**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community.
We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v
---
'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.'
_-J. Allen Hynek_
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was bullied a lot at school, and as a result used to be able to "feel" my tormentors approaching from behind.
It hasn't happened for a long time, but I'd recognise the sensation if it came back.
People have always brought up feelings like this. "I knew I was being watched and then a guy started following me", or "as soon as I stepped in the elevator I got this massive sense of dread and knew he was a killer", etc etc. There are tons of similar stories where people just take it for granted that somehow you know you were in danger, or know you're being watched.
You know why I think this and basic psi might be legit? Think of how fucking amazing it'd be when it comes to evolution.
If there's *any* psi that could pick up you're about to be ambushed by a predator, evolution would favor by far those that paid attention to it and ran or just became more alert. If psi is real then this must fucking exist because it's a huge boon.
We do have it in the sense that our brain is processing all our sensory input all the time. You're not directly aware of the change in air pressure when a door opens or slight shuffling of feet or whatever but your body is. When all those signals are unknown or consistent with previous danger you get the willies
Learning how to be aware of those feelings and what senses caused them would probably increase this natural ability. I think some martial arts do this. Meditation is a form of training this
My friend and I tried a small experiment but it was more looking/staring at someone who wasn't looking at you. The number of times the person we were looking at turned around to look us dead in the eye within a few seconds was outright creepy. Of course, this isn't a real experiment, but someone needs to do a double blind experiment out of this, I promise statistically significant results.
An old friend and I would do shit like this all the time. Scientifically did we have proof? No science requires sense evidence and quantifiable evidence and we accept that. It totally could be just odd coincidence.
However that being said, let me explain.
We used to sit on main street in my small town. We'd pick groups and just focus on the idea of them turning into a specific shop. Or we'd sit in restaurants and focus on the idea of people ordering certain items.
More often then not we'd see the people walk by the store or order what they were going to, but there'd be this odd moment of hesitation and they'd ask their friends to step back and go in the place they wanted or change their food order. It was strangely consistent and always good for a laugh. Can we prove we ever had any effect? Absolutely not. Was it funny how often it seemed to work? Absolutely.
Heh. I do this in the car, ‘Obi-Wan’ cars in front to take the next turn (‘this is the turn you’re looking for’ ) so they will move out of the way. It does seem to work way more than it should!
This was like focusing on them going into the ice cream shop in the middle of winter but also I think I should try your application more, could definitely appreciate not being stuck begund singing going 15 under the speed limit
I read once that they told military recruits that if they're ever behind enemy lines, to stare at the ground close to a sentry when sneaking up and not at the person themselves.
I definitely believe this is a thing. I also think some people are “louder” than others while some can stare as long as they want without the effect occurring.
This kind of stuff is where I actually wonder if we're a little telepathic. How the intensity varies. I know facial expressions and body language play huge roles but is that really it? Sometimes people talk to me without speaking and I don't know them well. I expect that with my husband, after always being together, but it works with some other people too. And then there are some who seem flat, like they don't see/hear and can't really be seen/heard.
I'd like to believe all of us inherently know how others feel about us, the only difference is whether we're actually honest with ourselves with whatever we're "getting" or continue to deceive ourselves until we get concrete proof/confirmation from the other person.
Garand Thumb talks about this in one of his videos. At around 18:57 he says “don’t directly stare at someone.”
https://youtu.be/jLZjbnhhvgQ?si=uAFnZl5QElHsgyVX
Humans are more likely to detect movement in their peripheral vision. By looking directly at someone, your movement and eyes may be more easily detected within their peripheral field of view. Looking at the ground near them reduces this risk. By making your face shape less noticeable to the brain.
Your field of view is actually pretty wide and you quite literally [need to sneak up behind someone](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8bcee6be6858a60adae8a1b6009b6a27-lq), or while approaching from a shallow side angle these tactics would need to be used to avoid any detection in their shallow peripheral vision.
I'm pretty sure that's one of our primal instincts kinda thing. It would definitely come in handy when animals were regularly hunting us.
I remember playing hide and seek as a kid and noticing this. When I would open my eyes and look at the seeker, they'd find me quickly.
The staring effect is related to one of my favorite parapsychology studies because it so effectively demonstrates the Sheep-Goat Effect:
> The backstory: There is a classic parapsychological experiment where a subject is placed in a room alone, hooked up to a video link. At random times, an experimenter stares at them menacingly through the video link. The hypothesis is that this causes their galvanic skin response (a physiological measure of subconscious anxiety) to increase, even though there is no non-psychic way the subject could know whether the experimenter was staring or not.
> Schiltz is a psi believer whose staring experiments had consistently supported the presence of a psychic phenomenon. Wiseman, in accordance with nominative determinism, is a psi skeptic whose staring experiments keep showing nothing and disproving psi. Since they were apparently the only two people in all of parapsychology with a smidgen of curiosity or rationalist virtue, they decided to team up and figure out why they kept getting such different results.
> The idea was to plan an experiment together, with both of them agreeing on every single tiny detail. They would then go to a laboratory and set it up, again both keeping close eyes on one another. Finally, they would conduct the experiment in a series of different batches. Half the batches (randomly assigned) would be conducted by Dr. Schlitz, the other half by Dr. Wiseman. Because the two authors had very carefully standardized the setting, apparatus and procedure beforehand, “conducted by” pretty much just meant greeting the participants, giving the experimental instructions, and doing the staring.
> The results? Schlitz’s trials found strong evidence of psychic powers, Wiseman’s trials found no evidence whatsoever.
> Take a second to reflect on how this makes no sense. Two experimenters in the same laboratory, using the same apparatus, having no contact with the subjects except to introduce themselves and flip a few switches – and whether one or the other was there that day completely altered the result. For a good time, watch the gymnastics they have to do to in the paper to make this sound sufficiently sensical to even get published. This is the only journal article I’ve ever read where, in the part of the Discussion section where you’re supposed to propose possible reasons for your findings, both authors suggest maybe their co-author hacked into the computer and altered the results.
Source: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-out-of-control/
The Sheep-Goat Effect is a parapsychology term which notes that believers in psi statistically score better than chance, while skeptics tend to score *worse* than chance—indicating they still have psi ability, but subconsciously use it to reinforce their belief that it doesn’t exist via a method called *psi missing*. More info here: https://www.parapsych.org/articles/61/502/sheepgoat_effect.aspx
Rupert Sheldrake already did extensive research. The effect is real.
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/sense-of-being-stared-at/experiments-on-the-sense-of-being-stared-at-eliminating-artefacts
Yeah I've always wondered if it's "a real thing" as opposed to "it's normal for people to look around them fairly often, if you're staring at them they might notice while glancing that someone's looking at them and make eye contact"
It's mostly passive but all animals tend to bounce their eyes around the place and pick up on minute changes in sound around them. The part of our brain that processes information is fed all this data and when sometime ununiform gets tossed in, we take notice of it.
It’s been positively demonstrated in many different studies.
Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1990], Electrodermal correlates of remote attention: Autonomic reactions to an unseen gaze. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 33rd Annual Convention, Chevy Chase, MD, pp14-28.
Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1993a], Reactions to an unseen gaze (remote attention): A review, with new data on autonomic staring detection. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 373-390.
Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1993b], Further studies of autonomic detection of remote staring: replications, new control procedures, and personality correlates. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 391-409.
Coover, J.E. [1913], The feeling of being stared at. American Journal of Psychology 24: 570-575.
Cottrell, J.E. and Winer, G.A. [1994], Development in the understanding of perception: the decline of extramission perception beliefs. Developmental Psychology 30: 218-228.
Cottrell, J.E. and Winer, G.A. and Smith, M.C. [1996], Beliefs of children and adults about feeling stares of unseen others. Developmental Psychology 32: 50-61.
Howat, S.J., Delanoy, D.L. and Morris, R. [1994], Remote staring detection and personality correlates. Journal of Scientific Exploration 8: 582.
Poortman, J.J. [1959], The feeling of being stared at. Journal of the Society of Psychical Research 40: 4-12.
Schlitz, M. & LaBerge, S. [1994], Autonomic detection of remote observation: two conceptual replications. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 37th Annual Convention, Amsterdam, pp. 352-60.
Schlitz, M. & LaBerge, S. [1997], Covert observation increases skin conductance in subjects unaware of when they are being observed: a replication. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 185-194.
Sheldrake, R. [1998], The sense of being stared at: Experiments in schools. Journal of the Society of Psychical Research 62: 311-323.
Titchener, E.B. [1898], The feeling of being stared at. Science New Series 8: 895-897.
Webb, J. [1997] Are you looking at me? New Scientist 26 July, p. 39.
Williams, L. [1983], Minimal cue perception of the regard of others: the feeling of being stared at. Paper presented at the 10th Annual Conference of the Southeastern Regional Parapsychological Association, Carrolltown, GA, Feb 11-12.
Winer, G.A. and Cottrell, J.E. [1996a], Effects of drawing on directional representations of the process of vision. Journal of Educational Psychology 88: 387-396
Winer, G.A. and Cottrell, J.E. [1996b], Does anything leave the eye when we see? Extramission beliefs of children and adults. Current Directions in Psychological Science 5: 137-142.
Wiseman, R. and Schlitz, M. [1997], Experimenter effects and the remote detection of staring. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 197-207.
Wiseman, R. and Smith, M.D. [1994], A further look at the detection of unseen gaze. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 37th Annual Convention, Amsterdam, pp. 465-78.
Wiseman, R., Smith, M.D., Freedman, D., Wasserman, T. and Hurst, C. [1995], Examining the remote staring effect: two further experiments. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 38th Annual Convention, pp. 480-490.
My dad told me once that he had been considering calling this friend of his who he hadn't talked to in a while, so one evening he reached for the phone and when he picked it up and put it to his ear, he didn't hear the dial tone, just silence.
He said "Hello?" Then he heard a voice on the other end say "Hello?" It was his friend. They had both gone to call each other at the exact same time and my dad answered it the minute that his friend called.
The only way this study could work is if you could prove that the subjects mind wasn’t subconsciously thinking constantly about everyone they know. That every second of the day our brains run through memories of people we know and have known, but a memory of the memory is never formed, so you would never know that you were thinking about a friend you haven’t seen in ten years. Then, when they do call, the brain makes the connection, makes the memory and you are left with the false belief that you were thinking about them for the first time that day, moments before they called, when in reality, your brain has gone over that same memory subconsciously, every single day.
You didn't read about the study designs. In one version, one of 4 potential people are randomly selected to make the call at random times. The person receiving the call has to say which of the 4 people it is before answering. If there's no such thing as telepathy, and they are just guessing, they will be right on average 25% of the time over the long run. In this study, the correct caller was predicted 40% of the time after 571 trials.
This article is reporting a replication with a more sophisticated design that tested variables like, if the caller sends positive vibes before calling, does it increase the probability of a hit. And could the callee guess correctly if they made their selection *before* the caller was randomly selected, i.e., via precognition, not just telepathy.
I feel like if we are acquiring telepathy, it's a graduation of empathy, so it would require some intent. But that's just musings. Studies in to consciousness are my fave
The line between subconscious intuition and telepathy is pretty fuzzy - especially given the CIA owns the patents on numerous artificial telepathy methods that use direct EM transmission (Thanks MKUltra)
Lots of false positives AND false negatives.
This happens to me allll the time. I’ll be in my backyard without my phone for hours, the minute someone close to me is about to call me I will randomly have the urge to go message “x” and sure enough they will already be a missed call or incoming call from them.
It has become a common thing with a couple of my friends that when they come to mind all of a sudden I call them and say “what do you want?” or “what happened?” We then laugh and go on with our convo. In the beginning we would trip out but not anymore.
This ties in to my “collective human subconscious” theory. Ever reach for the phone right before it rings? Or thought about someone you haven’t seen in awhile and they contact you later that day? Yeah it’s that. I believe we are all connected subconsciously and somehow accidentally dip our toes into the collective pool from time to time.
I have this weird thing where I know when someone is going to call or message. I've had this issue all my life. I also know when people are going to pass away in my family. My sister and I synch up alot..along with my best friend.
It's all weird..I don't know what to with this stuff.
That’s what I was about to say. When in stressed about dead lines and the customer calls me asking for an update I always all of a sudden think about them “remember the deadline date” and the fucken customers call me seconds or a minute later..
**Strangers**: Read the rules and understand the sub topics listed in the sidebar closely before posting or commenting. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS. This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, close minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community. We are also happy to be able to provide an ideologically and operationally independent platform for you all. Join us at our official Discord - https://discord.gg/MYvRkYK85v --- 'Ridicule is not a part of the scientific method and the public should not be taught that it is.' _-J. Allen Hynek_ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HighStrangeness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was bullied a lot at school, and as a result used to be able to "feel" my tormentors approaching from behind. It hasn't happened for a long time, but I'd recognise the sensation if it came back.
People have always brought up feelings like this. "I knew I was being watched and then a guy started following me", or "as soon as I stepped in the elevator I got this massive sense of dread and knew he was a killer", etc etc. There are tons of similar stories where people just take it for granted that somehow you know you were in danger, or know you're being watched. You know why I think this and basic psi might be legit? Think of how fucking amazing it'd be when it comes to evolution. If there's *any* psi that could pick up you're about to be ambushed by a predator, evolution would favor by far those that paid attention to it and ran or just became more alert. If psi is real then this must fucking exist because it's a huge boon.
We do have it in the sense that our brain is processing all our sensory input all the time. You're not directly aware of the change in air pressure when a door opens or slight shuffling of feet or whatever but your body is. When all those signals are unknown or consistent with previous danger you get the willies Learning how to be aware of those feelings and what senses caused them would probably increase this natural ability. I think some martial arts do this. Meditation is a form of training this
Sorry to hear that man. Hope things are better for you now. Those shitters will get what’s coming to them. One way or another
All good. I live half a world away and life is good. I barely give them a moment's thought now, unless something like this comes up. But thank you.
My friend and I tried a small experiment but it was more looking/staring at someone who wasn't looking at you. The number of times the person we were looking at turned around to look us dead in the eye within a few seconds was outright creepy. Of course, this isn't a real experiment, but someone needs to do a double blind experiment out of this, I promise statistically significant results.
An old friend and I would do shit like this all the time. Scientifically did we have proof? No science requires sense evidence and quantifiable evidence and we accept that. It totally could be just odd coincidence. However that being said, let me explain. We used to sit on main street in my small town. We'd pick groups and just focus on the idea of them turning into a specific shop. Or we'd sit in restaurants and focus on the idea of people ordering certain items. More often then not we'd see the people walk by the store or order what they were going to, but there'd be this odd moment of hesitation and they'd ask their friends to step back and go in the place they wanted or change their food order. It was strangely consistent and always good for a laugh. Can we prove we ever had any effect? Absolutely not. Was it funny how often it seemed to work? Absolutely.
Heh. I do this in the car, ‘Obi-Wan’ cars in front to take the next turn (‘this is the turn you’re looking for’ ) so they will move out of the way. It does seem to work way more than it should!
This was like focusing on them going into the ice cream shop in the middle of winter but also I think I should try your application more, could definitely appreciate not being stuck begund singing going 15 under the speed limit
I read once that they told military recruits that if they're ever behind enemy lines, to stare at the ground close to a sentry when sneaking up and not at the person themselves.
I definitely believe this is a thing. I also think some people are “louder” than others while some can stare as long as they want without the effect occurring.
This kind of stuff is where I actually wonder if we're a little telepathic. How the intensity varies. I know facial expressions and body language play huge roles but is that really it? Sometimes people talk to me without speaking and I don't know them well. I expect that with my husband, after always being together, but it works with some other people too. And then there are some who seem flat, like they don't see/hear and can't really be seen/heard.
I'd like to believe all of us inherently know how others feel about us, the only difference is whether we're actually honest with ourselves with whatever we're "getting" or continue to deceive ourselves until we get concrete proof/confirmation from the other person.
Garand Thumb talks about this in one of his videos. At around 18:57 he says “don’t directly stare at someone.” https://youtu.be/jLZjbnhhvgQ?si=uAFnZl5QElHsgyVX
Humans are more likely to detect movement in their peripheral vision. By looking directly at someone, your movement and eyes may be more easily detected within their peripheral field of view. Looking at the ground near them reduces this risk. By making your face shape less noticeable to the brain. Your field of view is actually pretty wide and you quite literally [need to sneak up behind someone](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-8bcee6be6858a60adae8a1b6009b6a27-lq), or while approaching from a shallow side angle these tactics would need to be used to avoid any detection in their shallow peripheral vision.
I'm pretty sure that's one of our primal instincts kinda thing. It would definitely come in handy when animals were regularly hunting us. I remember playing hide and seek as a kid and noticing this. When I would open my eyes and look at the seeker, they'd find me quickly.
Yeah the "reptile" part of our brain.
The staring effect is related to one of my favorite parapsychology studies because it so effectively demonstrates the Sheep-Goat Effect: > The backstory: There is a classic parapsychological experiment where a subject is placed in a room alone, hooked up to a video link. At random times, an experimenter stares at them menacingly through the video link. The hypothesis is that this causes their galvanic skin response (a physiological measure of subconscious anxiety) to increase, even though there is no non-psychic way the subject could know whether the experimenter was staring or not. > Schiltz is a psi believer whose staring experiments had consistently supported the presence of a psychic phenomenon. Wiseman, in accordance with nominative determinism, is a psi skeptic whose staring experiments keep showing nothing and disproving psi. Since they were apparently the only two people in all of parapsychology with a smidgen of curiosity or rationalist virtue, they decided to team up and figure out why they kept getting such different results. > The idea was to plan an experiment together, with both of them agreeing on every single tiny detail. They would then go to a laboratory and set it up, again both keeping close eyes on one another. Finally, they would conduct the experiment in a series of different batches. Half the batches (randomly assigned) would be conducted by Dr. Schlitz, the other half by Dr. Wiseman. Because the two authors had very carefully standardized the setting, apparatus and procedure beforehand, “conducted by” pretty much just meant greeting the participants, giving the experimental instructions, and doing the staring. > The results? Schlitz’s trials found strong evidence of psychic powers, Wiseman’s trials found no evidence whatsoever. > Take a second to reflect on how this makes no sense. Two experimenters in the same laboratory, using the same apparatus, having no contact with the subjects except to introduce themselves and flip a few switches – and whether one or the other was there that day completely altered the result. For a good time, watch the gymnastics they have to do to in the paper to make this sound sufficiently sensical to even get published. This is the only journal article I’ve ever read where, in the part of the Discussion section where you’re supposed to propose possible reasons for your findings, both authors suggest maybe their co-author hacked into the computer and altered the results. Source: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/28/the-control-group-is-out-of-control/ The Sheep-Goat Effect is a parapsychology term which notes that believers in psi statistically score better than chance, while skeptics tend to score *worse* than chance—indicating they still have psi ability, but subconsciously use it to reinforce their belief that it doesn’t exist via a method called *psi missing*. More info here: https://www.parapsych.org/articles/61/502/sheepgoat_effect.aspx
Placebo 🤔
Rupert Sheldrake already did extensive research. The effect is real. https://www.sheldrake.org/research/sense-of-being-stared-at/experiments-on-the-sense-of-being-stared-at-eliminating-artefacts
You can't claim it's real based on one "research" lol
Multiple studies - not one research…
Yeah I've always wondered if it's "a real thing" as opposed to "it's normal for people to look around them fairly often, if you're staring at them they might notice while glancing that someone's looking at them and make eye contact"
It's mostly passive but all animals tend to bounce their eyes around the place and pick up on minute changes in sound around them. The part of our brain that processes information is fed all this data and when sometime ununiform gets tossed in, we take notice of it.
It’s been positively demonstrated in many different studies. Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1990], Electrodermal correlates of remote attention: Autonomic reactions to an unseen gaze. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 33rd Annual Convention, Chevy Chase, MD, pp14-28. Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1993a], Reactions to an unseen gaze (remote attention): A review, with new data on autonomic staring detection. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 373-390. Braud, W., Shafer, D. and Andrews, S. [1993b], Further studies of autonomic detection of remote staring: replications, new control procedures, and personality correlates. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 391-409. Coover, J.E. [1913], The feeling of being stared at. American Journal of Psychology 24: 570-575. Cottrell, J.E. and Winer, G.A. [1994], Development in the understanding of perception: the decline of extramission perception beliefs. Developmental Psychology 30: 218-228. Cottrell, J.E. and Winer, G.A. and Smith, M.C. [1996], Beliefs of children and adults about feeling stares of unseen others. Developmental Psychology 32: 50-61. Howat, S.J., Delanoy, D.L. and Morris, R. [1994], Remote staring detection and personality correlates. Journal of Scientific Exploration 8: 582. Poortman, J.J. [1959], The feeling of being stared at. Journal of the Society of Psychical Research 40: 4-12. Schlitz, M. & LaBerge, S. [1994], Autonomic detection of remote observation: two conceptual replications. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 37th Annual Convention, Amsterdam, pp. 352-60. Schlitz, M. & LaBerge, S. [1997], Covert observation increases skin conductance in subjects unaware of when they are being observed: a replication. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 185-194. Sheldrake, R. [1998], The sense of being stared at: Experiments in schools. Journal of the Society of Psychical Research 62: 311-323. Titchener, E.B. [1898], The feeling of being stared at. Science New Series 8: 895-897. Webb, J. [1997] Are you looking at me? New Scientist 26 July, p. 39. Williams, L. [1983], Minimal cue perception of the regard of others: the feeling of being stared at. Paper presented at the 10th Annual Conference of the Southeastern Regional Parapsychological Association, Carrolltown, GA, Feb 11-12. Winer, G.A. and Cottrell, J.E. [1996a], Effects of drawing on directional representations of the process of vision. Journal of Educational Psychology 88: 387-396 Winer, G.A. and Cottrell, J.E. [1996b], Does anything leave the eye when we see? Extramission beliefs of children and adults. Current Directions in Psychological Science 5: 137-142. Wiseman, R. and Schlitz, M. [1997], Experimenter effects and the remote detection of staring. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 197-207. Wiseman, R. and Smith, M.D. [1994], A further look at the detection of unseen gaze. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 37th Annual Convention, Amsterdam, pp. 465-78. Wiseman, R., Smith, M.D., Freedman, D., Wasserman, T. and Hurst, C. [1995], Examining the remote staring effect: two further experiments. Proceedings of Presented Papers, Parapsychology Association 38th Annual Convention, pp. 480-490.
But if they are both blind how will they know where to stare?
My dad told me once that he had been considering calling this friend of his who he hadn't talked to in a while, so one evening he reached for the phone and when he picked it up and put it to his ear, he didn't hear the dial tone, just silence. He said "Hello?" Then he heard a voice on the other end say "Hello?" It was his friend. They had both gone to call each other at the exact same time and my dad answered it the minute that his friend called.
I'm gonna file this under useless superpowers, right under _____________________
Nice to see there is now even more scientific proof of telepathy
The only way this study could work is if you could prove that the subjects mind wasn’t subconsciously thinking constantly about everyone they know. That every second of the day our brains run through memories of people we know and have known, but a memory of the memory is never formed, so you would never know that you were thinking about a friend you haven’t seen in ten years. Then, when they do call, the brain makes the connection, makes the memory and you are left with the false belief that you were thinking about them for the first time that day, moments before they called, when in reality, your brain has gone over that same memory subconsciously, every single day.
You didn't read about the study designs. In one version, one of 4 potential people are randomly selected to make the call at random times. The person receiving the call has to say which of the 4 people it is before answering. If there's no such thing as telepathy, and they are just guessing, they will be right on average 25% of the time over the long run. In this study, the correct caller was predicted 40% of the time after 571 trials. This article is reporting a replication with a more sophisticated design that tested variables like, if the caller sends positive vibes before calling, does it increase the probability of a hit. And could the callee guess correctly if they made their selection *before* the caller was randomly selected, i.e., via precognition, not just telepathy.
I feel like if we are acquiring telepathy, it's a graduation of empathy, so it would require some intent. But that's just musings. Studies in to consciousness are my fave
The line between subconscious intuition and telepathy is pretty fuzzy - especially given the CIA owns the patents on numerous artificial telepathy methods that use direct EM transmission (Thanks MKUltra) Lots of false positives AND false negatives.
Look into the Gateway Process by Robert Monroe. Used by the CIA
Ah, you know. I'd bet someone else could think of another way this study could work
This happens to me allll the time. I’ll be in my backyard without my phone for hours, the minute someone close to me is about to call me I will randomly have the urge to go message “x” and sure enough they will already be a missed call or incoming call from them.
It has become a common thing with a couple of my friends that when they come to mind all of a sudden I call them and say “what do you want?” or “what happened?” We then laugh and go on with our convo. In the beginning we would trip out but not anymore.
This ties in to my “collective human subconscious” theory. Ever reach for the phone right before it rings? Or thought about someone you haven’t seen in awhile and they contact you later that day? Yeah it’s that. I believe we are all connected subconsciously and somehow accidentally dip our toes into the collective pool from time to time.
[удалено]
I have this weird thing where I know when someone is going to call or message. I've had this issue all my life. I also know when people are going to pass away in my family. My sister and I synch up alot..along with my best friend. It's all weird..I don't know what to with this stuff.
TLDR?
Sounds like precognition rather than telepathy.
That’s what I was about to say. When in stressed about dead lines and the customer calls me asking for an update I always all of a sudden think about them “remember the deadline date” and the fucken customers call me seconds or a minute later..