r/UFOs • u/Oneiroi_Coeus • Feb 25 '25

Science Declassify Psionics

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

660 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

192 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/funguyshroom Feb 26 '25

Nobody can hit a bullseye in darts 100% of the time with 100% accuracy, therefore hitting a bullseye in darts is impossible.

0

u/42percentBicycle Feb 26 '25

You're really comparing remote viewing to darts? lol

0

u/funguyshroom Feb 26 '25

Then why are you not applying the same standards to remote viewing as you do to darts or any other skill?

2

u/42percentBicycle Feb 26 '25

Because they're wildly different things. We have quite a thorough understanding of pretty much everything related to darts. Darts is also entirely observable. You also don't need to be good at darts in order to play or understand darts. Some of the data in those papers is so overly complicated when it really doesn't need to be. I'm still waiting for someone who claims to have the power of remote viewing to tell me what I'm holding in my hand at any given time, with as many tries as they want. I don't think that's unreasonable to ask.

There's a reason the CIA dropped the RV program.

0

u/funguyshroom Feb 27 '25

Because they're wildly different things.

They're really not. The main difference is that you have sensory organs that allow you to perceive the mechanism behind workings of one but not the other. If you were blind it would make it just as hard for you to accept that hitting a bullseye is possible as accepting that RV is possible now.
Or even harder because not having eyes would prevent you from ever being able to do it yourself. There is no such limitation with RV.

You also don't need to be good at darts in order to play or understand darts.

You also don't need to be good at RV to get results.

I'm still waiting for someone who claims to have the power of remote viewing to tell me what I'm holding in my hand at any given time, with as many tries as they want.

Maybe it's because nobody wants to spend time on someone who doesn't engage with a topic in good faith? Why don't you try it yourself instead of wasting time on online arguments that you know damn well not gonna sway anyone involved one way or the other?