but through their habits, they trigger associated psychic functionality.

    ===================

    High performance individuals are the (rarer) types who have a psychic system which is in their partial or full control. The mechanisms and the processes are either fully or partially understood to the degree that it allows them to efficiently gather information.

    Those are usually divided into those who can target specific information and those who can't.

    --Consistent performance but random access.
    --Consistent performance and non-random [targeted] access.

    The difference between the two is not about efficiency but more like usefulness.

    I don't yet know what are the proportions of them are since they are pretty sparse to come across.

    I am not sure what else to say. So I'll stop there. Again, this is all my ?opinion?/observations.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

  10. #20
    [opinion]
    The majority who do "psychic predictions" are usually the ones who listen to their own mental chatter, have no system per-say, regularly use some inducement regimen (not all do, sometimes it is whenever they think it might be valid), and can't pluck out accurately which is the real McCoy out of the entire lot of mental chatter.

    Could be right 1 out of every 200 tries. Or 1 out of every 12 tries.

    -----------------------

    There are also the types (low performance) who use "inducement" techniques without a real system.
    Usually the lab research types who are more formal in their goals.
    They tend to gravitate towards "clustering" and "cross referencing" techniques to attempt to sort out the basket of mental chatter and 1 instance of accurate future data observations.

    Usually they aim for high performance traits like targeted access and discrimination between mental and actual data.

    (Like the RV projects in Military circles of paranormal research)

    Just keep in mind that ignorance of sub-processes related to experiencing future data is a major factor in all environments.
    Even clustering and cross referencing doesn't really do much if you don't know how the underlying principles work.
    For every action, there is a corresponding over-reaction. -- Anonymous

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •