"The Weird Desk"?

Aviary discussion and topics

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:29 pm

Gary wrote:
ryguy wrote:What on earth was that manic post all about... For Pete's sake, at least try to focus on one issue at a time. You've just went from DIA to Star Gate to Caryn Anscomb to Agent X to Zero Point to Kit Green to High Freq Grav Wave research all in one fell swoop.

Gary's back.


Yes. And yes. They are all connected, my friend, but I am not (yet) at liberty to tell all. But there is a common thread.


Prove it or retract the claim. HFGW has nothing to do with any of it (at least not the Baker variety) and Agent X is a farce (mostly contrived by you), and can hardly be connected to the actual government research known as Star Gate and absolutely not at all connected to DIA. You claiming that Agent X has a connection to DIA or Star Gate crosses the line.
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension


Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:33 pm

Gary wrote:"Agent X" ... aka Richard Dell Jr. ... http://www.aaerc.org/ ... claimed to have 'recruited' Obama energy consultant Susan EIsenhower's daughter for a 'Mars Mission' project, according to her daughter's testimony.


How about Richard Dell Jr's own testimony, with confirmation that the testimony is actually that of the Richard Dell of AAERC (a driver's license photocopy will do)? Do you have that?
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:38 pm

Access Denied wrote:Goodbye Gary...

[Gary’s ban is now permanent due to repeated failures to respond to moderation]


Ah...just saw this. Ugh, why can't Gary understand the principle of verified evidence vs. anecdotal testimony from an unreliable witness?
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby philliman » Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:55 pm

Gary, who is Eric Davis?

You've mentioned him on AJ's and Don Ecker's show.
philliman
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby ryguy » Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:21 pm

He conducted this speculative study: http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf

Reported here (with a picture of Davis): http://www.8newsnow.com/story/2920927/u ... eportation

Note the "Institute" he promotes, and notice how he is insinuating the Chinese are investing heavily into this area in much the same way Puthoff/Targ insinuated that Russia was investing heavily into psychic research...

Here's another perspective on Davis: http://www.skepdic.com/teleportation.html

Currently owns/operates an entity in Vegas known as "Warp Drive Metrics"

Warp Drive Metrics
4849 San Rafael Ave.
Las Vegas, NV 89120

For even more interesting reading, check out Davis' reaction after RU researchers revealed that the "Angleton Papers", which in large part attempted to promote teleportation, were fake. Davis tries to distract Jack and others on the mailing list from connecting the dots...

http://www.realityuncovered.net/blog/20 ... j12-drama/

That's who Eric Davis is. Not surprising that Gary promotes him...

I'm sure AD can tell you much, much more. :-)

-Ryan
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby philliman » Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:05 pm

Thanks, Ryan. Already expected that it must be a rather dubious character. I've asked because his name sounds quite similar like the alleged name of a well known forum operative. Eric Davis, Rick Davis, Rick Doty. Sounds quite the same to me. ;)
philliman
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby Access Denied » Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:42 am

ryguy wrote:I'm sure AD can tell you much, much more. :-)

I don’t know what you’re talking about…

ETI

[get it?]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby dazdude » Wed Jan 26, 2011 5:36 pm

So let's cut to the chase - POST your very best example - the unshakablest one... So far I've only seen vague hand-waving, nothing that is fully documented. Why is that?


LOL well there are so many - so to be fair lets just use the last public Rv demonstration I was part - then I cant be accused of just supplying my best RV.
I did this project - BLIND - meaning I had no information upfront, no one who was in my vicinity knew anything about the target. The target had three parts to it (a,b,c) I did a remote viewing session for each part for the project manager and supplied these weeks before I was allowed to see any feedback.

An overview of the project:
http://www.farsight.org/demo/Mysteries/ ... sions.html

My rv sessions are down the page - now did I describe something that fits the project scenario and data or did I miss and describe a random things for each of my rv sessions - remember I was BLIND.

Another public RV example was this one:
http://www.remoteviewed.com/files/11.4. ... sydney.pdf
There are many more on my site.


That's three times you have claimed 'millions' in that post... How many millions exactly, and how did you count them and decide that they were properly conducted? And do you actually understand what BLIND means when we are talking about science methodology? How something like this might be 'proven' beyond reasonable doubt? I suspect you do not...


here it is again...
In 1988 SRI (Stanford research institute) created a study as part of its 23 year Remote Viewing program for the U.S military and INTEL services this study was called:
META-ANALYSIS OF FORCED-CHOICE PRECOGNITION EXPERIMENTS By: EDWIN C. MAY (SRI)
CHARLES HONORTON, DIANE B. FERRARI, GEORGE HANSEN, (Psychophysical Research Laboratories)

Psychophysical. Research Laboratories (PRL) were contracted to conduct a meta-analysis of the forced-choice precognition literature.

In statistics, a meta-analysis combines the results of several studies that address a set of related research hypotheses. The general aim of a meta-analysis is to more powerfully estimate the true "effect size" as opposed to a smaller "effect size" derived in a single study under a given single set of assumptions and conditions.
(Description Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis )

The SRI contracted study looked at:
Meta-analysis of forced-choice precognition experiments published in low English-language parapsychology journals between 1935 and 1987. The database includes 309 studies reported by 62 senior authors. Nearly 2 million individual trials were contributed by more than 50,000 subjects.

The exhaustive study concludes:
"Our meta-analysis of forced-choice precognition experiments confirms low the existence of a small but statistically highly significant precognition effect. Most importantly, the effect appears to be replicable; significant confirmations are reported by two dozen investigators using a variety of methodological paradigms and subject populations.

Access,
I already know what the NRC study found, I just wanted confirmation that you were aware of it and chose to cover it up and exclude it from your “Remote Viewing History Map”.


Why would a single report be on my visual history map? its a map of the people/agencies involved - it doesn't included any/all the 89,000 documents from the archives.

Hint: Don’t be surprised if people dismiss you as a fraud because of things like this. It certainly doesn’t help the “cause” or your credibility.

LOL makes no sense - documents aren't included in the map - its people and key events in the history of RV - showing how the people moved and what they did.

Fine, perhaps you misunderstood the nature of the evidence I was asking for. I was asking for your evidence that the protocols and methods used in any “study” conducted to date aren’t flawed.


Oh cmon - even Utts and Hyman in the AIR final report said that their wernt any flaws and yet there was still an effect. Many congressional and scientific oversight committees looked at the work every years of the program - you do understand the role of a scientific oversight committee dont you? (to assess if the science is being done correctly) :D :D :D

Hyman said:
"Because my report will emphasize points of disagreement between Professor Utts and me, I want to state that we agree on many other points. We both agree that the SAIC experiments were free of the methodological weaknesses that plagued the early SRI research. We also agree that the SAIC experiments appear to be free of the more obvious and better known flaws that can invalidate the results of parapsychological investigations. We agree that the effect sizes reported in the SAIC experiments are too large and consistent to be dismissed as statistical flukes."


more on the AIR report and all the comments:

* Report for AIR on Remote Viewing - http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/air2.html
~ Jessica Utts
* Report for AIR on Remote Viewing - http://mceagle.com/remote-viewing/refs/ ... hyman.html
~ Ray Hyman
* Dr. Utt's Response to Dr. Hyman - http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/response.html
~ Jessica Utts
* Commentary on the AIR Remote Viewing Report - http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/media/air_mayresponse.html
~ Edwin May
* Bologna on Wry Bread - http://www.irva.org/library/articles/smithph-air1.html
~ Paul H. Smith
* A Second Helping - http://www.irva.org/library/articles/smithph-air2.html
~ Paul H. Smith
* Scraps and Crumbs - http://www.irva.org/library/articles/smithph-air3.html
~ Paul H. Smith
* Addendum and Corrections - http://www.irva.org/library/articles/smithph-air4.html
~ Paul H. Smith

Thank you, I appreciate it. Although that wasn’t what I asked for, I find it interesting that Gary left the last two pages out of his “official history”. That said, with this I believe you have fulfilled your obligation to back up your claim of authenticity so you’re under no obligation to provide the rest of the document it's from (note the references to TAB A, B, and so on) or at the very least, the first page, however I certainly would appreciate it if it’s not too much trouble.


There is no rest of the document - its all that there is in the archives. Its like I said the CIA archives are a complete mess, they are in no order over a range of CDs - the only way to find things it so go thru them one by one. Whats common is that in the cia archives you may find a document from 1972 right next to a document form the closure in 1995 - its that random. This isthe only copy of this document in the files so far released. I have mine all in a database so I an search for words, phrases etc inside the pdf documents.

Daz
User avatar
dazdude
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:23 am
Location: UK

Re: "The Weird Desk"?

Postby Access Denied » Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:10 pm

Off-topic discussion moved here…

viewtopic.php?p=33654#p33654
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Previous

Google

Return to The Aviary

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron