Inner power and superhuman abilities

And he can repeat those skills under strict controlled environments. Probably couldn't fight without an initial connection though.

 

That's enough Redcoat. I've just gotten finished telling the OP how MAP posters are big on critical thinking. Don't undermine that point with trash posts please.

 

We know exactly what he did - he stopped the subject cheating

at 5:51 you do not hear a rational comment, you here a comment from someone unqualified to speak on the subject but who was deceived by a trick - it's not magical if the magician shows you how he does it

 

What qualifications of proof are you talking about ?
I've been giving evidence in my way, but you always deny it

i already said that the only way to prove it to you is by see, feel, and try it yourself

 

It was tested and failed - miserably

It doesn't exist

period

 

I always deny weak evidence.

I have enough background knowledge in anatomy and physiology to know you're talking complete baloney.

I don't need to buy a chocolate fire guard to know it isn't going to work.

 

That is not proof. People are convinced of all sorts of nonsense that they think they've seen, felt or tried.

 

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMjc-fDVowk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMjc-fDVowk[/ame]

 

I posted the above to show how subtle interractions can pretty much seem magical....they are actually mundane if not common

 

Let's try this another way. If I told you that my teacher had a way of making the human body bulletproof, literally, would you hop on a plane and come experience it for yourself?

What if a bunch of my teacher's other students all came on here and said, "no seriously dude, it's true"? Would that be enough?

What if those testimonials came from some source that initially looked impartial, but later turned out to be a direct student of my teacher (the way this Nate fellow does)?

Where's the independent verification? One person not at all affiliated with your style who will corroborate these claims?

 

Haidar, I think this is a good chance for you to explore skepticism and the philosophy of science. Believe it or not, these are very effective intellectual tools. :]

 

1. examples you give to me just a statement (I have given a lot of evidence in the form of videos with many people doing in the video, not just one person)

2. the example you give is never done science test

3. If you give an example of a test has been carried out, and no evidence that it fails I will visit it if I need it

JREF test and ophthalmology hospital test is different

when MP participated in the James Randi challenge

1. James Randi could not replicate what is done by MP
2. James Randi using dirty tricks to participants with hurting the eyes of the participants using a wet tissue antiseptic was used by a military surgeon who used to clean the wound before emergency surgery, and it was very sore and distracting the concentration of participants

 

So if they're not seeing with their eyes, what does it matter if their eyes are irritated?

 

People affiliated with that style. People with a vested financial interest in other people believing it.

Because it's a ludicrous claim

That's the point. You haven't provided evidence that meets the requirements of credibility.

Suggesting what? One interpretation is that it couldn't be replicated because Randi was able to prevent them from using any tricks.

You don't think that perhaps the Indonesian special forces might also experience "some distractions" whilst using this power instead of infrared technology? How useful is this technique if it can be disrupted by, literally, a wet tissue?

 

I give you an example

1. You perform a test of balance by standing on a rope
2. You perform a test of balance by standing on a rope, with your eyes were given a antiseptic wet tissue, which makes your eyes feel very sore and become itchy red eyes, so it bothers you to concentrate

which one will fail to perform the test ?

 

The difference is that we've probably all seen someone legitimately balancing on a rope. Whereas we haven't seen anyone legitimately doing what you describe.

 

what kind of trick that MP did ? i saw the video of james randi on youtube that he explain to everyone how to do the trick, but Randi can't explain the tricks used by the MP, he just make MP participant fail, but can't explain that

 

It's not incumbent upon Randi to explain how a trick is performed, only to show that, in controlled conditions, the trick cannot be performed.

 

Utter crap

Your representatative is a fraud and was exposed as such.

I will give you an easier illustration - I look at a book and tell you what color it is; I am then kicked squarely in the bollocks and pepper sprayed and asked to look again

I can still tell you what color it is

You are comparing a fine motor skill to a standard perception test - it's intellectually dishonest and shows how little you actually understand a testing methodology

 

Or he set laboratory conditions to conduct a proper experiment. The MP folks couldn't replicate the results they achieved under THEIR conditions. And they had a vested interest in devising an explanation that places the responsibility on James Randi. Do you notice that EVERYONE Randi has ever worked with has had some elaborate explanation about why their powers didn't work when he was there?