An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Use this forum for general Martial Arts related discussion. Please stick strictly to Martial Arts and use the "General Chat" topic for other themes.

Moderators: nyang, Dvivid, Inga

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby Monsoon » Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:54 pm

I'm going to agree with the first paragraph... the rest, not so much.

Regarding science and theology: these two are not comparable. Science is based around the testability of theories and is ultimately verifiable. Theology springs entirely (IMO) from the mind of man and is thus not verifiable. Apples and bananas.

If you attempt to detect water using devices to detect CO2, you wont find anything either, but it doesnt mean that CO2 doesnt exist... or maybe it does.


All this means is that you are using the wrong tool for the job based on a lack of understanding of what you are using the tool to measure. It doesn't have much relevance beyond that. In the infamous Chang video the tool used was a $15 voltmeter that was not designed for the type of output that Chang's hidden generator produced. It is not surprising that it did not detect anything, much like in your analogy.

The problem with people like Chang is that everything they do can be replicated by trickery or deception. The onus is not on us to prove how they did it (we can already show that), but for them to prove that they did it in a different way to our non-paranormal methods. Not a single claimant has ever been able to do this.

A scientist must draw specific conclusions from this. A theologian can make up their own stories to suit themselves.
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby chh » Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:22 am

In Chang's case there's no reason to talk about trying to measure qi. What's at issue is that he has already made testable claims about what qi does (shocks people, makes your hand safe from small metal air rifle pellets, spins knives on tables, burns paper, etc.), which haven't been properly evaluated yet, and which also happen to be magic tricks people can do. If the filmmakers had found a strong electrical current they would have said 'it's qi', and if they didn't, someone would say 'qi isn't electricity!' (which is what happened). There was no point in using it.

It's not difficult to think of testing conditions that would rule out the use of conjuring tricks, and it wouldn't be difficult in Java to find some actual researchers at a university to run the tests properly (although they say he travels around the world too). You don't need to measure qi to see whether he's a charlatan, you just need to test for the effects in a reasonable way (as monsoon said), which he could have easily done but chose not to do deliberately.

I think this is all kind of off topic, since as far as I understand most people who practice qigong, TCM, and IMA don't think that this is what qi is all about. Claims about effects on health, physical power, and martial ability are empirically weaker- it takes more work to test them, but I think those are the important questions.
chh
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby joeblast » Fri Jan 18, 2013 7:56 am

Monsoon wrote:@joeblast, I watched it.... with popcorn in hand and a huge grin!
So you already had your mind made up and saw what you wanted to. Only focusing on the paper and not the other people's direct experiences with it is a bit intellectually dishonest. If you watched the whole thing you saw the cameraman, the sound lady - all skeptical before their experience with it. Or how about the second vid with shifu jiang, how do you explain what happened to that kid's stomach, did that just magically appear? I took a class with some of the students before I decided not to pursue that lineage, and when they first went to him, he made the women exit the room, stripped naked in order to show them there was no device on him, and the qi he produced made everyone's mouths sweet, glasses of water that were in the room were sweet where they were not prior, and someone even attested to their piss being sweet after the occurrence. How do you explain such things? Or is that just a null and void bit of hearsay, since you have not experienced it yourself its bs?


To address your point though: what device would you use to detect qi? Would you be detecting the source of the qi, the type of energy qi is supposed to be, or the effect that is caused by the qi?I have no idea how you'd detect qi. I'm not an applied scientist 8) I've put a flukemeter on my laogung points before and found I was able to push around the ohms, but any other setting I couldnt budge in the least. I dont know if those wires were old or something, but they stopped working after a few times of having tested the resistance through the laogung and I had to buy new wires for my buddy. Probably just a coincidence, confirmation bias is something we all have to deal with, and I'm not going to run around saying omg my qi burned up those wires :lol:

This is an extremely important question. The observable effect is the easiest measurable part, but also the easiest to fake. Everything that exists has an effect associated with it - if there is no observable effect then the there is no causative agent. Simple. The argument that qi exists but has no observable effect means that even if, against all logic, it DID exist it would be of no use. And likewise, the argument that nobody with any really significant level of cultivation is all you have to choose from for test subjects, that's going to skew the result - so it remains an unknown unknown. But, having seen such things medically applied to significant effect....nah, that dont count :mrgreen:

Note: I am not saying that qi does not exist here, only putting a point across.

As to the YT vid? Yes, Chang is a fraud who uses a common illusionist method to fool people into believing he has mysterious neigong powers.

All this means is that you are using the wrong tool for the job based on a lack of understanding of what you are using the tool to measure. It doesn't have much relevance beyond that. In the infamous Chang video the tool used was a $15 voltmeter that was not designed for the type of output that Chang's hidden generator produced. It is not surprising that it did not detect anything, much like in your analogy.
Do you have any idea how old that vid is? I guess the one you watched didnt show him tear the paper and crumple it. I've seen similar demonstrations with hay, but then someone had a problem with it being over a sewer grate to provide upward airflow. To some people you will never prove any of this until they actually experience something real. I guess you could call a well developed nei gung "a hidden generator" since its within the body after all :roll:

And wrt/ Randi, I didnt get that from reading what's on his site - I got that from folks who have actually investigated it to the point of finding out these details of how exactly things would be "measured" and not a single one of them wanted to participate in a foregone conclusion. Of course the verbiage on his website is phrased so as to appear to be open to finding a positive result, but sorry, Randi is a zealot in his anti-qi belief and he is just looking to prove it doesnt exist, he is not an objective scientist that would be perfectly happy with either result.

At any rate, we'll continue to believe what we believe until we're shown otherwise. I've already experienced otherwise, and I'm not here to convince you guys. Perhaps one day you'll experience something real and your eyes will open a little more...until then, go ahead and consider your context to be comprehensive :lol:
Even in mildly complex systems, any outcome is the wrong thing to target, with the process being where the focus should be.
joeblast
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: CT

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:43 am

On something of a side note to all this. I have been practicing Yang Long Form for quite some time(despite what my skill level may lead some to believe). A hour a day would be a somewhat accurate fairly daily average. When I started doing this years ago I did not have high blood pressure, nor was I slightly diabetic, nor did I have the beginnings of heel spurs. Now I do.

Getting right to the point, if you will. I don't believe, for a minute, that Tai Chi caused any of this. What I do believe is that Tai Chi hasn't helped it. By this I mean that whatever benefits Tai Chi proponents claim, these 3 things should not be on the list. Not only did Tai Chi not help with those three issues, apparently it couldn't prevent them either.

Note that this is not a SLAM against Tai Chi and I realize that not everything that works actually works for everyone. I also realize that this is not scientific proof of anything. It's simply my experience. I'm also aware that, in the end, Tai Chi may be found to not have any affect on these items, or vice versa for that matter.

In the end I think that all the health benefit "studies" done of Qigong and Tai Chi are slightly flawed and or skewed from the beginning. It seems, to me, that the people who come up with the ideas for all these various tests and studies have, in the back of their minds, a desire to FIND SOMETHING, and find something positive. Finding nothing or getting negative results is not part of their minsdset and this, in it's own way, skews things ever so slightly. No one wants to run a study that doesn't find anything. That's not anything that will get you published.

So what am I saying? Not so sure as it's starting to sound like babbling and I can be very good at that.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby caesar » Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:51 am

pete5770 wrote:In the end I think that all the health benefit "studies" done of Qigong and Tai Chi are slightly flawed and or skewed from the beginning. It seems, to me, that the people who come up with the ideas for all these various tests and studies have, in the back of their minds, a desire to FIND SOMETHING, and find something positive. Finding nothing or getting negative results is not part of their minsdset and this, in it's own way, skews things ever so slightly. No one wants to run a study that doesn't find anything. That's not anything that will get you published.


The explanation of your believes?
caesar
 

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:10 pm

caesar wrote:
pete5770 wrote:In the end I think that all the health benefit "studies" done of Qigong and Tai Chi are slightly flawed and or skewed from the beginning. It seems, to me, that the people who come up with the ideas for all these various tests and studies have, in the back of their minds, a desire to FIND SOMETHING, and find something positive. Finding nothing or getting negative results is not part of their minsdset and this, in it's own way, skews things ever so slightly. No one wants to run a study that doesn't find anything. That's not anything that will get you published.


The explanation of your believes?


Not sure what, exactly, you're asking but yes, I would say that's a fair summary of how I think and or believe.
As an example let's take Global Warming. Bunches of scientist's and politicians around the world are engaging in testing to "prove" that it's happening. A very few are engaged in "proving" it's not happening. Either way there is NO ONE objectively looking at the issue(or so it seems to me).They have already made up their minds on the subject although they may not realize it. To me, this in itself flaws the result. And in any case my conspiracy theory holds that it's in the scientist's best interest to prove it does exist. Then, if it does exist, they can work to save us and get all kinds of money from various grants and the like to do further research. I also don't believe that scientist's working to disprove all this are starting with an objective slate. They are being funded somehow, and finding out that it does exist would effectively cancel out their research grants. They must continue to insist that it's not real to keep their jobs.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby caesar » Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:44 pm

Then I think you should first prove that the people making scientific studies on Qi Gong and TCQ are mostly practitioners themselves, and on top of that people who are not willing to publish results that seem "negative."

Otherwise your statement is only a belief which derives from your logic influenced by your prejudices...
caesar
 

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby joeblast » Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:52 pm

An honest assessment of where the money goes is an easy way to see who's got incentive for what in the AGW department. "working to save us and getting all kinds of grant money" has been going on for quite a while now, all you've had to do was mention global warming and the grant money flowed....and the joke of a "pal review" that they made out of the peer review process is heretical to the scientific method. It took an unpaid statistician to pull the legs out from underneath the hockey stick al gore trotted around - look at who has things to hide, east anglia, met office, penn state, EPA admin Jackson using a fake email address to get around FOIA requests...that's why the climategate dump happened because they were all trying to get around FOIA requests. (Just like Obama is trying to get around providing documents about enabling the transfer of all those weapons to the drug cartels...) So who's got something to hide :lol: The anti-AGW people have significantly less funding, and the government and one-world UNers want the co2 scam to be true because it is a vast source of untapped tax revenue. I first began to be really suspect after corresponding with James Hansen a bunch of years ago back before I knew he was a cheerleader zealot and not an actual scientist - he tried telling me his calculations clearly showed that human influences have well overtaken natural variabilities as main drivers of the climate, and I just laughed, as if Total Solar Irradiance in any way shape or form is an actual comprehensive assessment of the sun's energetic input.

You cant even separate the co2 climate sensitivity from background noise data at this point in time, but the only thing we know for sure is that all of the models that rely on a too-heavy warming coefficient for co2 make ridiculously wild predictions past a short amount of time into the future, and for them to have any applicability whatsoever they constantly need to be re-calibrated to reality. The entire usefulness of a model is its predictive capability, so...what good are those cockamamie models? They started with a flawed assumption-artifact from them trying to explain the CFC cycle in the upper atmosphere and the cooling in the 70s before they understood any of it well, attributing the preponderance to human activity, and then giving a too-heavy cooling coefficient to aerosols, which was then balanced by the too-heavy warming coefficient of co2.

That stuff happens when you refuse to back away from a premise at all costs ;)
Even in mildly complex systems, any outcome is the wrong thing to target, with the process being where the focus should be.
joeblast
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: CT

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:22 pm

caesar wrote:Then I think you should first prove that the people making scientific studies on Qi Gong and TCQ are mostly practitioners themselves, and on top of that people who are not willing to publish results that seem "negative."

Otherwise your statement is only a belief which derives from your logic influenced by your prejudices...


All I'm saying is that many "testers" have a predetermined mindset. Scientist's have beliefs like everyone else and how they view a subject has some influence on the study. Add to that the fact that someone is sponsoring this testing / study and, generally, these people want what is called "results". It could also be the the sponsors of this study want to hear good news(i.e. yes, it's real) instead of negative results, as they may have a vested interest in all this. So, more influence to come to a certain conclusion. Not saying that this is always the case but......

Also my "...statement IS only a belief which derives from.......". I never said that my beliefs were true. I said they were my beliefs and my beliefs are open to change. Always have been.
I'm no preacher of "truth". Good God no.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby caesar » Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:03 pm

What I'm saying is that I think you have a pretty predetermined mindset towards the benefits of Qi Gong, meditation and TCC. Even when you're unable to give proof that most of the positive results of the tests concerning those three are influenced by predetermined mindsets, you still feel the need to repeatedly state your believes.

Of course you're feel to believe whatever you want to believe...but if you want a serious discussion about the matter, you should also be able to give us support to your believes.
caesar
 

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:04 pm

caesar wrote:What I'm saying is that I think you have a pretty predetermined mindset towards the benefits of Qi Gong, meditation and TCC. Even when you're unable to give proof that most of the positive results of the tests concerning those three are influenced by predetermined mindsets, you still feel the need to repeatedly state your believes.

Of course you're feel to believe whatever you want to believe...but if you want a serious discussion about the matter, you should also be able to give us support to your believes.


My mindset says to me that certain things are credible and certain things are not, just like your mindset. We're not so different. We just believe in different things, on occasion. Wouldn't be much need for a forum if everyone agreed on everything.

I can't give you proof of peoples predetermined mindsets. I used the word "my beliefs", not "this is the truth".I think you're claiming to know the truth while I'm referring to what I BELIEVE in. Two different things.

I also can't prove that Qigong doesn't exist. No one can prove something doesn't exist.
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby Monsoon » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:22 pm

@joeblast, at the risk of being rude I wonder if you really understand the process of scientific examination. All your counter-points are straw-clutching. All those points are based "but, but, but, what if... " in a kind of desperate need for some way to continue believing.

This is an extremely important question. The observable effect is the easiest measurable part, but also the easiest to fake. Everything that exists has an effect associated with it - if there is no observable effect then the there is no causative agent. Simple. The argument that qi exists but has no observable effect means that even if, against all logic, it DID exist it would be of no use. And likewise, the argument that nobody with any really significant level of cultivation is all you have to choose from for test subjects, that's going to skew the result - so it remains an unknown unknown. But, having seen such things medically applied to significant effect....nah, that dont count


See here. Grasping. This is the old "you haven't tested the "RIGHT" people" defence. So obviously the RIGHT people NEVER step forward, and NEVER make any claims. Wow, who would have thought. All the public claimants are actually frauds by your own logic. Way to go!

Also, you say
To some people you will never prove any of this until they actually experience something real.
. While that may be true of 'some people' it is singularly not true of scientists. People in science test things based on what they think will happen, sometimes this corresponds with what they want to happen, but the end result is accepted irrespective of whether it proves or disproves a theory or claim. So, no, you are wrong. And most of the people in these videos are those who are craving belief. Even the 'impartial camera crew' are just ordinary people who, like most of us, are easily deceived by skilled illusionists. The difference is that when you go to the theatre you know beforehand that the guy is an illusionist. He doesn't try to make you believe otherwise. Outside of the theatre he knows you are just as gullible as everyone else.

Look, if you want to believe in what Chang et al claim, then that is obviously your prerogative. However, when you involve science there are very strict guidelines, one of which is that anecdotal evidence is ALWAYS treated with suspicion.

Did I watch the vid with prejudice? Of course! But only because I was already familiar with it all, having seen and researched it myself over the last 30 years. I actually thought it was going to be a new, unseen video, but alas, it wasn't.

Putting Randi aside, the simple fact is that not one single claimant can perform their miraculous abilities under properly controlled conditions. In all the years that claims have been made, NONE have stood up to proper scrutiny. Even a simplistic application of principles will tell you that the likelihood, in all those years, of at least one genuine person stepping forward is high. Yet NONE ever have. For any respectable scientist that basically kills the claims.

Perhaps one day you'll experience something real and your eyes will open a little more...until then, go ahead and consider your context to be comprehensive


You just don't get it do you? You are hiding your need to believe in this innocuous seeming but actually terribly offensive statement. As a trivial example, have you ever been hit by a bus? No? Then by your logic you cannot accept that such an event can occur, despite the observable and measurable fact that it does.

If any of these charlatans could actually perform medical procedures and so on by an application of their will/qi/whatever, it would be taken seriously by the scientific community.They can't and it's not. Science understands that some things have yet to be explained, but science deals with ACTUAL things, not things in peoples imagination.

@Pete

All I'm saying is that many "testers" have a predetermined mindset. Scientist's have beliefs like everyone else and how they view a subject has some influence on the study. Add to that the fact that someone is sponsoring this testing / study and, generally, these people want what is called "results". It could also be the the sponsors of this study want to hear good news(i.e. yes, it's real) instead of negative results, as they may have a vested interest in all this. So, more influence to come to a certain conclusion. Not saying that this is always the case but....


This is a very valid argument, and certainly has some basis in reality. However, in the scientific/academic environment there is a very powerful balance mechanism called 'peer review' . During the peer review process your work is examined critically by independent scientists/academics who, partly because they go through the same process in their own work, are especially alert to dodgy science. Generally speaking, if a piece of research has not passed peer review it is not taken seriously by the wider scientific community.

You are right about the beliefs of scientists, but any bias that creeps into a study is quickly spotted by those who have no vested interest in the results. The system is unpleasant at times, but it does work.
Last edited by Monsoon on Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby John the Monkey mind » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:25 pm

joeblast wrote:An honest assessment of where the money goes is an easy way to see who's got incentive for what in the AGW department. "working to save us and getting all kinds of grant money" has been going on for quite a while now, all you've had to do was mention global warming and the grant money flowed....and the joke of a "pal review" that they made out of the peer review process is heretical to the scientific method. It took an unpaid statistician to pull the legs out from underneath the hockey stick al gore trotted around - look at who has things to hide, east anglia, met office, penn state, EPA admin Jackson using a fake email address to get around FOIA requests...that's why the climategate dump happened because they were all trying to get around FOIA requests. (Just like Obama is trying to get around providing documents about enabling the transfer of all those weapons to the drug cartels...) So who's got something to hide :lol: The anti-AGW people have significantly less funding, and the government and one-world UNers want the co2 scam to be true because it is a vast source of untapped tax revenue. I first began to be really suspect after corresponding with James Hansen a bunch of years ago back before I knew he was a cheerleader zealot and not an actual scientist - he tried telling me his calculations clearly showed that human influences have well overtaken natural variabilities as main drivers of the climate, and I just laughed, as if Total Solar Irradiance in any way shape or form is an actual comprehensive assessment of the sun's energetic input.

You cant even separate the co2 climate sensitivity from background noise data at this point in time, but the only thing we know for sure is that all of the models that rely on a too-heavy warming coefficient for co2 make ridiculously wild predictions past a short amount of time into the future, and for them to have any applicability whatsoever they constantly need to be re-calibrated to reality. The entire usefulness of a model is its predictive capability, so...what good are those cockamamie models? They started with a flawed assumption-artifact from them trying to explain the CFC cycle in the upper atmosphere and the cooling in the 70s before they understood any of it well, attributing the preponderance to human activity, and then giving a too-heavy cooling coefficient to aerosols, which was then balanced by the too-heavy warming coefficient of co2.

That stuff happens when you refuse to back away from a premise at all costs ;)


All true. Some fields of science study have become very entrenched and controlled by vested interests and ego. Anthropology and the study of diversity in humanity is another example. Stephen Jay Gould would be a good example of faking evidence to push a political doctrine http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/scien ... .html?_r=0. Its all very closed and you can only develop your job prospects by towing the line. Archaeological dating for prehistory and paleoanthropology is another one. It is no longer about finding the truth but not rocking the boat, anomalies should be studied not sat on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hueyatlaco Its all vested interests in this day and age.
Last edited by John the Monkey mind on Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
John the Monkey mind
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:15 am

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby Monsoon » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:29 pm

Addendum

Just so people don't think I am a complete hard-ass. There are some things that I personally believe yet have not been proven to be true. I cannot test them, I only experience them.

Unfortunately internal experiences cannot be replicated exactly in another person. Even seeing colours. No two people see colour exactly the same way.

Sometimes when I am practicing a form a kind of peace envelops me. I feel it, I cannot explain it, I cannot demonstrate it to others, and I certainly cannot make other people feel what I feel.

These are internal manifestations. They are applicable only to the individual and are of little to no value to anyone else. As soon as people make claims of external manifestations of something then they are open to scrutiny. The rest you know.
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby Monsoon » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:34 pm

@John the Monkey mind.

Yeah, that was a fun case! The skull thing I mean. However, one of the true tests of scientific validity is repeatability. Any independent scientist who could get access to those skulls and measure volume for themselves would have noticed the anomaly immediately.

Unfortunately there are unscrupulous scientists who will try to stop independent verification of results. Although this point would not be useful in arguments about why one's favourite theories haven't been accepted yet.
peace and harmony

monsoon
Monsoon
Forum Guru
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:10 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby John the Monkey mind » Fri Jan 18, 2013 3:52 pm

Monsoon wrote:@John the Monkey mind.

Yeah, that was a fun case! The skull thing I mean. However, one of the true tests of scientific validity is repeatability. Any independent scientist who could get access to those skulls and measure volume for themselves would have noticed the anomaly immediately.

Unfortunately there are unscrupulous scientists who will try to stop independent verification of results. Although this point would not be useful in arguments about why one's favourite theories haven't been accepted yet.


That's true. If you look at the global warming theorist they are actually the only people with access to the data they work on, they only let their friends see it. Without the data nobody can check their work and people have to take their word for it. There is a huge amount of money tied up in research grants as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_R ... ontroversy

I think that a lot of people in Anthropology, climate science and sociology are highly political motivated or sensitive to an extent that they will ate times deem the truth "irresponsible" and so hide it.

With the skull thing Dr. Gould stifled further investigation and testing by playing the race card. Any further investigation at that time would have been "racist", new developments have shown there is not always a link between cranial capacity and IQ so Dr. Gould race block on research was broken and people could check his work. It is worth noting that Dr. Gould's work was highly influential in setting the modern view of the relationship between groups of humanity and its social economic implications. The man was clearly prone to lie and so it throws the whole subject into doubt but then the political lock on the subject still stops research in politically incorrect directions.
To me truth is the truth and I want to know it even if it seems uncomfortable what ever it may be.

I know this does not mean that all theories are rejected because of bias and corruption and I doubt this is the primary failing keeping QiGong from main stream acceptance but it does go to show that bias is not only possible among people investigating QiGong but rampant in other fields of study.
John the Monkey mind
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:15 am

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby caesar » Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:13 pm

pete5770 wrote:
caesar wrote:What I'm saying is that I think you have a pretty predetermined mindset towards the benefits of Qi Gong, meditation and TCC. Even when you're unable to give proof that most of the positive results of the tests concerning those three are influenced by predetermined mindsets, you still feel the need to repeatedly state your believes.

Of course you're feel to believe whatever you want to believe...but if you want a serious discussion about the matter, you should also be able to give us support to your believes.


My mindset says to me that certain things are credible and certain things are not, just like your mindset. We're not so different. We just believe in different things, on occasion. Wouldn't be much need for a forum if everyone agreed on everything.

I can't give you proof of peoples predetermined mindsets. I used the word "my beliefs", not "this is the truth".I think you're claiming to know the truth while I'm referring to what I BELIEVE in. Two different things.

I also can't prove that Qigong doesn't exist. No one can prove something doesn't exist.


So you join a forum to tell us your believes or non believes and views about efficiency of Qi Gong etc and when you are provided with studies on the subject you won't even look at them because you already claim to have some experience and knowledge about the matter so you don't need to look further...A little contradictory I'd say.

pete5770 wrote:
caesar wrote:Oh boy Pete...you truly are an anti-everything dude. :D


Interesting that you would say that. Seems like people are trying to make me out as some sort of demon. What kind of forum would this be if no one questioned anything that anyone said?


Not a demon. No need for that. If we met in person I'd be happy to do friendly push hands with you and learn. I only state that you won't even look into the studies because of your bias. Fine, but again I ask you: why go on and on with stating your believes that everybody already knows, you haven't brought anything new here. I don't think people care whether or not you believe in Qi Gong. It's still your tactics of debating that annoys at least me. This is hopeless and pointless, I think I'll withdraw soon.
caesar
 

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:18 pm

caesar wrote:So you join a forum to tell us your believes or non believes and views about efficiency of Qi Gong etc and when you are provided with studies on the subject you won't even look at them because you already claim to have some experience and knowledge about the matter so you don't need to look further...A little contradictory I'd say.



I don't see it as contradictory. If I believe that the earth is round and am satisfied that it is, I might read a bit, out of curiosity, as to why I should believe it's flat. If that doesn't convince me to change my mind I'm most likely to not read a whole lot more on the flat earth idea. Especially if it's what i deem a rehash of something I read earlier. I think you're assuming that I don't bother with anything, and maybe I gave that impression, but I do, at the very least, scan over things that are said. I think that's somewhat normal for most people and I like to think of myself as somewhat normal. Of course, I could be wrong. :wink:
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby joeblast » Fri Jan 18, 2013 5:23 pm

Monsoon wrote:@joeblast, at the risk of being rude I wonder if you really understand the process of scientific examination. All your counter-points are straw-clutching. All those points are based "but, but, but, what if... " in a kind of desperate need for some way to continue believing.lol, and now its on to ad hominem, the last refuge of those who cant keep a grip on their argument. :roll:

This is an extremely important question. The observable effect is the easiest measurable part, but also the easiest to fake. Everything that exists has an effect associated with it - if there is no observable effect then the there is no causative agent. Simple. The argument that qi exists but has no observable effect means that even if, against all logic, it DID exist it would be of no use. And likewise, the argument that nobody with any really significant level of cultivation is all you have to choose from for test subjects, that's going to skew the result - so it remains an unknown unknown. But, having seen such things medically applied to significant effect....nah, that dont count
feel free to mash my quotes up with yours, ignore any substantive point I have, and focus on the cracks - you are not interested in what I have to say, are you.

See here. Grasping. This is the old "you haven't tested the "RIGHT" people" defence. So obviously the RIGHT people NEVER step forward, and NEVER make any claims. Wow, who would have thought. All the public claimants are actually frauds by your own logic. Way to go!
I'm grasping because it appears that nobody with true ability seems to have been tested by Monsoon-approved testers with the correct Qi Gong® certified equipment?

frick, this place is turning into bullshido :lol:
Even in mildly complex systems, any outcome is the wrong thing to target, with the process being where the focus should be.
joeblast
Forum DemiGod
 
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: CT

Re: An explanation of my beliefs(and maybe yours)

Postby pete5770 » Fri Jan 18, 2013 7:33 pm

joeblast wrote:
Monsoon wrote:@joeblast, at the risk of being rude I wonder if you really understand the process of scientific examination. All your counter-points are straw-clutching. All those points are based "but, but, but, what if... " in a kind of desperate need for some way to continue believing.lol, and now its on to ad hominem, the last refuge of those who cant keep a grip on their argument. :roll:

This is an extremely important question. The observable effect is the easiest measurable part, but also the easiest to fake. Everything that exists has an effect associated with it - if there is no observable effect then the there is no causative agent. Simple. The argument that qi exists but has no observable effect means that even if, against all logic, it DID exist it would be of no use. And likewise, the argument that nobody with any really significant level of cultivation is all you have to choose from for test subjects, that's going to skew the result - so it remains an unknown unknown. But, having seen such things medically applied to significant effect....nah, that dont count
feel free to mash my quotes up with yours, ignore any substantive point I have, and focus on the cracks - you are not interested in what I have to say, are you.

See here. Grasping. This is the old "you haven't tested the "RIGHT" people" defence. So obviously the RIGHT people NEVER step forward, and NEVER make any claims. Wow, who would have thought. All the public claimants are actually frauds by your own logic. Way to go!
I'm grasping because it appears that nobody with true ability seems to have been tested by Monsoon-approved testers with the correct Qi Gong® certified equipment?

frick, this place is turning into bullshido :lol:


Boys, boys, if you can't play nice.......
C'mon, it's only a discussion and the world doesn't hinge on the answer. I'm sort of sorry I even brought it up, but different views on things are what makes the world go round. Now, that hasn't been proven but......... :?
pete5770
Forum ÜberGuru
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Martial Arts discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

cron