Hello!I have a question about law of attraction

[Jack]

Hello people,i am new to this board,and it's my first message

My question is about law of attraction.For example,if someone is often imaginining that he/she is meeting with me,talking with me on the street.
He/she saw me before in some way,but i don't know him/her.What happens?I don't have a belief of i will meet with him-her and talk with him-her,and so i don't imagine or think anything about him-her,but he-she is often imagining me.What happens?Do we meet-talk cause of her-his imagination?

Also,do we co-create our reality or create our reality totaly?For example,can i stop a war just by imagining or believing that it will stop ?What is my reality's boundaries?If i create my reality totaly,than it is like saying that all people have different worlds which do not intersect with each other and persons' may have a copy of themselves in other people's worlds..For example,if United States-Iraq war stops in my world,that war may continue in your world,but it is not possible...

[JJH]

Welcome to the boards.

Try not to think of IM or LoA as "hard and fast" things. It's far more resourseful to think of them as models.

For example, in the subjective reality model, you create your "world" in its entirety. Your ability to stop or not stop a war would be a reflection of the sum of your intentions (conscious and subconscious). But remember, focusing on anything (war), creates more of it. You will have to replace it with its opposite. (Steve has a great podcast introduction to Subjective Reality - check it out.)

Some people believe in the subjective reality model, others subscibe to a more co-creative universe model. It doesn't really matter -- the point is that you accept responsiblity for everything in your life (especially the bad suff).

So, the whole point of these models of interpreting your reality, is to create your life the way you consciously _want_ it to be, rather than relying on old unconscious and automatic ways of responding to stimulus. The best way to see what you are focusing on is to look around you and notice what results you are getting right now.

Steve has a great quote, "Live consciously."

[stephencp]

Intended clearly, positively, strongly and consistently by the other person, yes I believe that you would end up talking with them.

With respect to stopping a war, this seems to be somewhat of an academic and/or abstract question for you. Instead of worrying about that, I would recommend creating a reality that includes some small beneficial habit or event for yourself personally first. Small steps...

Stephen
Power-Book Library: Free personal development, success, inspiration and motivational classics

[eternomi]

Hi Jack

You might want to check out the following group. There is a huge number of discussions there regarding law of attraction:

http://www.stevepavlina.com/forums/i...-manifestation

[dorothy hanna]

To end war, don't think "anti-war", think instead. PEACE. Envision, PEACE.

[Jack]

Thanks for answers

But if i believe co-creator model,than i think i can't have full control over my reality,and can blame others...

For example(also this is a real event which happened previous week),My dog stays at a dog-hotel ,and previous week my mother said me that she saw a dream,in which my dog got stabbed.
I started worrying and asking questions about her dream,first she said that she got influenced of something which she heard from media and thought negatively, said that it was just a dream and couldn't understand why i was worrying,then she said that it was just a joke of her,she didn't see the dream she said.I understood that she really saw the dream but was trying to hide it to not to worry me.Then i tried thinking positively,and started saying positive affirmations to myself"my dog is healthy,my dog is healthy".Then,the next day,the telephone rang in the morning,and the caller was my dog's veterinary.(my dog was staying at a dog-hotel) He told my father that my dog had a problem,he can't able to move his back legs,they are not sure about what is my dog's problem,my dog's blood values were not very good.He said that it was looking like a tick infection, but he said that he couldn't understand why my dog doesn't have heat problem and is healthy and doesn't have a physical injury although he can't move his back legs.So i thought like my positive affirmations about my dog's health might work because i heard he was healthy...

But,if i believe to the co-creator model,then i think i may blame my mother cause of her negative thoughts about my dog's state before he got ill,and caused my dog to get ill.Right?
But if i believe to the subjective model,then maybe i was thinking negatively about my dog or my dog's state,my mother's talking to me about her dream was just a reflection of my own thoughts about my dog,so i am responsible %100 of my dog's injury.So i think,in a co-creative model,i can't accept full responsiblity i think,i am not the only responsible nor %100 responsible person of the events.
But if i accept subjective model,then doesn't this mean like i am living in my totaly-own made world-universe?And for example if i stop the war with concentrating on Peace,then it may stop in my world,but it may continue on your world if you are concentrating on war?So are our worlds different and do not intersect?

Did i analyze both models right or is there something wrong?

I would like to listen to the podcast of Steve Pavlina,but have a problem with understanding English words while someone speaking English(my English is not good enough)

Also i want to ask,is the founder of subjective reality Steve Pavlina or is he telling us the details about an already existing theory?

Thanks

[JJH]

@Jack: I _think_ I understand the rationale behind your thinking. Your thoughts about the models are valid, but you need to get your head around one thing: whichever model you prefer, YOU are responsible for everything in your reality.

The perception of reality that you are experiencing now is filtered through your ego. The ego has learned and habitualized many forms of coping, dealing, reacting to all the various stimuli you receive. Most of these reactions are unconscious; you don't need to think about how you are reacting, you just react. But, as your awareness expands (say, through meditation), you begin to sense the connectedness of all things. You begin to realize the responses your ego has put on auto-pilot are not getting you the results you truly desire. The ego is projecting an illusion that YOU are responding to (usually unconsciously). This is your unique reality.

You are responsible for your reality. You have the choice of how to act and think and react in any situation. It is only your ego that gives you the false impression that you do not (have choice). It is the ego that makes you think that events and circumstances outside of yourself are responsible. This is the dualistic / materialistic illusion that most of us live under throughout our lives. I know I sure did.

If you begin to expand your awareness, you might glimpse that the universe is an indivisible collection of systems, from a huge galaxy, down to a tiny nucleus. And if everything is one (some call it the zero-point field, pure consciousness, God) there is nothing to fear, get or do -- the ego's attachment to outcomes falls away -- and you are free to pursue a truly brilliant life.

This is a highly compressed version of how I see reality -- so I hope it's clear enough. There are lots of people on these boards with great understanding of reality, and with far greater eloquence than me to explain it!! But it sure is fun to discuss it...

[Acting Like Godot]

I think it is a very good explanation, JJH.

That is also why, if we can achieve and sustain that expanded awareness, then we realise that in the end, everything comes down to love. Because every person in your reality is created by you. If you like, you were also created by every person in your reality. Either way, you are everyone, and everyone is you. Everything is interconnected.

When you hate anyone, you therefore hate yourself, in a sense. If you love anyone, you are loving yourself.

That is why in the end, all religions teach love, forgiveness etc.

Achieving and sustaining that expanded awareness is however the challenge. Sometimes I am a very nice guy - the kind who runs across the road to help a blind old lady cross back. At other times, however, I'm still a mean old bastard. I shall not give examples.

[Ati]

Welcome, Jack!

I'd put in a vote for daily involvement in this or something like it, while you're exploring it otherwise. I so agree that much of this is present in most religions and spiritual teachings, perhaps just somewhat different words.

I'd suggest for example, some relatively easily observable interactive intention, like something positive and relating to the people you see daily--just to watch the response, or something having to do with your health or other habits-- just to watch the effect on your own self discipline.

Perhaps work out a discipline for actually using Intention Manifestation (this board and this forum is full of different peoples' experiences doing just that part of it), and then jump in! (You can phrase your intention and put it on the sticky, for example, if you like )

At the same time, you can analyze, conceptualize, intellectualize what people are saying is going on with this. I personally think it's real important to do that too.

Then you've got it from at least two perspecives--your own experience and the theoretical background that has developed. You might find that very interesting.

I do see some folks, very sincerely trying to analyze this to the point of "truth" vs. "untruth", without the benefit of their own open minded experience. That to me seems an incomplete use of time, unless that is truly all they want to do. Since we're just talking about seeing if a certain mental/emotional/spiritual exercise may be helpful in doing something we want to do anyway, this seems pretty much low risk, to me anyway.

Tell us how it goes and what you're learning! (Please !)

All best,

Ati

[Alvin]

Hi Jack!

I'd like to add my 2 cents here. I think there's another way to look at the LoA, summed up and starting from something Lon Milo DuQuette said in his book The Chicken Qabalah of Rabbi Lamed Ben Clifford:

"It's all in your head, only you have no idea how big your head really is."

I think the LoA is subject to the awareness and level of consciousness of an individual. If you have a low level of consciousness, you might not be able to discipline your own thoughts, much less direct your thoughts in a coherent and focused manner.

The more able you are to control your own thoughts and focus them in a direction you want, which is a principle of applying the LoA, the more powerful the results you'll get.

Perhaps the highest and supreme level is one where what you intend for the universe at large manifests immediately, but you'd have to be God at that stage

At a lower level of consciousness, awareness and power, we'd be able to use the LoA to manifest changes in our immediate vicinity and areas of attention, but less so in global changes that are outside of our awareness.

2 cents!

[Jack]

Thanks for your answers.


So is my dog's injury my thoughts' fault,or my mother's thoughts' fault,or my dog's thoughs' fault or my father's thoughts' fault or the people's thoughts 's fault in the dog hotel?I still couldn't understand the answer

Also,about creating things.For example,i have a computer now,i am writing this message with it.Did i create this computer in my reality?What does it mean exactly?Isn't Fujitsu-Siemens the creator of my computer?That company created the computer and i attracted the computer to my reality or did i create it entirely?

I really want to learn "I create my reality" thing very much,i am aware and sure that thoughts affect reality,but i am not sure about my reality's boundaries.For example,let's say that,i want to attract only blond people to my reality,is it possible?I want to walk in the streets freely in my city which i am living in now,and want to see only blond people for example.Is it possible if i concentrate to blond poeple very much ,with using imagination,affirmation?Also i want to watch Tv freely,but for example i still want to see only blond people in the Tv?Is it possible?(without hallucination of course )

Also,are we creating our realities or attracting things to our realities?

[Markus74]

Valid questions, Jack.

[JJH]

I don't think you will have much success with the LoA if you keep instisting on applying blame on people (events, circumstances, etc.) outside of yourself. The reason is: there IS NO outside of yourself! You are responsible.

Alvin makes a great point about one's level of consciousness. If you can expand your level of awareness, you will break down the faulty filters of the ego, and progressively see reality (you) as it is. A great analogy I heard goes like this: It's like staring into a dirty mirror, as you wipe away the dirt (of your ego filters) you see the real you, clearer and clearer.

Your other questions are interesting, but irrelivent. If you want to see if and how LoA works for you, you must ask yourself questions that are less hypothetical, and more resourseful. Just seeing blonde people isn't a resourseful intention, and would only serve to add to the disfunctional filters of your ego. Why not set an intention to experience LoA? Start with something small -- intend to attract a cup of coffee today...

This isn't science fiction. LoA and IM aren't magic. They are simply tools to help you take control of your life and live it to the full. Participate!

And remember, assigning blame, and being the victim, will not put you in a high enough "vibration" to attract what you want. When you do this, you are focusing on what you do not want! And will attract more of that instead.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by Jack

Also,about creating things.For example,i have a computer now,i am writing this message with it.Did i create this computer in my reality?What does it mean exactly?Isn't Fujitsu-Siemens the creator of my computer?That company created the computer and i attracted the computer to my reality or did i create it entirely?

I think this doesn't answer your question directly, but remember that without your consciousness to experience this Fujitsu computer in front of you, you wouldn't know it exists and therefore it wouldn't exist in your reality.

It's the old Zen question: if a tree falls and no-one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Jack

Also,about creating things.For example,i have a computer now,i am writing this message with it.Did i create this computer in my reality?What does it mean exactly?Isn't Fujitsu-Siemens the creator of my computer?That company created the computer and i attracted the computer to my reality or did i create it entirely?

Ah, if only it were so straightforward, things would be simple.

Very few things in reality are created by a single, simple, easily expressible thought. Most of the time, things in your reality have come about, as a result of the combination of many different thoughts.

To create your Fujitsu-Siemens computer, you must have thought many, many thoughts in the past. Some of those thoughts would be:

"Certain machines exist. They're called computers."
"Brands exist. Manufacturers make things and they have their own brand."
"Computers are useful. I could use them to do ___, ___ & ___."
"Siemens is a brand."
"Fujitsu is a brand."
"Sometimes manufacturers co-brand their products."
"I need a computer. I should buy one."
"I am going to the shopping mall now. I need to buy a computer."
"I need to ask the sales guy to recommend a computer."
"Oh, this one looks good. It's a Siemens-Fujitsu. I think I'll buy it."
"Where shall I put this computer? Ah, over here."
"I like surfing the Net."
"Steve Pavlina's blog sure is interesting."
"Hey he has a forum."
"They're talking about creating things in your own reality."
"I wanna ask these guys a question about reality. Like, what?"
"Ah, this computer that I'm using now. It's in my reality. Right? I'll ask them how it got here."

It got into your reality, due to many different thoughts that you've had in your life, such as your knowledge that computers exist; your desire to have one; your decision to purchase one etc etc.

Someone living in a very remote part of Africa may never have seen a computer, let alone heard of Fujitsu-Siemens. Therefore he probably has not thought enough thoughts that would lead to a Fujitsu-Siemen computer manifesting in his reality. He may not even know the concept of electricity and electrical appliances.

Remember - your complete reality today is the result of the sum total of all your thoughts in this life.

Buddhists would add - "... and in your past lives too".

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Jack

For example,let's say that,i want to attract only blond people to my reality,is it possible?I want to walk in the streets freely in my city which i am living in now,and want to see only blond people for example.

It could be possible. If for some strange reason, you truly manifest sufficiently strong intention to see only blond people, eventually you may end up moving to some remote corner of the world where your nearest neighbours live 30 miles away and they're all blond. I believe that this could be feasible, for example, in certain parts of Siberia, Russia, or perhaps the Nordic countries. Therefore your reality has changed.

In practice, however, you won't have such strong intention - for you do not actually wish to see only blond people. You're merely asking such a question because your real intention is to understand LOA better. Since that is your real intention, you have manifested me into your reality. I've appeared to answer your question.

Just for the sake of discussion, if you did strongly desire to see only blond people but you also want to live in a modern, cosmopolitan city where people of many different races converge, then what we have here is a matter of conflicting intentions. You know what Steve says about those, right? If your intentions conflict, then they are less likely to prevail. For example if I desire to look fit, but I also hate exercise, then things get tricky.

Anyway, I would say that it is probably easier to think enough thoughts to achieve your blond reality, than to think enough thoughts to achieve wealth in the region of, say, tens of billions of dollars. Nevertheless there have been people who have thought enough thoughts to achieve that kind of wealth - eg Bill Gates, Warren Buffet etc.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Jack

What is my reality's boundaries?

The boundaries of your reality are the outermost limits of what you conceive reality to be. If you truly believe in the Loch Ness monster, then the Loch Ness monster exists in your reality. If you truly believe in God, then God exists in your reality. If you truly believe in the flying ketchup monster, then the flying ketchup monster exists in your reality.

If however, you believe that the Loch Ness monster, God and the flying ketchup monster could possibly exist, then your reality is one where Loch Ness monster, God and the flying ketchup monster could possibly exist.

If however, you strongly believe that the Loch Ness monster, God and the flying ketchup monster cannot possibly exist, then your reality is one where the Loch Ness monster, God and the flying ketchup monster do not exist.

Note however that the boundaries of your reality are not static. They can shift and change. For example, this year you may not believe that God exists. Five years later, you may believe that God exists. Another five years later, you may change your mind and believe that God does not exist. Therefore in your reality, God pops in and out of existence.

This sounds bizarre, until you realise that this is basically quantum physics. At the level of subatomic particles, everything is constantly popping in and out of existence.

If i create my reality totaly,than it is like saying that all people have different worlds which do not intersect with each other and persons' may have a copy of themselves in other people's worlds..For example,if United States-Iraq war stops in my world,that war may continue in your world,but it is not possible...

You did not exist in my reality until today.

I did not exist in your reality until today.

Tomorrow you and/or I might not come back to this forum to read each other posts. We may never meet again in this lifetime. Then effectively I will no longer be in your reality, and you will no longer be in mine.

Thus you can think of it this way - we all have our subjective realities. Sometimes they intersect, and sometimes they separate. When they intersect, each reality may change. For example, my words may have some influence on your life, and your words may have some influence on mine.

In my reality, there is a place called Iraq. In your reality, there is also a place called Iraq. Could war stop in Iraq, in my reality, while it goes on in yours? Ahh, musings for a rainy day. Einstein proposes the idea of alternate dimensions. Could God, the Loch Ness monster and the flying ketchup monster exist in your reality, while not existing in mine?

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

It could be possible. If for some strange reason, you truly manifest sufficiently strong intention to see only blond people, eventually you may end up moving to some remote corner of the world where your nearest neighbours live 30 miles away and they're all blond. I believe that this could be feasible, for example, in certain parts of Siberia, Russia, or perhaps the Nordic countries. Therefore your reality has changed.

So THAT's what you mean by reality change? Moving to a new place/situation so that you get what you want? That doesn't sound too crazy and doesn't break any physical laws.

But again that's totally different from the magical stuff other people (and maybe you too) claim here.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Markus74

So THAT's what you mean by reality change? Moving to a new place/situation so that you get what you want? That doesn't sound too crazy and doesn't break any physical laws.

But again that's totally different from the magical stuff other people (and maybe you too) claim here.

Think of it this way - thoughts just have an inherent tendency to transform into reality. The stronger the thought is, the stronger its tendency to transform into reality.

However, like most other effects in nature, the process will take the path of least resistance. For example, if you suddenly have an extremely powerful intention to drink coffee, a few possible things may happen:

(1) you will get up, walk to the kitchen and make yourself a cup of coffee; or
(2) your mother may suddenly make a cup of coffee for you; or
(3) a cup of coffee will mysteriously appear out of thin air.

(1) represents the path of least resistance and therefore is likeliest to happen. (2) is a path of lesser resistance than (3), and is therefore much likelier than (3) to occur.

---

If you have an extremely strong desire to see ONLY blond people, a few different things may happen:

(1) non-blond people may start vanishing off the face of the earth;
(2) it may become highly fashionable for everyone to dye their hair blond;
(3) you may go and live in a remote place where the very few people you'll meet are all blond.

(3) represents the path of least resistance and is most likely to occur.

---

In IM theory, a common piece of advice is that you manifest the outcome, then practise detachment. In other words, you go deep and generate a strong thought of what the outcome should be - then you avoid thinking about the how.

Why? One way to look at it is that LOA will automatically find the path of least resistance to manifest your outcome. If however you interfere with that process by thinking a lot about "how" the outcome will come about, you are mucking up that process by sending out your interfering "how" thoughts.

Example: suppose you manifest the powerful intention to get exactly $5,000. The universe has infinite organising power and your thought will start searching for the easiest way to deliver $5,000 to you. It may be that the easiest way would have been for your boss to give you a surprise special bonus - and the universe is therefore going to arrange a series of events at work which will result in the boss deciding to give you such a bonus.

However you start sending out interfering thoughts like how maybe you will pick up $5,000 lying on the street, or perhaps someone will offer to buy your stamp collection for $5,000, and so on. The end result may be that you don't get any money at all because you are sending out conflicting thoughts about how to get $5,000 and these thoughts act against each other.

----

On my blog, you can go through my diary entries and you will see that recently I had manifested the desire for an opportunity to speak at an industry conference. I did not specify when, where or how, except that it should be sometime in the next 12 months.

I had never spoken at any conference before, I have no reputation as a speaker at such conferences and I did not have any contacts to call. In fact, I called no one at all - I made no attempt to search for an opportunity eg by surfing the Internet or calling up any professional association etc.

However, the universe took less than one week to find me the speaking opportunity. In fact, the organisers had already decided on all their speakers, but one of them pulled out suddenly and the organisers had to scramble to find a replacement speaker. Me.

This is what I meant, when I say that the universe has infinite organising power.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Markus74

So THAT's what you mean by reality change? Moving to a new place/situation so that you get what you want? That doesn't sound too crazy and doesn't break any physical laws.

But again that's totally different from the magical stuff other people (and maybe you too) claim here.

Just to be clear, from my perspective, IM and LoA can be used to manifest absolutely anything. Things that could be considered by you as nothing special, things that you would consider co-incidence, and things you would consider breaking physical laws.

It is not just a way to condition your mind to be positive and pay attention to opportunites which come up which can help you get things in life. That's Positive Thinking coupled with activating the Reticular Activating System. IM and LoA go beyond that into the realm of being able to manifest everything you could possibly dream of.

One thing to realize is that the manifestation happens without any conscious effort at the subconsious level and in fact you are always manifesting everything you see right now. This is also one of the reasons people might have trouble manifesting something at first, because if you're thinking "This stuff doesn't work, LOA is impossible." hundreds of times a day, and then you think "I want to manifest a parking spot." once, it's not going to work, because your subconsious will manifest what it feels most strong about which is what's repeated and felt with emotions.

If you manifested everything you thought immediately, life wouldn't be good because everytime you said the words "I'm going to kill that guy." in your life you would manifest that.

Therefore, the subconsious mind only manifests only what you REALLY want.

Smaller things like manifesting seeing a movie isn't that hard because you probably don't have a lot of pre-existing thoughts to conflict with that, but manifesting seeing nothing but women at a mall might be harder since you already have a thougth that says "There's an equal amount of men/women at the mall" for example. If you have a thought "It's impossible to find parking at the mall during Christmas season" then it's harder to manifest parking spots etc.

You do have control over your subconsious mind however by using visualization and emotion to truly tell your subconsious what you truly really want.

[JJH]

I can add to that by saying, what you truly _believe_ makes the biggest difference.

You can use visualisation and affermations to change your beliefs = change your reality... simple.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by impaul99

Just to be clear, from my perspective, IM and LoA can be used to manifest absolutely anything. Things that could be considered by you as nothing special, things that you would consider co-incidence, and things you would consider breaking physical laws.

Who knows? Perhaps "physical laws" were created by intention-manifestation.

After all, according to mankind's records, the first couple of things that ever happened in the universe were acts of intention-manifestation.

"Let there be light" and there was light.

"Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.".... and it was so.

"Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear" ... and it was so.

I'm not Christian by the way, but the above pronouncements sound like intention-manifestation to me.

I do similar tricks, on a much, much, much lesser scale. Like, "Let There Be A Conference Speaking Opportunity for me ..."

[Markus74]

Then would please somebody break the laws of physics and levitate for example? If it's doable then you should be able to

Or don't you believe that you could do that?

[Acting Like Godot]

Come on, surely levitation is not the most bizarre example you can think of? It's really not that uncommon:

Try Daniel Dunglas for example. 40 years of constant levitation and nobody managed to prove that he was a fraud:

Daniel Dunglas Home - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity is also full of levitating people:

St Joseph of Cupertino (Mystic, born 17 June, 1603; died at Osimo 18 September, 1663; feast, 18 September.) reportedly levitated high in the air, for extended periods of more than an hour, on many occasions.
St Teresa of Avila (born in Avila, Spain, March 28, 1515.She died in Alba, October 4, 1582.) claimed to have levitated at a height of about a foot and a half for an extended period somewhat less than an hour, in a state of mystical rapture. She called the experience a 'spiritual visitation'.
Catherine of Siena (1347-1380), levitation in states of ecstasy.
Hadewijch of Antwerp Flemish Catholic mystica (first half 13th century) is said to have levitated in state of trance.
Saint Philip of Neri (Born at Florence, Italy, 22 July, 1515; died 27 May, 1595.) supposedly went up several yards during prayer, even to the ceiling on occasion.
Ignatius Loyola (Born in 1491 at the castle of Loyola above Azpeitia in Guipuscoa, Spain; died at Rome, 31 July, 1556.) is said to have not only raised several feet but became luminous in the process.
Saint Robert de Palentinallegedly levitated eighteen or twenty inches.
Saint Dunstan (Probably his birth dates from about the earliest years of the tenth century.) supposedly rose off the ground a little bit just before his death.
St. John of the Cross (b. at Hontoveros, Old Castile,Spain 24 June, 1542; d. at Ubeda, Andalusia, 14 Dec., 1591)
And, at the beginning of the twentieth century Gemma Galgani, a Passionist nun, reported levitating during rapture.


Or are you really looking for levitation under monitored laboratory conditions, under scrutiny of many scientists? And would you like the experiments to be repeated again and again, scrutinised by different scientists, from different countries? Would you like her to levitate metal objects, and non-metal objects, and living tissue, would you like the scientist to test her by placing a bunch of objects before her and ask her specifically to levitate some objects but leave the rest alone? All done. Here:

Psychic Powers and Abilities | Nina Kulagina

Her levitation acts, in scientific labs, had been filmed many times, by many different scientists, over decades.

Today, there are still a bunch of yogis in India who supposedly can levitate. Here's one chap who did it in 1936, in an open-air environment (no stage trickery or hidden props), for four minutes, in front of 150 witnesses, and people were allowed to walk all around him and take photographs from different angles:

Yogi Pullavar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why should you be surprised that levitation is not at least possible?

[Acting Like Godot]

And I want to tell you -

in my country, the media had reported that there's this little eight-year-old girl who's been bending metal spoons with her thoughts;

and she's teaching her classmates to do it. They think she's really cool.

Bah, I say. Old trick. Uri Geller was doing it decades ago.

Currently they're making animal sculptures out of metal spoons. It freaks their teachers out, and one teacher has resigned.

[Frans]

The only thing I want to say about these psychic phenomenons is this:
the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) offers a reward of $1,000,000

to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event. The JREF does not involve itself in the testing procedure, other than helping to design the protocol and approving the conditions under which a test will take place. All tests are designed with the participation and approval of the applicant. In most cases, the applicant will be asked to perform a relatively simple preliminary test of the claim, which if successful, will be followed by the formal test. Preliminary tests are usually conducted by associates of the JREF at the site where the applicant lives. Upon success in the preliminary testing process, the "applicant" becomes a "claimant."

Million Dollar Challenge

To date, no one has ever passed the preliminary tests...

[Acting Like Godot]

In fact, I used to be a fan of Skepdic.com

It's a website that sets out to debunk all sorts of apparent nonsense like "ghosts" or "channeling" or whatever.

Alas, I grew skeptical of Skepdic.com when I realised that they seemed to be very selective in what they chose to talk about.

Their style, for example, is like this - if they want to talk about levitation, they will talk about all the fraud levitation cases, but they will not even mention that a person like Nina Kulagina ever existed.

But anyway, we stray from the general theme of this forum. Personally, I am not interested in devoting effort to levitating or doing other strange stuff for the sake of doing strange stuff (if you click on the link, you'll see that Nina's mental concentration would be so intense that her body would become exhausted - I really wouldn't recommend it).

I would be more interested in using LOA to earn more money; be a good husband and father; be very healthy etc etc. Seems to be a lot more practical than trying to float into the air or grow wings etc.

Of course, if/when my ability to use LOA expands to a much greater degree than where it is today, I will certainly move on to doing more and more interesting things. But levitation really seems relatively pointless to me - not to mention extremely difficult.

[Markus74]

Acting:

If there are people who can levitate, then they should do it openly and show it to everyone. What would they have to hide? And no, ancient stories by superstitious people are not enough.

If those children really can bend spoons with their mends, then they should show everyone? And Uri Geller was/is a fraud, his spoons were manipulated so that they would bent because of the temperature of his fingers. Everyone could have done it. And he couldn't have done it with my spoons at home.

What country are you from by the way? And where can I find some news about your spoon-bending kids?

Thanks.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Markus74

Acting:

If there are people who can levitate, then they should do it openly and show it to everyone.

You mean, like Anna Kulagina? Who kindly did experiments for decades, for Russian scientists? And Czech scientists? And American scientists? And British scientists? And allowed them to check her brain waves? And body weight? And blood sugar levels?

(What they did learn is that when she did her stunts, her blood sugar levels shot up and she could lose up to 4 pounds in half an hour).

I really suggest that you click on the link I provided above.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

You mean, like Anna Kulagina? Who kindly did experiments for decades, for Russian scientists? And Czech scientists? And American scientists? And British scientists?

Then show me the facts. And why doesn't even Google have anything about this? I tried to google her name.

By the way, the kids - they did it in front of the journalist. They're very excited about it - they do it for everyone who wants to see.

What journalist was it? Where? Which country? Can they do it with any spoons or just their spoons? etc

Metal spoons bend because of the heat of Geller's fingers? I guess maybe at around 200 degrees celsius that might start happening. Funny, Geller didn't seem to be in pain.

As for Uri Geller: YouTube - Uri Geller red-handed in spoon bending trick

And if they can bend the spoons with their hands why do they have to keep them in their hands or between their fingers in the first place?? Why does Uri have to rub it? Jeez, it's so obvious that this is but a trick.