Spirit, Telepathy or Lucky Guesses

Some of us took part in an experimental session last week with our ouija board. And before we receive the expected comments, yes , we do know about ideomotor action, yes, we do realise that it is potentially dangerous and yes, we do not take everything spelt out as being the truth.

We had tried a similar experiment before details of which can be found here http://www.paranormaldiscovery.co.uk/esp.htm

This time rather than just using a glass we wondered if the ouija board might give similar or better results. There were three of us present and one of the team, Nat, decided to draw an everyday item on her notepad. The other two team members, myself and Tori, asked the 'spirit' (or whatever was moving the planchette) if it could see the object to which it answered 'yes'.

Firstly the word 'tumbler' was spelt. First time lucky we thought as Nat had drawn a wine glass.

The second attempt was also good. Again the planchette indicated that it knew what the object was. However, several objects were spelt out which were wrong. We asked again if it knew what the object was and again we were told 'yes'. It was mentioned that it must be messing us around if it was giving the wrong answers in that case. The immediate response was that it then spelt out 'the page' and then 'book' right after. (Nat had drawn an open book).

The last try failed.

So what do we make of all this? Telepathy? Had Nat somehow tansmitted the image of what she had drawn to us? We had then subconsciously moved the disc to the appropriate letters to spell out the name of the object she was thinking of. Note how I say she transmitted the image of what she had drawn. It couldn't have been the word she uses for the picture . If it had been I am sure the disc would have spelt out 'glass' not 'tumbler' which is a word none of us use.

What are the other explanations ? Luck I suppose? Why did it get only 2 correct and not all 3?

It would be good to repeat this but we should try to remove the chance of telepathy playing a part. The original test with the Zener cards was probably better as nobody knew the cards that were being placed on the table face down.

Will more or less people touching the disc help or hinder ? We'll let you know ....

Well, a similar experiment to the ouija one could be done, but someone else drawing the pictures beforehand and none of those taking part knowing what they are. The drawing could then be placed away from those taking part in the experiment, in the corner of the room for example. The person putting it out could just take it out of an envelope and turn it upright (without looking of course).

I agree with Nat. It would be less likely for any transmission to occur if preferably someone not involved in the ouija, and ideally, someone not even aware of what the drawings were to be used for, was to do the doodles.

Yeah, totally agree.
I had suggested before using some preschool snap cards, if we can find them. Something simple that has an everyday object on each card.

I guess the crux of any experiment is to work out (preferably in advance but not necessarily) exactly what it is that the results are trying to prove.

For example, does the spirit (let's call it that rather than the board) knows information because it sees things, or does it get it from somewhere else?

Both of these questions raise other questions. For example, if it knows things because it "sees" them then what does it use for eyes, and can it see in the dark?

If the information is in an envelope then it seems like it doesn't "see" it in the same we that we do.

If it gets it's knowledge from elsewhere the question is where?

Someone else could know and it either gets it from their mind. If so we accept that knowledge is "collective", that is, once something is known it's potentially known to everyone. There's a lot of evidence that this is the case, but it still requires an open-mind.

The third, and for me more exciting possibility, is that knowledge can be obtained without any person knowing, in other words without any human mind involved. This would mean that things can be known simply because they "are". Which leaves us to ponder on how knowledge and memory is stored.

Also, to make the world even more exciting there's the possibility that large scale events (like words on paper and so forth) behave just the same way as particles do at the atomic level. This scares a lot of people - mostly scientists.

Suppose you put several photographs into identical envelopes. Now someone else chooses one.

In this case no-one knows what's in the envelope. It could be any of the pictures.

Can the spirit tell you which one it is? If so it can either "see" (through envelopes - which is odd) or else it knows something that nobody knows. It can't have read your mind and neither can anyone have sent the information out telepathically because no-one knows (which is even odder).

The hardest thing to get your brain around is this:

The picture in the envelope could be any of them. It's not known until you look.
Does this mean that, until you look, it could be any of them. Maybe the outcome is not decided until you look, or find out some other way.

So, if you can predict what it is, does it mean that you have been able to know something that no-one knew, or have you made it be the one you chose?

My brain hurts now.

Hmm, so those lucky people out there who seem to be able to predict are basically exhibiting mind over matter. Rather than knowing what was in the envelope, they are willing it to be a certain card and succeeding. So how would that work if the gifted person had decided that no card would be in the envelope but rather a ten pound note? Is it possible?

Treen wrote:

So how would that work if the gifted person had decided that no card would be in the envelope but rather a ten pound note? Is it possible?

It could only be one of the things it could be (if that makes sense).

The way that experiment is described the contents of the envelope could be one of several possibilities, but someone knows what those possible outcomes are, so it can only be something that was a possiblity.

Not sure how you engineer an experiment where nobody even knew what the possiblities were. Even if they put something in it before they died there's no certainty that knowledge 'dies' - their spirit would still know.

This stuff is hard to get your brain around.

If you found an envelope and didn't know who put the object in it then could you make it anything you wanted? Maybe. But there could never be a discrepancy between what you found and what they put there. This would mean that either you and they would never meet to verify it, or that if you did you'd find that you agreed.

We're too used to assuming that time flows forwards and has meaning. What's to say that if we made that object a ten pound note that we didn't "pass that action back in time" so that we made them put that there - from their future.

Aargh! I need a mug of tea.

Crikey, that's a lot to take in. If time isn't necessarily a one way thing then it's got me wondering what it is that we are looking for on paranormal investigations and what 'ghosts' could be.

I have visions of a future me coming back to scare myself stupid but that would involve wiping memories of having been scared so I'd know in the future to come back to scare me etc so highly unlikely. I know what I mean even if nobody else does and perhaps I just watch too many films.

Anyway, back to the cards in the envelope experiment.

I have a book which is really interesting and covers a lot of what you say, Steve. It's a wee bit over my head but I managed to get the jist of it all.
According to the author

Quote :

evidence of psi experiments suggests that observation in the form of attention and intention does seem to influence the world.

Dean Radin, "Entangled Minds : Extrasensory Experiences In A Quantum Reality" Don't let the title put you off - it's not that hard to read. Basically the author goes through various scientific arguments against telepathy, psi and intuition etc and debunks them with sience - science against science.
If anyone wants to borrow it just ask.