PDA

View Full Version : Reiki



meat
21st November 2002, 11:17
Hi guys, I was just wondering if anyone here had done reiki levels 2 and 3. I'm at level 1 myself, but I'm looking to do level 2 next year. Could anyone tell me what the difference is in energy output between the two? Is it worth doing? and not that I'm thinking of it anytime soon, but what about reiki 3?

Carl Elder
21st November 2002, 14:22
Im a Reiki level 3 practioner. I noticed the biggest difference in energy out put when I went from 1 to 2. Going to level 3 was that much difference. You do learn a lot more symbols and things you can do with your reiki however. I think its worth it if you have the money to spare, I think that all the levels are overpriced, but its not like you can shop around. I think that something as benifical to the world shouldnt be so expensive. Just my 2 cents though.

JimGould
2nd March 2003, 08:36
Note: Not everyone charges like a wounder bull for Reiki :D

I am surprised that the person who did your level one didnt explain level 2 :eek:

Level 2 seals in the attunement of level 1 but also deals with symbols and distance healing

Try this site for more info http://reikitheworld.com

Gene Williams
2nd March 2003, 11:51
I visited the website. I know nothing of Reiki. Is it related to chiropractic or shiatsu? We have had several shiatsu seminars in our dojo from time to time, and I have used a chiropractor several times after weekend long seminars. Are there any books you would recommend? Thanks, Gene

JimGould
2nd March 2003, 18:35
It differs from chiropractic or shiatsu as in reiki you dont actually need to touch the body. Some people use a light touch but there is no manipulation of the skin of muscles at all. Reiki is an energy healing.

As for books, its hard to say because there are so many out there but anything by Diane Stein should be ok.

hmjoe
4th March 2003, 00:53
Hello All,

I am a Reiki 2. Doing Reiki 2 is great and well worth it, since you will be able to do Reiki over distances. I have used this quite a bit. :cool:

Reiki is a tremendous gift. The more you use it, the more intune you get....

Sincerely,

Joe DiBella

MarkF
5th March 2003, 10:25
There have been quite a few discussions concerning reiki:

http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/search.php?action=showresults&searchid=169584&sortby=&sortorder=

There may be some good info, and one or two flame wars in that search.


Mark

UKPatrick
5th March 2003, 22:26
Hi all,

I would agree with most of you that Reiki 2 is well worth doing, as the upgrade in energy is really noticable.
I would also recommend that anyone taking Reiki 1 tries to get into, or form, a Reiki share group, to practice what you have learned, and develop your skills. Like many skills, it it is not used regularly you have a tendency to stop using it all togeather.
If anyone reading this is within travelling distance of Coventry, (England)I can recommend the share group at the Pheonix Aikido Dojo, last Friday of each month. We have up to 15 people at each gathering.

Patrick

Kimpatsu
5th March 2003, 23:11
For goodness' sake, gentlemen! Reiki is quack nonsense. Theraputic no-touch? :confused:
C'mon, guys, if you can really perform this, go claim $1 million. (www.randi.org)
This thread really belongs in the Bad Budo forum. :rolleyes:

JimGould
6th March 2003, 04:03
There will always be some people you just can't reach. I CAN prove to you Reiki works with MY OWN medical records and the people we treat.

Please try not to be so blinkered.

hmjoe
6th March 2003, 04:28
Originally posted by Kimpatsu
For goodness' sake, gentlemen! Reiki is quack nonsense. Theraputic no-touch? :confused:
C'mon, guys, if you can really perform this, go claim $1 million. (www.randi.org)
This thread really belongs in the Bad Budo forum. :rolleyes:

I don't know.... For what it is worth... I have used Reiki several times... Many don't believe in it. Many times I have used it for injuries, tooth-aches, colds, etc.... All with success.

But, I had a friend, kevin, who's mother had brain cancer... This is a fact.

Several people I knew (Myself, My Wife and My Reiki Master) did Reiki on her without her knowledge.

Her Brain Tumor Dissapeared! - Fact.... Her doctors were amazed...

Could it be coincidence? Of course.... But the fact is: She is without cancer and doing well. And thats what matters.

Do I take credit for healing her? No. No reiki practitioner would. We don't do anything except use ourselves as a channel of energy.

If martial artists could be fine with the concept of KI or CHI and other forms of energy, then why not universal energy?

Hey, I am not some drugged out hippie living on a farm... I am a well respected college professor in NY teaching Computer Science. I believe in Reiki, that's my choice. If you don't, that's your choice.

But I ask you this, what could it hurt to try it? Your next injury, find a reiki person and see for yourself if it works for you. If you heal quicker than usual, or if the pain disapears, then suprise suprise!

With all of my best....
-Joe

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 05:31
Originally posted by JimGould
There will always be some people you just can't reach. I CAN prove to you Reiki works with MY OWN medical records and the people we treat.
Great! Go claim the $1 million. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) You claim it works; may I see evidence of your double-blind testing, please?

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 05:47
Originally posted by hmjoe
I have used Reiki several times... Many don't believe in it. Many times I have used it for injuries, tooth-aches, colds, etc.... All with success.
These tests were, of course, properly double-blinded?

Originally posted by hmjoe
But, I had a friend, kevin, who's mother had brain cancer... This is a fact.
Several people I knew (Myself, My Wife and My Reiki Master) did Reiki on her without her knowledge.
Her Brain Tumor Dissapeared! - Fact.... Her doctors were amazed...
That is a correlation, not necessarily a cause. Besides, you cannot have a statistical sample of one. We need at least 100 people (the more the better), and an equal number in the control group. Anecdotes such as yours do not constitute evidence.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Could it be coincidence? Of course.... But the fact is: She is without cancer and doing well. And thats what matters.
Not here. Your attempt to appeal to emotion cuts no ice. See above for explanation of proper double-blind testing. This thread is about reiki quackery.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Do I take credit for healing her? No. No reiki practitioner would. We don't do anything except use ourselves as a channel of energy.
What energy is this? Energy can be measured and detected. How was this achieved?

Originally posted by hmjoe
If martial artists could be fine with the concept of KI or CHI and other forms of energy, then why not universal energy?
"Energy" is one of those weasel words bandied about and misapplied by woo-woos. If you hypothesise a form of energy not currently known to science, you must devise an experiment to test for the presence of this energy. How do you intend to do that? Remember, your experiment must be reproducable, and potentially falsifiable.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Hey, I am not some drugged out hippie living on a farm... I am a well respected college professor in NY teaching Computer Science. I believe in Reiki, that's my choice. If you don't, that's your choice.
Why don't you behave like a scientist, then? If you can demonstrate the existence of reiki under proper observing conditions, you can be $1 million richer. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Why don't you take the test and put the argument to rest? Why doesn't any reiki theorist?
As to beliefs, I don't choose them. I believe what is provable, potentially falsifiable, and scientific. This is not about two competing ideas of equal validity; one is just plain wrong. Remember, "What we must have is not the wish to believe, but the will to find out."

Originally posted by hmjoe
But I ask you this, what could it hurt to try it? Your next injury, find a reiki person and see for yourself if it works for you. If you heal quicker than usual, or if the pain disapears, then suprise suprise!
It won't hurt, but it won't do me a blind bit of good, either. And as I said above, a statistical sample of one cannot exist, so even if I personally feel better, you have not established evidence for the existence of reiki. Again, win $1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) or admit it's all a load of baloney. We're all waiting...

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 05:49
Originally posted by JimGould
Please try not to be so blinkered.
"Our minds must not be so open that our brains fall out." Or, to put it another way, you should not be so gullible. Supply us with evidence, not anecdotes. Remember, there's $1 million (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) waiting...

JimGould
6th March 2003, 09:22
you seem highly motivated by money while I am not.. please come and see me and i will give you so much proof you would explode .ahhh but of course you wont do that cos its easy to sit by your PC posting ummmm 6 posts a day? do you ever go out? ... come come come ..see me..i'll show you....ahhh but then.... hmmmmmm you would have to admit you were wrong :D

JimGould
6th March 2003, 09:25
Reading youir other post regarding many mentions of a $million thing hohohoh you are obsessed ........

Basically what you said was that even if you were ill and someone cured you with Reiki you wouldn't believe in it? how stupid are you?

JimGould
6th March 2003, 09:27
oh and could you PROVE to me that you exist? Come on I bet you cant ;)

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 12:07
Originally posted by JimGould
you seem highly motivated by money while I am not..
So give the money to charity. It's a typical ploy of quacks that when challenged, you claim to be uninterested in making any money. Win the $1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and donate it to something worthwhile. Save the Children Fund, for instance.

Originally posted by JimGould
please come and see me and i will give you so much proof you would explode .ahhh but of course you wont do that cos its easy to sit by your PC posting ummmm 6 posts a day? do you ever go out? ...
Unlike you, I can walk and chew gum at the same time. I have a full time job, train in Shorinji Kempo three times a week, go to the gym 2 to 3 times a week... and still manage to post on e-budo. See, it's not so hard if you manage your time correctly.
This is also a tactic of quacks put on the spot: Use ad hominem rather than supply evidence for their claims. Carry on, Jim; you're just proving my point that you're a quack and a charlatan.

Originally posted by JimGould
come come come ..see me..i'll show you....ahhh but then.... hmmmmmm you would have to admit you were wrong :D
Given that were you to prove reiki works, it would change our entire understanding of physics and biology, far from being disappointed, I would be delighted. You keep attacking ME; that does not constitute evidence. Show me the evidence! Otherwise, you should be arrested for fraud, just like all the woo-woos.

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 12:11
Originally posted by JimGould
Reading youir other post regarding many mentions of a $million thing hohohoh you are obsessed ........
I want you to put up or shut up. Come on, Jim, $1 million smackaroos (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and the chance to prove me wrong. How can you pass this up? Unless, of course, you know that you can't do what you claim.

Originally posted by JimGould
Basically what you said was that even if you were ill and someone cured you with Reiki you wouldn't believe in it? how stupid are you?
You would first have to prove that it was indeed reiki that cured me. You still haven't shown me any evidence whatsoever! Do you even understand scientific principles?
Oh, and FYI, I'm a genius, and I have a gold card to prove it. Your ad hominems, however... :rolleyes:

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 12:14
Originally posted by JimGould
oh and could you PROVE to me that you exist? Come on I bet you cant ;)
Here's evidence of my existence: I'm typing to you. You even invited me to come and see you! I'll meet you at the scientific test of your paranormal abilities, OK?
BTW, what you're attempting here is called the fallacy of composition. Maybe I am just a figment of your imagination; it doesn't detract from the fact that you are claiming to possess a physically impossible paranormal ability, and are charging people money to "use" it. That's fraud. Keep quacking like a duck, Jim.

UKPatrick
6th March 2003, 22:45
Tony,

is it my imagination, or are you a lttle bit anti Reiki?

You only believe what can be scientifically proven to you, you say, so we can assume you have no trust in people, society, or any new concept not proven statistically. Is your life really that sad?

There are probably as many people out here in the big bad world who believe in, and enjoy, Reiki as there are practitioners of Martial Arts, whoops, disregard this statement, I don't have the stats to back it up, *hit, I must be wrong.

Lighten up, and try experiencing a reiki session, and see how it feels.

Patrick

Gene Williams
6th March 2003, 22:47
By God, that's what I want to see...Tony Kehoe in a reiki session. May I sell the tickets? Gene

Kimpatsu
6th March 2003, 23:19
Originally posted by UKPatrick
is it my imagination, or are you a lttle bit anti Reiki?
I'm opposed to all quackery and pseudoscience. Not just reiki; I also oppose theories of Planet X, UFOs, ghosts, gods, demons, magic crystals, etc.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
You only believe what can be scientifically proven to you, you say, so we can assume you have no trust in people, society, or any new concept not proven statistically.
You can assume no such thing. Such false analogy is common among proponents of pseudoscience because it's a form of ad hominem, but has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Is your life really that sad?
What's sad about fighting for the truth?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
There are probably as many people out here in the big bad world who believe in, and enjoy, Reiki as there are practitioners of Martial Arts,
Typical woolly thinking. However many people may believe it does not make it true. What we have to test is not people's faith in reiki, but whether reiki actually works. See the difference?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
whoops, disregard this statement, I don't have the stats to back it up, *hit, I must be wrong.
Yes you must, for the reason given above.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Lighten up,
And you should wise up.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
and try experiencing a reiki session, and see how it feels.
I'm only interested in testing reiki under proper scientific testing conditions. Why don't you take that challenge? Remember, success=$1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and the chance to prove me wrong. Why not go for it?

hmjoe
7th March 2003, 00:03
Dude....

With all respect... People believe in lots of things that can't be measured....

What is the difference between a living person and a dead person.... The answer is energy... And, can that energy be measrued? Also, where does it go when we die? You weight the same a second before and a second after you die, so it doesn't have measurable weight or volume, does it? ... So where does it go?

We don't understand alot of things in our world. There are so many thing we can't measure.... What about God? Can you measure God? I don't know what your beliefs are, but I can say that even though I can't measure "God", I still believe in him. And it is funny that more and more Scientists believe in some sort of un-measurable God. How do they do that? Oh... I suppose God does not need the Million Dollars, either. ;) If he did, he would open up his Internet Explorer, go to the website and claim his million.

With all respect.... I luv the Martial Arts. I really do! But, it is nice to be involved in another art in that its only purpose is healing.

All I can say is the people that I have used Reiki on have said it helped them. I can say it helped me, too. Hey, Why would I Lie? I have never asked anyone for a cent for any Reiki that I have given. I don't profit from it in anyway, except in knowing that I was able to "Do the right thing" and help someone.

Reiki can't do everything, Neither could accupuncture, ("Which also uses an UnMeasurable energy"). But both could help a person toward wellness.

All My Best,

Joe DiBella

hmjoe
7th March 2003, 00:08
Originally posted by Gene Williams
By God, that's what I want to see...Tony Kehoe in a reiki session. May I sell the tickets? Gene

Only if we give the money to Tony's charity of choice!

hmjoe
7th March 2003, 00:15
Hey now... I have a great Idea!

Lets send Tony Reiki. O-Oh.... Perhaps if he "Glows in the Dark" from all of the healing energy we send his way, (Which could be measured in LUX) would he have the evidence he needs.


No need to Thank me Tony, was my pleasure!

To your good health.

-Joe

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 00:26
Originally posted by hmjoe
With all respect... People believe in lots of things that can't be measured....
And you don't think it's foolish to believe in something for which there is no evidence?

Originally posted by hmjoe
What is the difference between a living person and a dead person.... The answer is energy...
No, it's the absence of biological activity. Misuse of the word "energy" is a typical woo-woo ploy.

Originally posted by hmjoe
And, can that energy be measrued?
Of course energy can be measured. It can also be detected. If it can't be detected and measured, it's probably not there.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Also, where does it go when we die?
There is nothing to go anywhere. There is nothing paranormal about life.

Originally posted by hmjoe
You weight the same a second before and a second after you die, so it doesn't have measurable weight or volume, does it? ... So where does it go?
Thereby indicating that there is nothing there. You can turn a radio ON and OFF. Same principle.

Originally posted by hmjoe
We don't understand alot of things in our world. There are so many thing we can't measure.... What about God?
The correct thing to say is there are many things we don't understand YET. We cannot measure them YET. Oh, and god doesn't exist.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Can you measure God? I don't know what your beliefs are, but I can say that even though I can't measure "God", I still believe in him.
And why do you believe in something for which there is no evidence? Reiki, god (whichever one), UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, the Tooth Fairy... all superstitions.

Originally posted by hmjoe
And it is funny that more and more Scientists believe in some sort of un-measurable God.
Actually, this is not true, but even if it were, it would mean nothing, because you are arguing the logical fallacy of Appeal to Authority, and in science, there are no authorities.

Originally posted by hmjoe
How do they do that? Oh... I suppose God does not need the Million Dollars, either. ;) If he did, he would open up his Internet Explorer, go to the website and claim his million.
Yes, more evidence of god's non-existence.

Originally posted by hmjoe
With all respect.... I luv the Martial Arts. I really do! But, it is nice to be involved in another art in that its only purpose is healing.
But reiki doesn't heal! It's snake-oil quackery, and taking money for practicing it is fraud, pure and simple.

Originally posted by hmjoe
All I can say is the people that I have used Reiki on have said it helped them.
That's right. They SAID it helped them; that doesn't mean that it did help them. The only way to be sure would be proper double-blind testing with a sufficiently large sample of people. Why are you afraid to try this?

Originally posted by hmjoe
I can say it helped me, too. Hey, Why would I Lie?
Self-delusion. Perhaps we should call you Henri Blondlot.

Originally posted by hmjoe
I have never asked anyone for a cent for any Reiki that I have given. I don't profit from it in anyway, except in knowing that I was able to "Do the right thing" and help someone.
No, you THINK you helped them. Once again, you are confusing appearance with reality. I'm glad that you personally don't take money for it, but if you dissuade a cancer sufferer, for example, to take your reiki instead of proper chemotherapy, and they subsequently die of the tumor, you should be prosecuted.

Originally posted by hmjoe
Reiki can't do everything, Neither could accupuncture,
Neither of them can do anything.

Originally posted by hmjoe
("Which also uses an UnMeasurable energy").
There's no such thing. If there is energy present, it will be both detectable and measureable. You don't know what energy actually is. A typical woo-woo misuse of terminology.

Originally posted by hmjoe
But both could help a person toward wellness.
No, neither can. Come on, you're still ducking the issue. Apply for the $1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and prove us all wrong. You would also probably win a Nobel Prize, for radically changing our understanding of the universe. What have you got to lose?

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 00:29
Originally posted by hmjoe
Only if we give the money to Tony's charity of choice!
Yes: I'm the worthiest cause I know! :D

JimGould
7th March 2003, 01:55
Here's evidence of my existence: I'm typing to you Well thats the biggest piece of quakery we have seen so far ... For all i know you could be my MUM signing onto E-budo using a silly nic name :D . So you loose by default as YOU have proved NOTHING while I have sick people all around me and my group being made to feel better :D

Its far easier to shoot something down you know nothing about than to prove something you do :D

I am still waiting for you to prove to me you are not my mum :cool:

JimGould
7th March 2003, 02:00
I have lost count now on how many time the idiot mentions MONEY..hmm lets see... there's that old $1000000000 prize and lets see, hmmmmmm me charging for Reiki of which he has no idea because actually I don't change ... stupid..always get the facts first or you are on a loser ..ohhh yeah and...he has a GOLD CARD.....

Money mad? Want to take a vote? and whats with keep repeating yourself? It's not making you any clearer on what you are afraid of ;)

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 02:03
Originally posted by JimGould
Well thats the biggest piece of quakery we have seen so far ... For all i know you could be my MUM signing onto E-budo using a silly nic name :D .
Yes, I could be. But if your mother's in the room with you while I'm typing, then it can't be her. Maybe I'm your old school science teacher. (You clearly slept through his classes.)

Originally posted by JimGould
So you loose by default as YOU have proved NOTHING while I have sick people all around me and my group being made to feel better :D
No, whom you believe to be better. To claim unequivocally that you have cured them, you must have data compiled from double-blind tests with an appropriately large sample base. What part of this don't you understand?

Originally posted by JimGould
Its far easier to shoot something down you know nothing about than to prove something you do :D
I know far more than you do. When are you going to take the $1 million test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Go on, revolutionize our understanding of the universe! Win a Nobel Prize as well! Make Einstein look foolish! C'mon, what are you waiting for?

Originally posted by JimGould
I am still waiting for you to prove to me you are not my mum :cool:
I will do so by introducing myself at the $1 million test, when you take it.

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 02:06
Originally posted by JimGould
I have lost count now on how many time the idiot mentions MONEY..hmm lets see... there's that old $1000000000 prize and lets see, hmmmmmm me charging for Reiki of which he has no idea because actually I don't change ... stupid..always get the facts first or you are on a loser ..ohhh yeah and...he has a GOLD CARD.....
More ad hominem. Give the money to charity. Or, if you prefer, forget the money. I just thought it made a good incentive. Take the test for free, if you like. But until you offer scientific data collected under double-blind testing, you have no case, and no right to make your wild claims.

Originally posted by JimGould
Money mad? Want to take a vote? and whats with keep repeating yourself? It's not making you any clearer on what you are afraid of ;)
Science is not a democracy. You can't vote on which laws of physics to uphold. I keep repeating myself because you keep ducking the question. Answer unequivocally: when are you going to take a properly double-blinded test? If you're confident that reiki works, you have nothing to fear.

JimGould
7th March 2003, 02:12
I'll take it TODAY. You come to my place and I'll let YOU set the test and standards...

Are you here yet? are ya? are ya? ;)

Actually my mum isn't in the room with me so hmmmm I think you ARE my MUM. (ps some of us dont live with our mums anymore ;) )




Make Einstein look foolish! C'mon, what are you waiting for? Ohhh the guy who said the A Bomb wouldnt work ... ;) That wasn't hard was it LOL

JimGould
7th March 2003, 02:39
Hey I just had a thought. If I did the triple blind test ;) and went in with a headache, took two asprin and 20 mins later the headache went would this actually prove that the asprin worked or could the headache have gone away anyway? ;)

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 04:58
Originally posted by JimGould
I'll take it TODAY. You come to my place and I'll let YOU set the test and standards...
Hey, you know I'm in a different country from you. First things first: Complete the application protocol (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html) and submit it either to me, or directly to JREF. (www.randi.org) We will then arrange a local university or similar to design a protocol. You participate in the protocol design to ward off later cries of unfair. We must also assemble a suitably large pool of patients, including a control group. This takes time, but if you fill in the application form, we can start the proceedings today.

Originally posted by JimGould
Are you here yet? are ya? are ya? ;)
Could you possibly be any more childish?

Originally posted by JimGould
Actually my mum isn't in the room with me so hmmmm I think you ARE my MUM. (ps some of us dont live with our mums anymore ;) )
OK, I'm your mother. Now do as I say: Wash behind your ears, eat your greens, and complete the application form. We're waiting.

Originally posted by JimGould
Ohhh the guy who said the A Bomb wouldnt work ... ;) That wasn't hard was it LOL
When did Einstein ever say the A-bomb wouldn't work? He was disappointed with the application of his theory, unlike Oppenheimer, Bohr, or Fermi. What's your point?

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 05:07
Originally posted by JimGould
Hey I just had a thought.
Liar. :D

Originally posted by JimGould
If I did the triple blind test...
What on earth is a triple blind test? A protocol for testing second sight?

Originally posted by JimGould
...and went in with a headache, took two asprin and 20 mins later the headache went would this actually prove that the asprin worked or could the headache have gone away anyway? ;)
We don't know. That's why we need a massive pool of, say, 200 people with headaches. We give aspirin to 100, and a placebo to the other 100, and then check 20 minutes later to see if the test group has been cured, and the control group hasn't. If neither group has been cured, we conclude that aspirin doesn't work. If both groups are cured, we still don't know if aspirin works; we say that all headaches could have gone into spontaneous remission, and we repeat the experiment with another 200 people. If, however, after 20 minutes, the test group are all cured and the control group are all still sick, we tentatively conclude that aspirin is as effective as claimed. See how it works?

JimGould
7th March 2003, 05:17
So lets see.... I need 200 patients and a trial that could last 5 years? hmmmm I can't see it working myself...

If you want to know either a) Why it may take 5 years or b) The Einstein thing.... I am not going to do your research for you :)

JimGould
7th March 2003, 05:24
Oh and you still havn't offered one shred of evidence as to who you are ;)

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 05:26
Originally posted by JimGould
So lets see.... I need 200 patients and a trial that could last 5 years? hmmmm I can't see it working myself...
So you're backing out? Why am I not surprised? :rolleyes:
If you think it can be done more simply, post your suggested protocol here. I said you'd be consulted at all stages, remember? But first you must complete the application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html) You can manage that much, can't you?

Originally posted by JimGould
If you want to know either a) Why it may take 5 years or b) The Einstine thing.... I am not going to do your research for you :)
Regarding (A): Are you saying that reiki takes five years to complete a single treatment? I don't understand.
As to (B), the quote doesn't exist. You made it up, so there's no way I can ever find it.
Now, where's that completed application form?

JimGould
7th March 2003, 05:32
ummm no I am not backing out
A) thats not what I said.... but you have to research what i said and why first
and b) its not a quote..its a fact... and you must research that too...

I don't need to fill a form out... i'll do it form and $ free.. you don't get it do you?

JimGould
7th March 2003, 05:34
Okay I feel in a good mood.... I'll give you a clue........

On June 13, 1939 a patent on the atomic bomb was issued to Mr. Leo Szillard, a mostly self-educated Hungarian refugee (U.S. patent No. 2,161,985). That same year Albert Einstein wrote to U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt expressing his opinion that an atomic bomb would be too heavy to carry in an airplane and wouldn't do any more than blow up something the size of a harbor.



You playing with the big boys now matey :P

JimGould
7th March 2003, 05:38
Do one thing... So you a little more aware of what we are talking about...

Go on a Level 1 and Level 2 course and report back.. Then we can talk more as its hard explaining the colour green to a blind man :)

ErikH
7th March 2003, 08:34
Wow, I just went through this last week. Here we go again. There will be a lot of picking and choosing here.


Originally posted by hmjoe
I don't know.... For what it is worth... I have used Reiki several times... Many don't believe in it. Many times I have used it for injuries, tooth-aches, colds, etc.... All with success.

You do know that tooth-aches, colds and injuries will all pretty much heal themselves with or without reiki, right? How do you measure that they are going away faster or slower? For instance, I've had tooth-aches that lasted a day or a few days that went away all by themselves. Depending on the injury, sometimes they heal quickly, sometimes they don't.


But, I had a friend, kevin, who's mother had brain cancer... This is a fact.

Several people I knew (Myself, My Wife and My Reiki Master) did Reiki on her without her knowledge.

Her Brain Tumor Dissapeared! - Fact.... Her doctors were amazed...

I'm with Tony. Document and publish your findings. Forget his $1,000,000. Wouldn't it be more valuable to bring this practice into modern medicine? Get the studies done and submit them to medical journals for review.

Quit the BS and step up to the plate.

ErikH
7th March 2003, 08:37
Originally posted by Gene Williams
I visited the website. I know nothing of Reiki. Is it related to chiropractic or shiatsu? We have had several shiatsu seminars in our dojo from time to time, and I have used a chiropractor several times after weekend long seminars. Are there any books you would recommend? Thanks, Gene

Yes, they are very similar.

All three were made up.

There are no studies supporting their validity.

ErikH
7th March 2003, 09:04
Originally posted by JimGould Hey I just had a thought. If I did the triple blind test ;) and went in with a headache, took two asprin and 20 mins later the headache went would this actually prove that the asprin worked or could the headache have gone away anyway? ;)

It would show something but not that aspirin worked. You'd need more for that, a lot more.

Aspirin is an interesting example to use because it came into general use long before it was understood. In fact, it has a very long history and came into use largely from observation. It goes back to Hippocrates although it obviously wasn't aspirin back then. However, it's not the same world today. Any drug that comes on the market today, and purports specific things, requires studies.

If you want to say you feel better when you do Reiki then I don't much care. No big deal there because it's probably true. Go for it and feel better about yourself.

You want to say that you treat injuries, cure headaches and may have healed a tumor, then you need evidence. You say you work with energy and it affects things then that energy is measurable.

If you make claims then those claims need to be backed up.

JimGould
7th March 2003, 09:11
I can prove it. I can removed headaches within 30 seconds..fact..proved heaps of times.... done it.,..been there... when will you guys get it?

If you havn't tried it why even bother talking about it?

ErikH
7th March 2003, 09:15
Originally posted by ErikH
Yes, they are very similar.

All three were made up.

There are no studies supporting their validity.

I should amend this. I'm sure someone somewhere has claimed studies supporting one or more of these practices. Their quality is what is in question.

ErikH
7th March 2003, 09:25
Originally posted by JimGould I can prove it. I can removed headaches within 30 seconds..fact..proved heaps of times.... done it.,..been there... when will you guys get it?

Then write up your efforts and submit them to a medical journal. If you can reliably knock out a headache then you are a miracle worker. My father used to get migraines which flattened him. I presume that you can handle those too, right? Think of all the good you could do the world. Think of all the suffering you could alleviate.

Put yourself up to the same standards that modern medicine plays by. If you want us to listen to you then that is where the bar is set.


If you havn't tried it why even bother talking about it?

It always cracks me up when I hear this one. I always marvel at the assumptions made by believers but then I suppose it's a requirement of sorts. I've had reiki treatments. Felt nice. So does a massage. Big whup in the greater scheme of things.

You are the one making claims. We are challenging them. That's how the game is played.

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 21:27
Originally posted by JimGould
ummm no I am not backing out
A) thats not what I said.... but you have to research what i said and why first
That's why I'm querying it. Each claim is different, so the protocol has to be individually tailored. To create an appropriate protocol, we need as much info as possible. See?

Originally posted by JimGould
and b) its not a quote..its a fact... and you must research that too...
No, it is a misquote. But what do I expect from a man who knows no science and less truth?

Originally posted by JimGould
I don't need to fill a form out... i'll do it form and $ free.. you don't get it do you?
Even if you don't want the money, you still have to complete the form for us to start the ball rolling. More procrastination. You're a fraud.

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 21:30
Originally posted by JimGould
Okay I feel in a good mood.... I'll give you a clue........
On June 13, 1939 a patent on the atomic bomb was issued to Mr. Leo Szillard, a mostly self-educated Hungarian refugee (U.S. patent No. 2,161,985). That same year Albert Einstein wrote to U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt expressing his opinion that an atomic bomb would be too heavy to carry in an airplane and wouldn't do any more than blow up something the size of a harbor.
This is actually an urban myth, like the rat in the Kentucky Fried Chicken. It's about as factual as your reiki science.

Originally posted by JimGould
You playing with the big boys now matey :P
And I'm way bigger than you are, tough guy. ;)

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 21:33
Originally posted by JimGould
Do one thing... So you a little more aware of what we are talking about...Go on a Level 1 and Level 2 course and report back..
Then we can talk more as its hard explaining the colour green to a blind man :)
More ad hominem. The science behind reiki doesn't add up. You're talking bollocks, as any doctor or physicist can tell you. But you really are prince woo-woo. (Bruce is king, but you're a close second.)
Given a free course, sure I'll attend. I'll blow their theories out of the water. Now take the challenge. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Or are you chicken?

Kimpatsu
7th March 2003, 21:38
Originally posted by JimGould
I can prove it. I can removed headaches within 30 seconds..
No, that is not proof. It is a correlation, not a cause. I'm getting tired of repeating this. Either you're incredibly dense, or you're being deliberately dishonest. Which is it?

Originally posted by JimGould
fact..proved heaps of times.... done it.,..been there... when will you guys get it?
No, that is NOT proof. Evidence can only be compiled with proper double-blind testing. Either you really are that stupid, after the number of times I've explained this, or you're being deliberately evasive because you know your reiki bull won't stand up to testing.

Originally posted by JimGould
If you havn't tried it why even bother talking about it?
I haven't tried crack cocaine either, but I'm sure it has a detrimental effect. Have you?
Now take the challenge! (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Gene Williams
7th March 2003, 22:38
Tony,
I haven't seen you get this worked up about anything before! Well, maybe Bruce, but you kept your sense of humor. I have a question to both of you: could the effects of Reiki be related to hypnotism/suggestbility? Hypnotism is, in my opinion, more art than science, but has some basis and recognition in psychiatric practice (it is often chemically induced, but just as often by the words and guidance of the practitioner.) The subject must be willing to be hypnotized, as well, unless it is drug induced. If I am experiencing a headache that is tension/stress induced and not based upon some neurologic process, want to be "cured" and believe the cure works, chances are it will work. Not exactly science, but demonstrable. Gene

ErikH
7th March 2003, 23:06
Originally posted by Kimpatsu No, that is NOT proof. Evidence can only be compiled with proper double-blind testing..

This is inaccurate. Evidence is compiled from many sources. I doubt Hippocrates was performing double-blind studies when he prescribed the leaves of the Willow Tree. Also, in 1948 Dr. Lawrence Craven noticed that patients taking aspirin were not getting heart attacks. Also, not double-blind but it provided a basis for exploration.

Having said that I don't think Jim's claims count for much either.

ErikH
7th March 2003, 23:21
Gene, I know you didn't direct this at me, or at least I think you didn't but I can tell you almost exactly what is going on here.

I used to do an exercise where a person lays down and a small group surrounds him. One person puts their hand on the person's head, another the feet, another takes an arm or if there are enough people one person takes each leg. This can be done with up to 6 people. Each person resting their hands on the person is told to relax and not try to heal or anything. After a minute or so you rotate the person laying down.

After a cycle of this I find that generally I feel very relaxed. No woo-woo science here, no claims of anything, I've just found that it helps people to relax. It's kind of like being in a room when the conversation level rises and pretty soon everyone is yelling. The reverse happens in a library.

Now, if when I did that, I claimed it was a mysterious healing energy I can guarantee that I could get people to buy into it's healing power. I too could fill a book saying I cured all kinds of things. People would remember the one time something strange happened with cancer and completely forget the 99 who died of it. And we'd never record the people who still got ulcers, or other diseases because we'd lack the skill to recognize those diseases and subsequently know that our efforts produced nothing or a person actually got worse despite our efforts.

Then we'd talk about what someone should be feeling such as a tingling in the arms, a tingling in the back or neck, and pretty soon everyone would be feeling those things.

Pretty soon I'd get on e-budo and argue with Tony, and I guess myself as well, about my claims.

It's not hypnotism but just common human fallibility.

Gene Williams
8th March 2003, 00:02
Thanks, Erik. Then, it is more suggestibility, right? Gene

JimGould
8th March 2003, 00:39
Ok I give up... the proof of doing it is not proof so I am a fraud.. ok you win .... I'll just go back to helping people and fooling them into being cured.. who cares long as they aint sick and they think I helped... all in thier imagination but hey... so are you Tony cos not one person here thinks you aint my Mum....

BTW I see you resorted to personal insults which is always the way when someone knows they are wrong...

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 03:52
Actually, Gene, I lost my sense of humour when Jim Gould started dodging and ducking the issue, and refusing to take the test. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) His is a liar, a fraud, and a charlatan, and I'm submitting an article about his unethical practices to JREF. (http://www.randi.org/) It's bound to make interesting reading.
Erik: Of course you're right if my statement is taken at face value, so I'll clarify. Proper double-blind testing is essential to verify (or disprove!) Gould's claims.
Mr. Gould: You can run, but you can't hide. You won't take the test, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) because you know you can't pass genuine scientific scrutiny. Why don't you stop posting your lies here? The local Chamber of Commerce should investigate you.
Now, I'm off for a beer in the Hawaiian sun... :beer:

JimGould
8th March 2003, 04:00
Tony you are a total prick. Its people like you that cause unrest.

I offer you proof and you run away .... I'm still here.

YOU are the one who needs proof.. so YOU go find it. Ahhh but YOU can't because you do not have the brains or mentality to do so. You sit making threats and calling names and yet would ¤¤¤¤ your pants if anyone you insulted was in the same room as you. You Tonay are a blot of the face of the earth.

And its ok it Tony gets it FREE I see... cant have a post without mentioning money now can we.

JimGould
8th March 2003, 04:02
Oh and Tony, if you dont like a topic here why dont you take your tiny mind somewhere else and let those who do enjoy it... prat

JimGould
8th March 2003, 04:04
Now, I'm off for a beer in the Hawaiian sun More lies Tony or are you lying in your profile.. You see, no one can believe a word you say

JimGould
8th March 2003, 07:21
Maybe you would like to report and sue all the HOSPITALS using reiki listed here and also read some of the research papers... people are scientifically researching reiki right now.... go ask the ones that live near you Tony ;)

http://www.simplyreiki.co.uk/reiki_research_papers.htm

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 12:39
Originally posted by JimGould
Tony you are a total prick.
Typical of quacks. Can't do what you claim, so you resort to name calling. Take the test (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) already. Or is the reason you keep ducking and avoiding is because you know you can't?

Originally posted by JimGould
Its people like you that cause unrest.
Exposing your fraud causes unrest? Good. Let's have a rational revolution, in which the likes of you are swept away by truth and science.

Originally posted by JimGould
I offer you proof and you run away .... I'm still here.
You haven't offered a single proof yet. You blather on in anecdotal form, but that does not constitute proof. Where's this proof you claim? Show me! Take the test!

Originally posted by JimGould
YOU are the one who needs proof.. so YOU go find it. Ahhh but YOU can't because you do not have the brains or mentality to do so.
More ad hominem. Calling me names does not disguise the fact that the emperor has no clothes. Yes, all science needs proof. Where is yours?

Originally posted by JimGould
You sit making threats and calling names and yet would ¤¤¤¤ your pants if anyone you insulted was in the same room as you. You Tonay are a blot of the face of the earth.
Fine, asshole. You want to challenge me, come here. I'm a Shorinji Kenshi, and I can wipe the floor with you. Come to Japan and find out. Coward. You duck the challenge, and I bet you'll duck this. If I'm ever in New Zealand, you are in serious trouble.


Originally posted by JimGould
And its ok it Tony gets it FREE I see... cant have a post without mentioning money now can we.
So give the prize money to charity. You keep ducking that point too, as if I hadn't made it many times. You are a liar, a fraud, a cheat, and a coward. I look forward to meeting you, so I can prove it in person. Coward.

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 12:43
Originally posted by JimGould
Oh and Tony, if you dont like a topic here why dont you take your tiny mind somewhere else and let those who do enjoy it... prat
More ad hominem. And if I have a tiny mind, by definition, you must have no mind at all. But look at what you're saying: can't take the challenge, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) so you resort to name-calling. Your ploys are so transparent, they're pitiful. You can't even spell or punctuate correctly! Wow! A woo-woo who can't spell! Kinda par for the course... :rolleyes:

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 12:46
Originally posted by JimGould
More lies Tony or are you lying in your profile.. You see, no one can believe a word you say
What on earth do you mean? I'm currently in Honolulu. (See, some of us travel and enrich our minds...) But I guess that idea is beyond your tiny mind... :rolleyes:
Next time you want to threaten me with physical violence, come to Tokyo. Then we'll really see how much your woo-woo powers protect you.

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 13:18
Homeopathic Remedies That Won't Make You Better
Patients better off with conventional treatments, says study.
By James Chapman, Science Correspondent.
Homeopathic remedies simply do not work in the treatment of many illnesses, scientists have concluded. A review of patients with symptoms including migraine, sore muscles and flu found homeopathy had no effect at all. The scientists also said there was very little evidence that homeopathic methods worked on any other condition.
I think that says it all. But as Gould won't take the challenge, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) I guess we'll never know... :rolleyes:

UKPatrick
8th March 2003, 17:54
Hi all,

well, following this thread is certainly more interesting than watching the soaps on TV.

We are now into name calling, threatening to beat the proverbial out of each other, when 'we' get to the same point on the globe. The same point on the globe - golly gosh, the scientist (address Japan, statement 'I'm in Japan'), is now in Hawaii, thats CLOSER to Aeoteora than he was - is this the international crisis that we are hearing about on the TV.

Have the UN been advised of this potential world shattering confrontation? Can humanity survive? Will anybody notice that all that has happened is Tony has continually promoted his'Randi' website?
Yes, after 5 bl**dy pages of mails I finally flicked the 'challenge'link.
Keep the laughs coming folks, after all, some people do say laughter is the best medicine (Tony, how long can you keep up a tirade against this statement?)

Patrick

Gene Williams
8th March 2003, 19:07
Yes Patrick, I think it is time Tony left the girl on the river bank. Gene

JimGould
8th March 2003, 20:49
Okay thats my laugh for the day.
Tony says I have threatened me and yet I see that no where but Tony says IF hehehe he evern comes to NZ I am in serious trouple because hes gonna bring him mum with him. Well I'm so scared I will leave my name and details right there on my web site so he cant find me ;) and kick my ass :D

He says I am ducking something and yet I still say come here and I will prove it... hmmm dont see no ducking

He still hasnt offered one shred of evidence that he exists

He cries now at name calling when he has been doing it all along

He wants proof yet wont leave his computer

He refuses to go and try Reiki and see for HIMSELF

He keeps pointing at a web site when he could have proof so easily

He's scared of something

Tony,, please don't threaten me with pysical violence while sitting shaking behind a PC screen It's really childish and pathetic. In fact don't do it at all, it's what kids do at school and I am too old for that crap and dons't gain you any respect or credability.

Please note that I havn't dodged, ducked, ran, mislead, lied, failed to prove... anything.. I am still here and still waiting for the challenge to come to me. You get around the world...so get around it... Better still, go into the town and get some Reiki.

Tony, answer 2 simple questions without resorting to name calling, slader, lible, money, tests, or general childishness.....

Why do YOU want to know if Reiki is real?

second question

Why won't YOU go and find out?

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 22:06
Originally posted by JimGould
Okay thats my laugh for the day.
Tony says I have threatened me and yet I see that no where but Tony says IF hehehe he evern comes to NZ I am in serious trouple because hes gonna bring him mum with him. Well I'm so scared I will leave my name and details right there on my web site so he cant find me ;) and kick my ass :D
More rubbish from the airhead. Forget the name-calling, tough guy. You know I'm on the far side of the Pacific. I guess you feel safe that way.

Originally posted by JimGould
He says I am ducking something and yet I still say come here and I will prove it... hmmm dont see no ducking
You know that logistically it just isn't possible for me to visit NZ on a whim; that's why you should take the test (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) locally. Still chickening out, I see.

Originally posted by JimGould
He still hasnt offered one shred of evidence that he exists
That's right; I'm a figment of e-budo's collective imagination. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by JimGould
He wants proof yet wont leave his computer
How childish can you be? Just because I have 24/7 connections. What is your point? Do you even have one? Note that you're on line too, so trying to paint me as a cloistered nerd is a case of pots and kettles.

Originally posted by JimGould
He refuses to go and try Reiki and see for HIMSELF
Not true; I'm just trying to pin you down for scientific test. Which you know, and keep avoiding.

Originally posted by JimGould
He keeps pointing at a web site when he could have proof so easily
How? You won't take the test! (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Originally posted by JimGould
He's scared of something
How can I be the one running scared when you're the one who won't be tested?

Originally posted by JimGould
Tony,, please don't threaten me with pysical violence while sitting shaking behind a PC screen It's really childish and pathetic. In fact don't do it at all, it's what kids do at school and I am too old for that crap and dons't gain you any respect or credability.
You threatened me, tough guy. Going to knock me out with your psychic powers, are you? Take the test, already!

Originally posted by JimGould
Please note that I havn't dodged, ducked, ran, mislead, lied, failed to prove... anything.. I am still here and still waiting for the challenge to come to me. You get around the world...so get around it... Better still, go into the town and get some Reiki.
Is this an acceptance of the challenge? E-mail me the completed form by the end of today!

Originally posted by JimGould
.....Why do YOU want to know if Reiki is real?
Because it would revolutionise our understanding of the world. Free energy! (A physical impossibility.) Bioelectric forcefields! Marvelman lives! Come on, Jim, prove this and you'll win a Nobel Prize! What have you got to lose?

Originally posted by JimGould
Why won't YOU go and find out?
That's what I'm attempting to do, but you won't participate in any testing. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What have you got to fear? (Unless you know you can't perform a claimed.)

Kimpatsu
8th March 2003, 22:08
Originally posted by UKPatrick
the scientist (address Japan, statement 'I'm in Japan'), is now in Hawaii, thats CLOSER to Aeoteora than he was - is this the international crisis that we are hearing about on the TV.

Just taking a vacation, Patrick. Why don't you help me convince Jim Gould to take the test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What is he so afraid of?

JimGould
8th March 2003, 22:50
Tony the only one who has threatened anyone that i can see of re reading the threads is YOU ...


Now, explain the tests like I am a 4 years old and then we will take it from there.......... forget that silly web site challenge and YOU do the work Tony.. You the man with the brains....

Now lets see if I am right...

You take 200 people with headaches, you seal them in a room, I reiki 100 and pretend to Reiki the other 100... You see if the 100 I reiki no longer have a headhache....

Hmmm how do we know that a) they had a headache b) they dont have one now and c) I did or didnt pretend to Reiki them?

You see how this test wont work Tony?

Reiki isnt like kenetic enegry . i cant sit in a sealed box and make a glass fall off a table... It dosnt work that way....


Tell you what.... You prove I cant do it..... You find 1 single person that says i have done Reiki on them and it hasnt worked... Just 1 Tony... Come on big boy.. You can do that can't you? In a court of law that is exactly what you would have to do... I'm the defendant . So prove me wrong Tony ;)
And yes I could come of with people on the positive side easily ... but then you would say they were all telling fibs wouldnt you Tony?

Try going down to one of the many many practitioners in Tokyo ;) or wherever you say you live and asking to see thier records or talking to thier patients Tony or is that too much hard work for you too?

Oh here comes the link to that web site again.........

UKPatrick
9th March 2003, 00:29
Hi Tony,

firstly, enjoy your vacation, I hear Hawaii is great, although Fiji is as close as I have managed to come so far.

As you seem to have some serious problem with Reiki, unlike the previous mails I have read from your good self on other subjects, I must remind you that I am a Reikiist (cor - I've invented a new word). I do not see why anyone should convince any practitioner of any art form to prove their arts validity. Tony, I'm a believer.

Finally, how any mother can continue to squable with her son (NO, I JUST CAN NOT GET INVOLVED WITH A MOTHER AND SON FIGHT).

As to belief (OK, I lied about 'finally'), I have never seen Shorinji Kempo practised, but I am prepared to believe that such a style (Art) exists. Why, because in this great big world in which most of us live, there are things that I do not (personally) know about. I have no reason to believe that you are not telling the truth when you say you are a Shorinji Kempo practitioner, and I have no reason to ask you to prove that your style (or you) exist.

Enjoy the sun out there

Patrick

Gene Williams
9th March 2003, 01:59
It doesn't seem to me that Reiki is science, either. Does it claim to be? If it does not claim to be science, then we cannot demand it be tested by scientific means. If it claims to be science, then it must subject itself to those rigors that Tony has insisted upon. Now, I wonder if it isn't akin to hypnosis, suggestion, and guided meditation. If I am feeling melancholy or drained of energy, just having a good conversation with a person with a positive attitude and some charisma makes me feel better. I hesitate to say an energy exchange takes place, because that has scientific overtones, but in a loose sense, an energy exchange does take place. It may not be measurable, but something happens. I believe it is dangerous to make such claims as curing cancer, etc. because that does demand scientific verification and testing, IF YOU ARE CLAIMING SCIENTIFIC STATUS. If not, and someone is cured of a dread disease through some kind of quasi medicine/alternative healing, that's great. There are recorded cases of what appear to be remissions based upon mental and spiritual phenomena. They are occasional, unpredictable, and raise a lot of questions. I do not, however, think people should abandon medical treatment, rather use alternatve methods in conjunction with more traditional means. Gene

Gene Williams
9th March 2003, 02:19
You know Tony, I suspect if you hooked someone up to an EEG during a reiki session you would probably see significant changes in the readings based upon the responses of the patient.
A lot of these things are anecdotal, not scientific, but all of us have been around people that just drain us of energy, and we have been around others who seem to engender energy in us. Even in individual combat, the idea is to mentally dominate your opponent "before you even lay a hand on him." I don't think we can acknowledge these things without admitting, at least, that there are mental phenomena that do affect our behavior and thinking. Gene

hmjoe
9th March 2003, 20:05
Hi Gene,

I am a Reiki practitioner. I just want you to know that I would never suggest that Reiki should be used as an alternative to important medical treatment.....

However, people could make decisions for themselves. And there is a degree of this....

For instance, it is one thing for a person to forgo the Asprin and use Reiki to get rid of a headache....

It is another for someone to for go the Chemotherapy and use Reiki for cancer. The Reiki may help, however with the side-effects with cancer, however.

Some people believe that Laughter can cure diease. I personally think people heal themselves, with their own energy. But Reiki can be used to kind of feed their energy, as could laughter.

For what it is worth, that's my 2 cents..

- Joe

JimGould
9th March 2003, 20:24
Joe you are right, a Reiki practitioner would never suggest a client (not patient) should stop using medication. Only a doctor should do that.

If Reiki indeed only has the effect of making the person more positive about thier illness and with that they get better then Reiki has still done its job. Many people who have gotten better from illness have purely done so with thier own will power and positive thinking and thats nothing that can be proved by science either.

Kimpatsu
9th March 2003, 20:48
Originally posted by JimGould
You take 200 people with headaches, you seal them in a room, I reiki 100 and pretend to Reiki the other 100... You see if the 100 I reiki no longer have a headhache....
Not quite, but you've got the beginnings of a protocol. Can you diagnose which 100 people have headaches, and which are just pretending, by running your hands over them? We need to define your claims precisely in order to tailor a suitable protocol.

Originally posted by JimGould
Hmmm how do we know that a) they had a headache b) they dont have one now and c) I did or didnt pretend to Reiki them?
This is why your suggested protocol won't work. We have to define the parameters more precisely. BTW, is this an admission that you are now willing to be tested? If so, first complete the application form, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and we can get the ball rolling.

Originally posted by JimGould
Reiki isnt like kenetic enegry . i cant sit in a sealed box and make a glass fall off a table... It dosnt work that way....
Then what kind of "energy" is it like? Electromagnetic? Gravity? You seem to be misusing the word "energy" again. Define what you can do, and we'll create the perfect protocol for it. Quit stalling.

Originally posted by JimGould
Tell you what.... You prove I cant do it..... You find 1 single person that says i have done Reiki on them and it hasnt worked... Just 1 Tony... Come on big boy.. You can do that can't you? In a court of law that is exactly what you would have to do... I'm the defendant . So prove me wrong Tony ;)
If you knew any logic at all, you'd know that you can't prove a negative. Besides, you are NOT the defendant; you claim to have this paranormal ability, so show me. That's all I ask. Of course, you will have to show me under proper double-blind conditions to ensure that the placebo effect isn't acting on your patients, but I'm sure that for a person of your super powers, it won't be hard... will it?

Originally posted by JimGould
And yes I could come of with people on the positive side easily ... but then you would say they were all telling fibs wouldnt you Tony?
I don't understand this statement. Are you saying that you can supply people who would claim to have been healed by you? If so, two words: Placebo effect.

Originally posted by JimGould
Try going down to one of the many many practitioners in Tokyo ;) or wherever you say you live and asking to see thier records or talking to thier patients Tony or is that too much hard work for you too?
Once again, anecdotes are not evidence. Try reading Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit (http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html) to understand why. Proper double-blind testing is essential. So, when are you going to take the test?

JimGould
9th March 2003, 20:57
Tony, You claim to be a man of science and yet you have dicovered nothing for yourself. You only know what you have read in books or seen on your star trek convention type web site. I refuse to belive in you until you prove to me that you exist and therefore will ignore your constant boloney and boring repeats. Everyone can see you are out of steam, Hey wasnt it scientists who said that if man travelled over 17 MPH they would sufforcate? I guess we will have to wait for science to catch us up on this one too.

Kimpatsu
9th March 2003, 21:01
Originally posted by UKPatrick
I must remind you that I am a Reikiist (cor - I've invented a new word). I do not see why anyone should convince any practitioner of any art form to prove their arts validity. Tony, I'm a believer.
"What we need is not the wish to believe, but the will to find out." (Bertrand Russell.)
Just because you have faith in something, does not make that thing true. As Richard Dawkins pointed out, faith is rediculous, because with evidence, faith is superfluous. Therefore, you are admitting to belief in something for which there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER! Don't you find that just a tad stupid?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
As to belief (OK, I lied about 'finally'), I have never seen Shorinji Kempo practised, but I am prepared to believe that such a style (Art) exists. Why, because in this great big world in which most of us live, there are things that I do not (personally) know about. I have no reason to believe that you are not telling the truth when you say you are a Shorinji Kempo practitioner, and I have no reason to ask you to prove that your style (or you) exist.
This is a specious analogy. I can demonstrate Shorinji Kempo to you any time you like. If I hit you using jun zuki, you will know it. I defy you to perform something similar on me using reiki.
BTW, I would suggest "reikiya" for a practitioner of reiki.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Enjoy the sun out there
Unfortunately, it's raining heavily at the moment. At least the rain is warm (unlike either Tokyo or London).

Kimpatsu
9th March 2003, 21:06
Originally posted by JimGould
Tony, You claim to be a man of science and yet you have dicovered nothing for yourself. You only know what you have read in books or seen on your star trek convention type web site. I refuse to belive in you until you prove to me that you exist and therefore will ignore your constant boloney and boring repeats. Everyone can see you are out of steam, Hey wasnt it scientists who said that if man travelled over 17 MPH they would sufforcate? I guess we will have to wait for science to catch us up on this one too.
For science to "catch up" to reiki (sic), we will need to conduct proper scientifi testing. So have you completed the application form (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html) yet?
BTW, it's a common characteristic of woo-woos that they see themselves as defying the monsrous conspiricy of the scientific establishment to suppress the "truth" (sic) of woo-woo theories like free energy or transcendental energy. Good to see you fit the paradigm nicely. Normally I wouldn't ask for this, but because you're so far away, please give me your theories on how you can break the physical laws that deny free energy? If possible, please include the maths, but I won't insist upon it. I"m waiting...

JimGould
10th March 2003, 01:57
I wonder what my Mums stance on these two articles are? ;)

http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/science/scinprov.htm

http://agbiosafety.unl.edu/science.shtml

Of course these pages are made by woo wooos too :P

(ps i dont agree or disagree with anything on these 2 site as they are not in my field of interest)

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:04
I wonder why Tony refuses to reply to any of the queries asked here and also why he continues to libel me on his star trek convension site. I noticed his star trek buddies are not really interested in what he has to say there on this subject either.

Also I wonder why he wants Reiki to be proven right here right now when science had failed in 50 years to prove Einstines 'theory' of relativty :rolleyes: Maybe when Tony has proved that I will fill in his form ;)

hmjoe
10th March 2003, 02:05
Hi Tony,

On a side note, Is Shorinji Kempo the same style as Shorinji-Ryu, the Okinawan Karate-Jitsu art?

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:07
This also makes me smile too :)

Someone using aerodynamic theory once "proved" that bumblebees cannot fly. However, the bumblebees, unimpressed by this triumph of science, refused to walk from flower to flower and continued flying just as before.

hmjoe
10th March 2003, 02:10
Good One, Jim!:)

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:10
Oh and i love this too :)

What Science is NOT

1. Science is not a process which can solve all kinds of problems and questions.
The realm of science is limited strictly to solving problems about the natural world. Science is not properly equipped to handle the supernatural realm (as such), nor the realm of values and ethics.

2. It's not a process which can ignore rules.
Science must follow certain rules; otherwise, it's not science (just as soccer is not soccer if its rules are not followed).

3. It's not a process which seeks the truth or facts.
The goal of science is to come as close as we can to understanding the cause-effect realities of the natural world. It's never "truth" or "facts". "Truth" and "facts" can mean different things to different people.

4. It's not a process which attempts to prove things.
The process of science, when properly applied, actually attempts to disprove ideas (tentative explanations)... a process called "testing", or "challenging". If the idea survives testing, then it is stronger, and more likely an accurate explanation.

5. It's not a process which can produce any kind of explanation.
Scientific explanations must be potentially disprovable. Therefore, supernatural explanations cannot be used, since they can never be disproved (supernatural forces, by definition, do not predictably follow the laws of nature). Whatever results occur in any test can be attributed to those nebulous forces, effectively ending any further efforts to explain.

6. It's not a process which produces certainties, or absolute facts.
Science is a process which can only produce "possible" to "highly probable" explanations for natural phenomena; these are never certainties. With new information, tools, or approaches, earlier findings (theories, or even facts) can be replaced by new findings.

7. It's not a process which can always be relied upon due to its total objectivity and internal self-correction.
Science can be done poorly, just like any other human endeavor. We are all fallible, some of us make fewer mistakes than others, some observe better than others, but we are still subjective in the end. Internal self-correction mechanisms in science merely increase the reliability of its product.

8. It's not a process which is always properly used.
Unfortunately, science is all too frequently misused. Because it works so well, there are those who apply the name of science to their efforts to "prove" their favorite cause, even if the rules of science were not followed. Such causes are properly labeled "pseudosciences". Also, some scientists have been known to do fraudulent work, in order to support their pet ideas. Such work is usually exposed sooner or later, due to the peer review system, and the work of other scientists.

9. It's not a process which is free from values, opinions or bias.
Scientists are people, and although they follow certain rules and try to be as objective as possible, both in their observations and their interpretations, their biases are still there. Unconscious racial bias, gender bias, social status, source of funding, or political leanings can and do influence one's perceptions and interpretations.

10. It's not a process in which the product (understanding) is based on faith or belief.
The product of science (probable explanations for natural phenomena) are always based on observations carefully analyzed and tested. The high confidence we have in science comes from the many successful applications to real-life problems (e.g. in medicine, space exploration, chemistry and technology).

11. It's not a process in which one solution is as good as another, or is simply a matter of opinion.
In science, there is a rigorous analysis and fair-test comparison of alternative explanations, using discriminate criteria, e.g., confirmation by multiple independent lines of evidence, leading to one "best" solution.

12. Scientific Theories are not "tentative ideas" or "hunches".
The word "theory" is often used this way in everyday conversation, but a theory in science refers to a highly probable, well-tested comprehensive explanation, usually for a large collection of observations.

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:17
Clause 6) All expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant

Seems to be a scam for Mums mates to get a free all incuissive holiday to me ;)


Lets see, 5 years in a hotel x say 5 of Mums mates = $lots and he really thinks I will fall for that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:24
Oh I wonder if...........

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2181455.stm

but then most of what Tony understands about the universe would be screwed ;)

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:46
For people just joining this chat and who may not be quite clear on what science is here is a quick (or is that quack ;)) explanation lest they be bullied into a certain way of thinking by Mums knowledge gained from a star trek convention web site:

The Nature of Science
As we look at the world around us, we seem to see certain regularities in how the world operates. For example, if I drop a ball there is a pattern in the way it falls back to the earth, it behaves in a similar manner every time. This has led to the speculation that there are basic rules that determine how the world around us behaves. Scientists try to find these rules that govern the natural world. They do this using the processes of

observation
hypothesis
experimentation.
We observe certain regularities and make a hypothesis or form a theory, i.e. try to guess what the rules are, and then test our hypothesis or theory by experimentation. When we make hypotheses, we prefer hypotheses that are testable. Scientists like hypotheses that make predictions that can be tested and shown to be either correct or incorrect.

Note that although a prediction may be correct, that does not prove the hypothesis is correct, merely that it is not incorrect in that particular case. We cannot prove a hypothesis is correct, only that it is consistent with our observations and the tests we have been able to make. However, if a hypothesis is consistent with a wide range of observations and experiments, we begin to have confidence in it and even call it a law, e.g. Newton's Laws of Motion. Calling it a law does not necessarily mean it is correct and immutable. (Ironically, Newton's Laws of Motion are known to be wrong. They are approximately correct in many cases, but are not applicable in all situations.) Our theories often have to be modified as we acquire new information.

Another important characteristic of science is that scientists should have a little skepticism. When someone proposes a theory, other scientists have the task of testing it. They look for problems or shortcomings in the theory to see if it is accurate, and a little skepticism aids in this process. Typically, it is only after a period of testing that a theory is generally accepted as a good rule or explanation, and even then only until it fails a test and a better theory is developed.

JimGould
10th March 2003, 02:54
Ok I'm getting bored now so just one more thread for people to read and then we should all agree that science is a bit woo woo ;)

http://www.csicop.org/si/9703/end.html

Kimpatsu
10th March 2003, 03:41
OK. Typical woo-woo behaviour. Makes unproven claims, then gets angry when challenged to prove them. Just take the test, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and we'll all know that science is wrong.
You know better. So prove it. Calling me names and pretending to be bored does not make an argument. Show me the money! SHOW ME THE MONEY!
Or don't you have it?
Until you are prepared to be examined, don't post again.

JimGould
10th March 2003, 03:59
hehehehe you all out of crap now mum? :D

Kimpatsu
10th March 2003, 04:34
Originally posted by JimGould
hehehehe you all out of crap now mum? :D
Yes, a truly rational response from a man who won't take a test (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) to prove his claims.
Calling me names doesn't prove you right, Jim. Only science can do that. When are you going to prove your claims scientifically?

JimGould
10th March 2003, 04:51
Oh its Jim now and not Gould... I think I am starting to get through

joe yang
10th March 2003, 15:03
Tony need not believe in Reiki, for Reiki to work. You who would argue with him only expose your own insecurities. Your animosity does not reflect well your faith in and support of the healing arts. How will you truly grow and evolve, you who have such fragile egos? How can you see? The proof is there for those who have eyes. Review Tony's posts. See how he mellows, changes, his strident tones shift to humour. He doesn't believe, yet he is still effected. My interntet, Re Tar Do E-ki Reiki is too powerful, even for him. Do not envy him. Pity him. Help him. Change him. Put your hand on your monitor and think healing thoughts. :D

hmjoe
10th March 2003, 15:36
Originally posted by joe yang
Tony need not believe in Reiki, for Reiki to work. You who would argue with him only expose your own insecurities. Your animosity does not reflect well your faith in and support of the healing arts. How will you truly grow and evolve, you who have such fragile egos? How can you see? The proof is there for those who have eyes. Review Tony's posts. See how he mellows, changes, his strident tones shift to humour. He doesn't believe, yet he is still effected. My interntet, Re Tar Do E-ki Reiki is too powerful, even for him. Do not envy him. Pity him. Help him. Change him. Put your hand on your monitor and think healing thoughts. :D

Bless you, Sir Joe Yang! We need to be in touch with positive feelings and energy. Which is why I suggested that we reiki Tony in an earlier post.


-joe

joe yang
10th March 2003, 16:36
We should Reiki Tony a lot. :D

UKPatrick
10th March 2003, 18:12
Hi Tony,

Thanks for offering to hit me with a Jun Tsuki, I have been hit by enough karateka to know that I would be very aware of what you had done.

And YES, I must admit that I cannot do what you defy me to do - I COULD NOT DO THE SAME TO YOU USING REIKI (sorry Jim, he got me with this one). Reiki is a HEALING skill, I really can not hit you with it, in fact, even if I sneak up behind you and reiki you by surprise, you just will not be hurt. I guess you have found a major weakness there mate.
Perhaps if you researched Reiki a little more,(scientiffically) you would have known this?

Tough luck with the weather, but at least it's not London.

Patrick

Kimpatsu
10th March 2003, 18:18
Originally posted by JimGould
Oh its Jim now and not Gould... I think I am starting to get through
So, when are you going to take the test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Kimpatsu
10th March 2003, 18:20
Originally posted by joe yang
Tony need not believe in Reiki, for Reiki to work.
Science is not a matter of belief, Joe. It's about oberservation and prediction.

Originally posted by joe yang
Put your hand on your monitor and think healing thoughts. :D
Yes! Try! If my opinions change miraculously, you will have passed the preliminary test for the $1 million. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Any takers?

Kimpatsu
10th March 2003, 18:24
Originally posted by UKPatrick
Reiki is a HEALING skill, I really can not hit you with it, in fact, even if I sneak up behind you and reiki you by surprise, you just will not be hurt. I guess you have found a major weakness there mate. Perhaps if you researched Reiki a little more,(scientiffically) you would have known this?
I think you've missed the point, Patrick. I can demonstrate that Shorinji Kempo can do what I claim it can do. If you claim you can heal using reiki, then I demand that you show me under proper observing conditions. For example, can you heal someone with n-stage cancer? Can you cure syphilis? How about congenital birth defects? Can you remove the scar on my left knee? Whatever claims you make must be testable. Remember, there's $1 million (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) on the table here. Are you going to try for it?

UKPatrick
10th March 2003, 18:39
Tony,

I think that my only 'claim' re Reiki is that I could not hurt you with it.

Please forward the cheque to a local hospital, But not in London. Birmingham is more worthy.

I am also a little puzzled about somethind in this disscussion. I'm afraid its my very poor Japanese. What does Re Tar Do E stand for? (Only joking).

Bye the way Tony, thanks for helping me get my mailings up to 20.

Patrick

joe yang
10th March 2003, 18:56
Patrick, that's Re Tar Do©, my internet martial art. Or Re Tar Do© E-ki Reiki, the healing side of Re Tar Do©. Since you just don't get it, it pains me greatly to tell you, you are ineligable for membership in Re Tar Do©. Everyone else on this thread is eminently qualified for Re Tar Do©. Some of you are over qualified.

Pat, please don't take it badly. If you keep participating here long enough, you may reach Re Tar Do© level.

UKPatrick
10th March 2003, 23:24
Joe,

thanks for the straight talk, I'll try to take it like a man.
At least I can look forward to reaching the required level one day. I will keep on trying, and head straight for the comfort food right now.

Patrick

joe yang
11th March 2003, 00:04
Graciously put, in the true spirit of budo. And while training for Re Tar Do©, try Charlie Kondek's famous recipe, microwaved grilled cheese sandwich, for a real fast food treat.

joe yang
11th March 2003, 00:04
Graciously put, in the true spirit of budo. And while training for Re Tar Do©, try Charlie Kondek's famous recipe, microwaved grilled cheese sandwich, for a real fast food treat.

joe yang
11th March 2003, 00:05
Graciously put, in the true spirit of budo. And while training for Re Tar Do©, try Charlie Kondek's famous recipe, microwaved grilled cheese sandwich, for a real fast food treat. :D

joe yang
11th March 2003, 00:10
Sorry about the multiple posts. First I thought it was a psychic internet attack, but my astral presence could not detect anyone. Then I thought it was hardware error, so I tried some hardeware empty hand technique, no luck there. I fell back on some software empty hand technique, but software wsn't the problem. Turns out it was just human error. That's Re Tar Do©.

JimGould
11th March 2003, 01:25
I think you've missed the point, Patrick. I can demonstrate that Shorinji Kempo can do what I claim it can do. Well no actually that's not proof. You could just have hit me with any old Karate type punch leanrt from a video or movie. You see Tony, you would have proved nothing.

Kimpatsu
11th March 2003, 09:58
Karate punching is markedly different from Shorinji Kempo technique, so I can prove it.
So, when are you going to take the test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) You're clearly running scared.
Patrick: to win the $1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) you actually have to demonstrate that you can do this psychic stuff.
Patrick, Jim, and Joe: Three reikiya, and not one of them prepared to be examined under scientific conditions. There's a moral in there, somewhere...

JimGould
11th March 2003, 10:26
Tony, save your breath. We heard you the 1st 10000 times and you choose to ignore us and all the questions asked of you. Go back to the pub now... This thread has no further use.

Dave Pawson
11th March 2003, 10:50
Dn't really know why I'm going to post this but, just got round to reading this thread so here goes:.

Just for clarification.

Point 1 - Am I Reiki initiated, No but have see and spoken to those that are.

Point 2 - Yes I have an interest in what it is, can I explain it Nope not yet.

Tony you state the following "Patrick, Jim, and Joe: Three reikiya, and not one of them prepared to be examined under scientific conditions. There's a moral in there, somewhere..." which on the surface appears to be a good method.

Question I have, and I may have missed something here, if science does not agree in principle that Reiki exists how will they test for its existance. Are the test themselves not invalid because what they are testing for may not exist in that format?

have to agree with one of Jim's earlier comments about going and trying it out,

Science used to claim that the world was flat till someone went to see if it actually was. Now some still claim it is. Same with the moon landings, science changes and can be bent to prove or disprove anything. Tony prove that you have an open mind on the subject, else you just end up sounding like someone who is locked in their own rule base which can not change course.

We each have our own set of rules in which rely on, mine are no doubt different to you, however at the end of the day we each have to live with what we believe in, that is what makes us all individuals.

Kimpatsu
11th March 2003, 11:13
David, you miss the point about science. We have a hypothesis called reiki, which claims to heal people using psychic energy. We must therefore devise a double-blind test to see if this hypothesis is true. Remember, the claimant also participates in divising the test to ward off later cries of unfair if they fail. To date, no one has ever succeeded, but I'm willing to be convinced. You might also like to read this (http://www.randi.org/jr/06-08-01.html) about reiki.

Kimpatsu
11th March 2003, 11:19
Originally posted by JimGould
Tony, save your breath. We heard you the 1st 10000 times and you choose to ignore us and all the questions asked of you. Go back to the pub now... This thread has no further use.
YOU have no further use, Jim. You're clearly running scared. You claim that reiki works, but you won't prove it. All you have to do is take the test. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What could be easier? Unless, of course, you know that you can't do what you claim...
Go on, enlighten us all. Why won't you take the test? Of course, the reluctance of reiki practitioners to actually be tested is well documented. (http://www.randi.org/jr/111601.html) So I guess this is typical reiki: Make all sorts of claims, but fail to back them up. There's a good English word for that: dishonesty.
Take the test, Jim.

Dave Pawson
11th March 2003, 11:50
Ok, good point Tony.

Will this test though in fact actually work, I don't know of anyone who claims Reiki works everytime only that they claim that it can help.

Somethings I guess in life we either believe in like God, or not.

Once remember having a really good debate with a bishop in relation to God, (I have not been baptised in any religion but don't not believe either).

He stated that there was only one God, I for my part disagreed. He asked me to prove there was more than one, I asked him to prove there was only one. Impasse you would think. Categoricallly we couldn't prove one way or the other, although when I stated that in the Bible that there was a son of God, and in my view that meant he was also a God therefore making two Gods I was more right than him.

Science cannot prove or disprove at the moment whether God exists, but an awful lot of people believe in him. Are they all wrong, possibly guess I'll find out when I die, unless reincarnation is possible in which case who knows:D

What I am saying is that for all the tests around at some stage there are something we can't explain and defy all scientific testing maybe this is one of them.

Gene Williams
11th March 2003, 11:55
Tony. I hope you are leaving Japan before 2004. I don't want the earth to swallow you. If you don't have a ride, I'll pick you up in my spaceship...it looks kinda' funny, sort of like a weiner, and it can get us back to Zort and the teen age Amazons we love. :)
Gene

Kimpatsu
11th March 2003, 12:04
Actually, Dave, we've dedicated a whole thread (http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12203&highlight=theistic) to my thoughts on religion. Or as Soulend put it, "Thou shalt debate religion endlessly." These reiki woo-woos claim they can heal psychically, but won't agree to be tested. Surely that tells any rational person that something's up? Jim Gould sounds an awful lot like Henri Blondlot to me. Wishful thinking. No hard science.
Gene: Yes, I'm planning our escape to Zort before planet X comes crashing in here and destroys the world. I plan on watching the fireworks from a safe distance, with a beer in my hand, and an 18yo Amazon on my lap.

Gene Williams
11th March 2003, 12:16
Tony, Can we have some single malt scotch? Lagavulin would be my preference. Gene

Kimpatsu
11th March 2003, 12:25
Originally posted by Gene Williams
Tony, Can we have some single malt scotch? Lagavulin would be my preference. Gene
OK, whatever you want. Personally, I prefer Glenfiddich, though. Or you could always try Glenmorangie, (http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/tain/glenmorangie/index.html) where my parents live.

ErikH
11th March 2003, 20:56
Originally posted by Dave Pawson
Will this test though in fact actually work, I don't know of anyone who claims Reiki works everytime only that they claim that it can help

Question I have, and I may have missed something here, if science does not agree in principle that Reiki exists how will they test for its existance. Are the test themselves not invalid because what they are testing for may not exist in that format?

If they claim results then the claims can be tested. If they claim it helps then there is a way to measure that. If they are not claiming results then what's the point of reiki? I suppose if they want to sit around and think they feel better then no harm done but don't claim it does anything else and not provide valid evidence.


Science used to claim that the world was flat till someone went to see if it actually was. Now some still claim it is.

Well, actually science knew it wasn't flat long before someone went and checked. This is pretty much a myth.

http://www.id.ucsb.edu/fscf/library/RUSSELL/FlatEarth.html


Same with the moon landings, science changes and can be bent to prove or disprove anything.

This is just stupidity. It really has nothing to do with science but rather with people's inability to think logically.


Tony prove that you have an open mind on the subject, else you just end up sounding like someone who is locked in their own rule base which can not change course.

How come the reiki people can't accept modern medicine and science? I used to have an "open-mind". Now I regularly get accused of having a "closed mind" despite the fact that I've looked at both sides. What I found was that modern science had an understanding of the world which was light-years ahead of the other side. It's always funny how quick they resort to this argument.

My problem is that this kind of debate is often treated as either reiki is true or it isn't. It reads as a 50/50 debate. In reality, it's a 99.9999/.0001 debate. In other words, according to our understanding of the world it's very unlikely that the reiki claims are true. Hence, the burden of providing evidence lies squarely with them.

They are apparently incapable of providing any.

Todd Stephens
11th March 2003, 22:20
Originally posted by JimGould

Someone using aerodynamic theory once "proved" that bumblebees cannot fly. However, the bumblebees, unimpressed by this triumph of science, refused to walk from flower to flower and continued flying just as before.

This is not quite correct. Aerodynamic theory, incorrectly applied, can prove that a bumblebee cannot fly. The main contributions in this mode of flight are in viscous effects and vortex shedding, which are small and neglected when applied to a large object moving at relatively high speed. So the aerodynamic phenomena which account for an airplane's ability to fly are not the same phenomena which allow a bumblebee to fly.

Like this thread, this is just another way in which science is misunderstood and misinterpreted.

______________
Todd Stephens

UKPatrick
12th March 2003, 00:01
Eric,

how many of the practitioners of Reiki have said, in this thread, that they do not belive in modern medicine or science?
Where is the evidence of your stated 99.999/0.0001 split in the strenght of the 'argument'.
Once again the scientists amongst us are creating their own (opponents)opinions, and them crediting them to the other side.
I do believe in modern medicine, and anyone who advised a suffering friend not to seek medical advice would be a dangerous fool. Having said that, Reiki, proven or not, can help some people, and can relieve some syptoms of some problems. Where I live in the West Midlands of England, several GP's are starting Reiki clinics in their practices.
At the end of the day, people are getting relief from pain by using Reiki. It may not be proveable, but it happens.
To change the direction of the thread slightly, I must say I have problems with the concept of attunements being carried out over the net, and the prices I have seen advertised for either attunements or treatment.

Kimpatsu
12th March 2003, 00:13
The bumblebee myth is the clearest example of the misapplication of science. If you assume a bumblebee flaps its wings like a bird, then yes, a bumblebee would not be able to fly. As the bee clearly does fly, however, we should be asking, "What is the bee's method of lift?" The answer is that a bee does not flap its wings like a bird; rather, it winds them in a figure-of-eight, like a helicopter. This is more than sufficient to generate lift.
Now buzz off and take the test! (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) :D

ErikH
12th March 2003, 02:58
Originally posted by UKPatrick
Eric,

how many of the practitioners of Reiki have said, in this thread, that they do not belive in modern medicine or science?

I would extrapolate that believing in a mystical unproven energy with no scientific basis whatsoever comes pretty close to not believing in science.


Where is the evidence of your stated 99.999/0.0001 split in the strenght of the 'argument'.

My point was that shooting a healing energy out of one's hands, or whatever you precisely claim to do, has no basis as we understand the world. If you want to claim that you can do that you don't get the benefit of the doubt. You get the doubt until you show us something which alters our understanding of the world.


I do believe in modern medicine, and anyone who advised a suffering friend not to seek medical advice would be a dangerous fool.

I agree with you guys on something.


Having said that, Reiki, proven or not, can help some people, and can relieve some syptoms of some problems.

Show us the studies.


Where I live in the West Midlands of England, several GP's are starting Reiki clinics in their practices.

That's a scary thing.


At the end of the day, people are getting relief from pain by using Reiki. It may not be proveable, but it happens.

If it happens then it can be measured.


To change the direction of the thread slightly, I must say I have problems with the concept of attunements being carried out over the net

Holy S***!

There really are people claiming to do this.

http://usui-reiki.org/reiki_attunement.htm

or

http://biminibound.com/attunements.html

I thought you guys were joking about this.

I'm too honest. There a huge market of suckers just waiting to be bilked and I'm missing out on it.

Unbelievable.

Gene Williams
12th March 2003, 03:40
I was outdoors the other evening thinking about rain and it thundered. Now I have begun doing rain dances each day. I figure if it rains even once a month it must be doing some good. :) Gene

hmjoe
12th March 2003, 14:54
Sure, Gene....

Dancing is a fine aerobic exersice and is good for cross training in the martial arts....

It can also get you dates, provided your dance moves don't look too much like Kata ;)

Kimpatsu
12th March 2003, 15:49
Originally posted by hmjoe
...provided your dance moves don't look too much like Kata
That's it. Knock out your dance partner. ;)

UKPatrick
12th March 2003, 23:10
Gene,

have you just invented Rainki?

Patrick

UKPatrick
12th March 2003, 23:26
Eric,

How can you attach you name to the statement that my belief in Reiki precludes me from having a belief in science? Are you so narrow minded yourself that you cannot concieve of people who have the intellect to have more than one opinion, and sometimes, on more than one subject?

It is a terrible thing to say, but you could be sadder than Tony.

On the other hand, it was a pretty slimy way to avoid answering my question - just which respondents to the thread, supporting reiki, had made the claims you had imputed to them. Perhaps this is the 'Way of the Scientist', an art of mirrors and slight of keyboard fingering.

Patrick

Kimpatsu
13th March 2003, 01:23
Originally posted by UKPatrick
Are you so narrow minded yourself that you cannot concieve of people who have the intellect to have more than one opinion, and sometimes, on more than one subject?
Typical woo-woo nonsense, portraying yourself as "open-minded", versus the "closed" minds of scientists. If your mind is too open, your brains fall out.
I'll keep saying it until one of you accepts: Take the $1 million challenge, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and prove to us that Reiki works. We're waiting...

ErikH
13th March 2003, 04:06
Why do you guys get so defensive?

I think reiki makes all kinds of claims:

From

http://www.reiki.org/FAQ/Questions&Answers.html

Q. What can be treated with Reiki?

A. Reiki has had a positive affect on all forms of illness and negative conditions. This includes minor things like head or stomach aches, bee stings, colds, flu, tension and anxiety as well as serious illness like heart disease, cancer, leukemia, etc. The side effects of regular medical treatments have also been reduced or eliminated. This includes the negative effects of chemotherapy, post operative pain and depression as well as improving the healing rate and reducing the time needed to stay in the hospital. Reiki always helps and in some cases people have experienced complete healings which have been confirmed by medical tests before and after the Reiki treatments. However, while some have experienced miracles, they cannot be guaranteed. Stress reduction with some improvement in ones physical and psychological condition are what most experience.

I just want you to back up the claims.

Note: I highlighted the two parts.

JimGould
13th March 2003, 04:15
Yes but Erik you are taking what one person says on their web site as the truth. That's not very good research. We all know anyone can make a web site.

ErikH
13th March 2003, 05:06
Originally posted by JimGould Yes but Erik you are taking what one person says on their web site as the truth.

Not at all. I think it's complete BS along with chakras, meridians, reiki, mystical healing energy and making symbols in the air.

If you guys can't tell a straight story about your art what does that say about it's substance?


That's not very good research.

I'm surprised you think you know good research? Wait a second, I'm not surprised by that.


We all know anyone can make a web site.

And anyone will. :)

JimGould
13th March 2003, 09:45
Erik you are probably surprised everytime you look in the mirror and how can you make blanket statement about someone and thing you know nothing about?

There is a saying 'Everyone is entitled to an opinion' right? WRONG

it should be "Everyone is entitled to an opinion IF they have researched thier subject"

There seems to be a lot of band wagon jumping going on by people who know jack s about the subject

Kimpatsu
13th March 2003, 15:30
Originally posted by JimGould
it should be "Everyone is entitled to an opinion IF they have researched thier subject"
Here, here. And all research conducted proves that reiki is BS. No one has ever been able to perform under scientific conditions. Will Jim Gould be the first? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Doubtful. I've supplied him with countless opportunities to step up to the plate, and he ducks, evades, and refuses to put his money where is mouth is. Now, why am I not surprised?

Dave Pawson
13th March 2003, 15:47
Hi reentering the debate again, quick question for Kimpatsu do you believe in Meridian points.

I know ErikH doesn't from an earlier post.

Kimpatsu
13th March 2003, 23:50
Originally posted by Dave Pawson
Hi reentering the debate again, quick question for Kimpatsu do you believe in Meridian points.
What are meridian points? Do you mean kyusho?

JimGould
14th March 2003, 00:25
You see my point? Tony is unqualified to enter this debate. He has NO knowledge of this subject or any similar subjects.

Kimpatsu
14th March 2003, 00:29
Absolute rubbish. I have more knowledge than you do of science, which is the arbiter here. I'm just clarifying: Does he mean kyusho? And if so, why not call them kyusho?
You're reaching, Jim. Still afraid to take the test, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) I see. Yawn. Do you think you'll ever agree to be tested before we die of old age?

JimGould
14th March 2003, 02:55
The only thing i'm afraid of is you boring us all to death and you coming to wipe the floor with me :) (actually I lied about the 2nd part) so are you gonna do that before I die of old age as I am a lot older than you ;)

hmjoe
14th March 2003, 04:58
Kyusho and the Meridian points are one in the same, Tony. People call things different names because of different cultures and perspective.

In my art, this is called Kyusho. Some Chinese arts refer to the same thing as Dim Mak.... Accupuncturists call the lines upon these points are Meridians. Many arts refer to these as simply "Meridian Points". Each Meridian has an elemental value, a Yin/Yang perspective and an Organ to which it is associated. Also, a time of day, which a pair is more active.

You may wish to pick up a book called The Bubishi, if this interests you.

Dave Pawson
14th March 2003, 10:07
Tony

Sorry I would normally use the terminology Kyusho within the system I train, but used Meridian as that is what I wrongly asumed you would understand with your Shorinji Kempo background.

It was a general question of do you believe in them?

Kimpatsu
15th March 2003, 05:14
Originally posted by JimGould
...so are you gonna do that before I die of old age as I am a lot older than you ;)
What, you can't live forever with reiki?
I bet I die of old age before you take the test. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) How's that for a prediction?

Kimpatsu
15th March 2003, 05:18
Originally posted by Dave Pawson
Sorry I would normally use the terminology Kyusho within the system I train, but used Meridian as that is what I wrongly asumed you would understand with your Shorinji Kempo background.
In Shorinji Kempo we use Japanese terminology.

Originally posted by Dave Pawson
It was a general question of do you believe in them?
As actual channels of energy? No, of course not. They don't exist. (Anyone proving otherwise can win $1 million.) (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)
In the earliest examples I can find in Chinese literature, the kyusho are mentioned without any meridians (keiraku hiko), which were added later just to help people visualise where the individual points lie. The idea that they "conduct energy" (sic) came much later. In Shorinji Kempo, we use the meridians for such visualisation purposes. Anyone claiming otherwise is a woo-woo, who really ain't gonna win $1 million.

Randall Sexton
15th March 2003, 08:15
No Reiki studies here, but a few of that "other kind of stuff."

Acupressure for Chemotherapy Induced Nausea


Dibble, S. L., J. Chapman, et al. (2000). “Acupressure for nausea: results of a pilot study.” Oncology Nursing Forum 27(1): 41-7.



Dundee JW, Yang J (1990). Prolongation of the antiemetic action of P6 acupuncture by acupressure in patients having cancer chemotherapy. Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 83, 360-362



Dundee JW, Yang J (1991). Non-invasive stimulation of the P6 (Neiguan) antiemetic acupuncture point in cancer chemotherapy. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 84, 210-212



Stannard, D. (1989). Pressure Prevents Nausea. Nursing Times, 85: 33- 34



Acupressure for Morning Sickness



Belluomini, MSN, et al. (1994). Acupressure for Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy: A Randomized, Blinded Study. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 84, 245-47



Aloysio, D. DE, MD, Penacchiloni, P., MD (1992). Morning Sickness Control in Early Pregnancy by Neiguan Point Acupressure. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 80: 852-4



Bill, K. M., Dundee, J. W. (1988). Acupressure for post-operative nausea and vomiting. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 26: 225



Dundee, J. W., et al. (1988). P6 Acupressure reduces morning sickness. The Royal Society of Medicine, 81: 456-7



Mazzotta, P. and Magee, L. A. (2000). A Risk-Benefit Assessment of Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Treatments for Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy. Drugs, 59(4): 781-800



O’brien, Relyea, and Taerum (1996). Efficacy of P6 acupressure in the treatment of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 174(2): 708-15



Acupressure Wristbands for the Nausea of Pregnancy, Cheryl L. Stone, M.S.N., R.N., C. Nurse Practitioner, Nov. 1993



Acupressure for Motion Sickness



Bruce DG, Golding JF, Hockenhull N, Pethybridge RJ. Acupressure and Motion Sickness. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 1990; 61:361-5



Hu S, Stritzel R, Chandler A, Stern RM. P6 Acupressure reduces symptoms of vection-induced motion sickness. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 1995; 66:631-4



Warwick-Evans LA, Masters IJ, Redstone SB. A double-blind placebo controlled evaluation of acupressure in the treatment of motion sickness. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 1991; 62: 776-8.



Acupressure for Post-Operative Nausea



Agarwal A, Pathak A, Gaur A. (2000). Acupressure wristbands do not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting after urological endoscopic surgery. Can J Anesth, 47(4); 319-324.



Allen DL, Kitching AJ, Nagle C. (1994). P6 Acupressure and Nausea and Vomiting After Gynaecological Surgery. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 22(6); 691-693.



Alkaissi A, Stalnert M, Kalman S, (1999). Effect and placebo effect of acupressure (P6) on nausea and vomiting after outpatient gynaecological surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand, 43: 270-274.



Barsoum G, Perry EP, Fraser IA, (1990). Postoperative nausea is relieved by acupressure. The Royal Society of Medicine



Dundee JW, Ghaly RG, Bill KM, Chestnutt WN, Fitzpatrick KTJ, Lynas AGA, (1989). Effect of Stimulation of the P6 Antiemetic Point on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting. Br J Anaesth., 63: 612-618.



Dundee JW, Yang J, (1989). Acupressure prolongs the antiemetic action of P6 acupuncture. Br. J. Anaesth., 62, 612



Fan CF, Tanhui E, Joshi S, Trivedi S, Hong Y, Shevde K, (1997). Acupressure Treatment for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting. Anesth Analg., 84: 821-5.



Acupressure and Postoperative Vomiting. E.N.S. Fry. Article in Anaesthesia 1986; 41: 661-2.



C. Gieron, B. Wieland, D. von der Laage und W. Tolksdorf, (1993). Akupressur zur Prophylaxe postoperativer Ubelkeit und Erbrechen. Anaesthesist, 42: 221-226.



D. Harmon, J. Gardiner, R. Harrison and A. Kelly, (1999). Acupressure and the prevention of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopy. British Journal of Anaesthesia 82 (3): 387-90.



D. Harmon, M. Ryan, A. Kelly and M. Bowen, (2000). Acupressure and prevention of nausea and vomiting during and after spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section. British Journal of Anaesthesia 84 (4): 463-7.



CM Ho, SS Hseu, SK Tsai and TY Lee, (1996). Effect of P6 acupressure on prevention of nausea and vomiting after epidural morphine for post-Cesarean section pain relief. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 40: 372-375.



Anna Lee, Mary L. Done, (1999). The Use of Nonpharmacologic Techniques to Prevent Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Meta-Analysis. Anesth Analg 88: 1362-9.



Lewis IH, Pryn SJ, Reynolds PI, Pandit UA, Wilton NCT, (1991). Effect of P6 Acupressure on Postoperative Vomiting in Children Undergoing Outpatient Strabismus Correction. British Journal of Anaesthesia 67: 73-78.



Lu, Dominic P., Lu, Gabriel P., (1998). Clinical Comparison of Anti-Emetic Effect Between Acupuncture and Acupressure for Treatment of Post-Sedation Nausea Among Dental Patients. Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Res., Int. J., 231 (1): 60-62.



A. Schlager, M. Boehler and F. Puhringer. (2000). Korean hand acupressure reduces postoperative vomiting in children after strabismus surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia 85 (2): 267-70.



Ze’ev Shenkman, M.D., et al. (1999). Acupressure-Acupuncture Antiemetic Prophylaxis in Children Undergoing Tonsillectomy. Anesthesiology 90: 1311-6.



Stein D, Birnbach DJ, Danzer BI, Kuroda MM, Grunebaum A, Thys DM, (1997). Acupressure Versus Intravenous Metoclopramide to Prevent Nausea and Vomiting During Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section. Anesth Analg 84: 342-5.



Andrew J Vickers MA. Can acupuncture have specific effects on health? A systematic review of acupuncture antiemesis trials. J R Soc Med 1996;89:303-311.



Acupressure For Other Conditions



DB Allison, K Kreibich, S Heshka and SB Heymsfield (1995). A randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of an acupressure device for weight loss.



Mei-Li Chen, Li-Chan Lin, Shiao-Chi Wu, and Jaung-Geng Lin (1999). The Effectiveness of Acupressure in Improving the Quality of Sleep of Institutional Residents. Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 54A (8): M389-M394.



C. Bartocci, M. Lucentini (1981). Agopuntura e micromassaggio nel tratamento dell’enuresi notturna idiopatica. Min. Med., 72.



Edzard Ernst (1997). Acupuncture/Acupressure for weight reduction? A systematic review. Bien Klin Wochenschr, 109 (2): 60-62.



Wu Heping, Bi Lianyang, Shen Ping, Li Zhidao, Zhu Peiting (1997). Clinical Observation and Mechanism Study on Application of Auricular-Pressing Pill for Postoperative Analgesia. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine 17 (1): 26-31.



Lin Jaung-Geng, Hamdallah S. Salahin, Lin Jung-Charng (1995). Investigation on the Effects of Ear Acupressure on Exercise-Induced Lactic Acid Levels and the Implications for Athletic Training. American Journal of Acupuncture, Vol. 23, No. 4: 309-313.



Howard D. Kurland, M.D. Treatment of Headache Pain with Auto-Acupressure.



Chen Rongzhong Treatment of Apoplectic Hemiplegia by Digital Acupoint Pressure – A Report of 42 Cases. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine 17 (3): 198-202, 1997.



Research and Letters on Shiatsu



Linda H. Brady, R.N., Ph.D., Kathryn Henry, Ph.D., L.M.T., O.B.T., James F. Luth, II, L.M.T., O.B.T., E.M.T., Kimberly K. Casper-Bruett, M.S.N. The Effects of Shiatsu on Lower Back Pain. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 19 (1): 57-70 2001.



Haruhiko Saito Preventing and Resolving Post-Laparotomy Intestinal Obstruction: An Effective Shiatsu Method. American Journal of Chinese Medicine, 28 (1): 141-145 2000



Steven Herskovitz, MD, Berish Strauch, MD, Michael J. V. Gordon, MD Shiatsu Massage-Induced Injury of the Median Recurrent Motor Branch. Muscle and Nerve, Oct. 1992: 1215.



Alan H. Mumm, David M. Morens, Joe L. Elm, Arwind R. Diwan Zoster after shiatsu massage. The Lancet, 341: pg.447, Feb. 1, 1993.



Research on Tuina



Janice Walton-Hadlock, Primary Parkinson’s Disease: The Use of Tuina and Acupuncture in Accord With an Evolving Hypothesis of Its Cause from the Perspective of Chinese Traditional Medicine American Journal of Acupuncture, 1998; 26(2/3): 163-177 &31-49.



Miscellaneous Articles



B. Janovsky, et al. (2000). Are Acupuncture Points Tender? A Blinded Study of Spleen 6. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 6 (2): 149-153.

Yoshiaki Omura, M.D., Sc.D., F.A.C.A., F.I.C.A.E., Sandra L. Beckmann, M.A. (1995). Application of Intensified (+) Qi Gong Energy, (-) Electrical Field, (S) Magnetic Field, Electrical Pulses (1~2 Pulses/sec), Strong Shiatsu Massage or Acupuncture on the Accurate Organ Representation Areas of the Hands to Improve Circulation and Enhance Drug Uptake in Pathological Organs: Clinical Applications with Special Emphasis on the “Chlamydia-(Lyme)-Uric Acid Syndrome” and “Chlamydia-(Cytomegalovirus)-Uric Acid Syndrome.” Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Res., Int. J., 20: 21-72.

Yoshiaki Omura, M.D., Sc.D., F.A.C.A., F.I.C.A.E., Yasuhiro Shimotsura, M.D., F.I.C.A.E., Motomu Ooki, M.S., Toshiyuki Noguchi, Ph.D. (1998). Estimation of the Amount of Telomere Molecules in Different Human Age Groups and the Telomere Increasing Effect of Acupuncture and Shiatsu on St. 36, Using Synthesized Basic Units of the Human Telomere Molecules as Reference Control Substances for the Bi-Digital O-Ring Test Resonance Phenomenon. Acupuncture & Electro-Therapeutics Res., Int. J., 23: 185-206.

Dave Pawson
15th March 2003, 20:19
Tony the reason I asked is that I was doing some research into Shorinji Kempo and noticed on the UK site a section where they used the term meridians NOT KYUSHO. It is also stated it is a significant part of the art. If that is the case, has anyone in Shorinji Kempo taken THE TEST and won the $1Million challenge. If not I take it you have informed your teachers that they are teaching a load of old clap:D

As I stated earlier in a post I have an interest in Reiki, do I believe to be perfectly honest I don't know and I also like to play with people as well;)

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 00:20
Where is this, Dave? I'd like to know. TIA,

JimGould
16th March 2003, 04:32
Now explain to me why I want to do this again as I am a little lost (not why you want me to do it ;)) and why I should invest a lot of my money into it.

ps wonder where the estimated $6000 a week interest on that $1000000 goes ;)

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 05:15
Originally posted by JimGould
Now explain to me why I want to do this again as I am a little lost
To prove that you can do what you claim you can. And all you'd have to invest is your train fare to a big city like Auckland. Then when you've demonstrated your paranormal abilities, you win $1 million. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What could be easier? Unless, of course, you can't do what you claim...

JimGould
16th March 2003, 05:22
Ummm no I don't think you understand the question... Re think your answer.
(ps will cost a ¤¤¤¤ load more money than that for a 5 year study, please re read this thread..I can't keep doing all your thinking for you)

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 06:01
Originally posted by JimGould
Ummm no I don't think you understand the question... Re think your answer.
(ps will cost a ¤¤¤¤ load more money than that for a 5 year study, please re read this thread..I can't keep doing all your thinking for you)
A five year study is not required. Just performing once in an appropriately blinded protocol will be sufficient. Stop stalling. Take the test. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Your ad hominem and churlishness does nothing to distract from the fact that you're running scared. We're still waiting.

JimGould
16th March 2003, 06:06
Ummm no Tony as YOU have stated many times... It must be done with the proper testing.. we wouldn't want a the test to be done wrong now would we? Tony you cant have it all ways...

And I think many of us are waiting for YOU to do something ;)

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 06:15
Originally posted by JimGould
Ummm no Tony as YOU have stated many times... It must be done with the proper testing.. we wouldn't want a the test to be done wrong now would we? Tony you cant have it all ways...
Jim, either you really are the dumbest person on the planet, or you're just stalling. I know which one my money's on. Apply for the test, already! (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) C'mon, prove you're not all just mouth and trousers. The protocol will be designed by expert professionals. Get with it! Or do you know that you can't do it?

Originally posted by JimGould
And I think many of us are waiting for YOU to do something ;)
Like what? I don't claim to have any paranormal powers. This is merely another attempt at distraction, and by the logical fallacy of tu quoque. It won't wash. Apply for the test! (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Dave Pawson
16th March 2003, 08:47
Tony the link is http://www.bskf.org/seiho.html

Just so that I make myself clear, I am neither in favour of Reiki nor against it I don't know enough either way.

It is just that I have seen things that I cannot discern using the knowledge that I possess. Everyone can give an opinion on what these things are but proving one way or another is sometimes not quite that easy.:cool:

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 11:30
Of course I know this website. I started Shorinji Kempo in the UK.
I agree that page could be better written, because the ambiguity can be misinterpreted to mean that meridians actually exist.
Reiki is still nonsense. Notice that the three reiki threads on e-budo have been running for some time now, extending to pages and pages in some cases, and not one of the exponents of reiki will agree to be tested. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Jim Gould keeps ducking the challenge with asinine assertions. Don't you think there's a moral in there somewhere?

Randall Sexton
16th March 2003, 19:53
Kimpatsu rambled on:

Snip <Reiki is still nonsense. Notice that the three reiki threads on e-budo have been running for some time now, extending to pages and pages in some cases, and not one of the exponents of reiki will agree to be tested.>snip


Randy:

Don't you remember I agreed to be tested. Don't you think that if I do Reiki and other meridian work in front of MDs that a challenge upsets me any? I challenge you: if there is so many problems with emperical studies...and now I've risen to the challenge of being tested...can't you go back to sleep. I'm going through the other Amazing Randi's site now.

JimGould
16th March 2003, 20:25
and not one of the exponents of reiki will agree to be tested. Jim Gould keeps ducking the challenge with asinine assertionsWhen will Tony stop telling lies and start understanding. If he had bothered to get his head out of his arse he would see the number of times i have agreed to be tested as soon as he fronts up with the money. Tony, its you who are stalling.
You have lied, libeled, threatened , bullied, slandered your way through these threads and still you do nothing but cut and paste. You are a fool and I challenge you to do something, ANYTHING.

JimGould
16th March 2003, 20:29
Oh look, 3 out of 5 photos on that web site page are people doing woo woo stuff and Tony is a master of this art.... how odd ... start diggin Tony
(in fact the guy doing the bone and muscle manipulation... is he qualified to do that? hmmm could be dangerous)


In addition, the full repertoire of seiho includes techniques for first aid dealing with everything from headaches and bruises to sprained joints and resuscitation following unconsciousness. Woo Woo Woo , sounds like a fire engine dont it :D

Kimpatsu
16th March 2003, 23:07
Originally posted by JimGould
When will Tony stop telling lies and start understanding.
You're the liar! When are you going to take the test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) And what do you mean, challenge me to do something? I don't make any paranormal claims. You're just obfuscating. Liar. Cheat. Coward.

Steve Williams
17th March 2003, 00:00
Does anyone else think that this has gone on for too long.....


In the blue corner we have Tony and Erik.....

In the red corner we have Jim Patrick and Joe




The referee for tonights bout will be Gene.....



It seems that a lot is being said, but not a lot is being read.....

Questions have been asked, and (contrary to what some think) some of them have been answered.


All this thread is doing now is making e-budo look like a schoolyard.

You should agree to disagree....

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 00:05
Gassho, Sensei.
Agreeiung to disagree will not offer evidence of claims made. Jim Gould claims to have paranormal powers; he should offer evidence, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) don't you think. This isn't about diplomacy; it's about truth.
Kesshu.

Steve Williams
17th March 2003, 00:06
Oh and another thing.....

Tony is real, I know him..... so there you go Jim, proof..... or do I not exist also??

Jim, if you believe that what you do is real, then fine, as long as you are not conning people or giving false hopes to the Ill, or harming anyone, then you carry on.


Personally I do not believe in Reiki.......

I do think that no-touch healing is possible, but that is my opinion, the only way to change that is to "do it on me" but I am not coming to NZ to get it done...... so I will stick with my opinion for the time being.

Steve Williams
17th March 2003, 00:15
Originally posted by Kimpatsu
Gassho, Sensei.
Agreeiung to disagree will not offer evidence of claims made. Jim Gould claims to have paranormal powers; he should offer evidence, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) don't you think. This isn't about diplomacy; it's about truth.
Kesshu.

Whats "Agreeiung"???? ;) (got you!! :D )

But also I don't think I would believe it even after the test.....

I however would be more inclined to believe if I felt it for myself.
But as Jim will probably not come to the UK then I guess I will never know :(

Oh and Jim.... as you like to quote what is said, from the BSKF website
In addition, the full repertoire of seiho includes techniques for first aid dealing with everything from headaches and bruises to sprained joints and resuscitation following unconsciousness
You will note that Seiho is related to Shiatsu, which uses touch and pressure so this is not related to reiki, so lets not even bring that into the conversation, because if you do then you must also mention physiotherapists, massage etc....

Steve Williams
17th March 2003, 00:17
Just a closing word (for tonight)

I can (and will) moderate this thread if it continues the way it has been.

Lets stop the name calling, and if you are so set on disagreeing with each other then do so in a civil way.

Gene Williams
17th March 2003, 00:52
This is like two porcupines, each trying to convince the other to file down his quills. I compare this to the Pope refusing to look into Galileo's telescope. Tony, you can be Galileo; Jim, you get to be the Pope (are you Catholic?). Me? I want to be Napolean...I AM Napolean....hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahha!!!!!!!! Gene

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 01:33
Don't forget that Napoleon met his Waterloo... :p

JimGould
17th March 2003, 03:28
The whole point has been missed. The point is i dont have to go anywhere and you dont have to come to NZ. Reiki IS available everywhere. The point is YOU WONT GO AND TRY IT. shesh how many times (stamping foot now) I would be more inclined to reason with someone who said ' look I tried it and it didnt work' ... Get my point?

And as for mods.... do you always allows posters to threaten other posters with physical violence? Do one or the other

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 03:47
No, Jim. YOU have missed the point. The point is that you have made a claim, and now will not let us test it. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) That's highly suspicious. Why won't you agree to be tested? Running scared?

JimGould
17th March 2003, 04:02
read above shitforbrains

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 04:43
More ad hominem. What's the matter, Jim? Run out of excuses? Let's look at the issue. You claim to have a paranormal power, but have consistently refused testing. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) We have to wonder why. Could it perchance be because you cannot perform as claimed? That makes you a liar. We are still waiting for you to either (a) Agree to be tested, or (b) Admit that you cannot perform as claimed.
Get with the programme.

Randall Sexton
17th March 2003, 07:10
Good point, Jim. Tony, you're right in the middle of Reiki country. Look up Frank Arjava Petter and his wife Chetna Kobyashi and say, "Hit me with some of that Reiki dust." The Usui Reiki Ryoho Gakkai is still there in Tokyo also. Maybe they can help you with your "byo ki."

Now, I'm going to cruise through Amazing Randi's site before bedtime. By the way, was Tokyo quiet this weekend? Lot's of Japanese here for the Honolulu Festival.

Striking Hand
17th March 2003, 07:20
Originally posted by Randall Sexton
By the way, was Tokyo quiet this weekend? Lot's of Japanese here for the Honolulu Festival.

Not more than usual, but thant I guess many people are gearing up for the Hana-Mi season.
:D :D

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 07:24
Randall, you too have missed the point completely. The point is that Jim Gould has made a claim. I want to test that claim. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What do these other woo-woos have to do with anything, unless they too make such claims? Then they too can apply for the $1 million. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) I see that neither you nor Jim have any understanding of scientific methodology. While in itself that would be OK (I nearly said "fine", but I think everyone should at least be familair with the basics), your telling me to look up other people has absolutely no bearing on Jim's claims. Do you see that? When is Jim going to admit that he's dodging and ducking because he can't fulfill his claims? You woo-woos are amazing. Pseudoscience at its grandest. I tell you what, let's make it really easy on you: Randall, link me to a website in which proper double-blind testing has proven Reiki to be effective. Go on, please find one. I'm waiting...

Randall Sexton
17th March 2003, 08:29
Tony:

Randall, you too have missed the point completely.

Randy:

No, I didn't miss any point. Just thought it would be funny as hell if you experienced something outside your realm of experience! Feel something that can't happen!

Tony:
I see that neither you nor Jim have any understanding of scientific methodology.

Randy:
Don't forget I have 30 years experience in a scientic occupation. While I have no Ph.D., I did have to take research courses and do a thesis for one of my masters. Also had to develop a new nursing model. Also, a Ph.D. messed up my stats and I caught the mistake.

Tony:
Randall, link me to a website in which proper double-blind testing has proven Reiki to be effective. Go on, please find one. I'm waiting...

Randy:

You won't wait long. http://www.reiki.org/reikinews/research.html Looks like some of these even have the words "double-blind" mentioned.

Here's a book mentioned written by an MD:
Spiritual Healing
Scientific Validation Of A Healing Revolution
by Daniel J. Benor, M.D.
Foreword by Larry Dossey, M.D.

There's a version for the public and one for the scientic types who want more info on the studies. I quote, "This book is also available as a professional supplement. It is for the medical or nursing professional and researcher. It focuses on an expanded version of research chapters four and five from the above edition and presents a more detailed description of the studies, information and statistical analyses." I gotta order this one.

I see in today's paper that Queens Medical Center here is offering "Healing Touch" classes. The biggest medical institution in Hawaii is going "woo-woo!"

We're going to hell in a handbasket!

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 08:45
Randall,
You're arguing in circles. For me to experience Reiki assumes that Reiki works, but we haven't established that yet.
The so-called tests to which you refer broke the cardinal rule of the Baloney Detection Kit: The accepted the hits and ignored the misses. That book is only sensationalist, not genuine science.
And yes, it IS terrible that a University should offer such claptrap. Recently the Sorbonne allowed a PhD on Astrology. Popularism does not mean that it is true sceince. I suggest you read Michael Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0805070893/qid=1047890666/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/103-6690247-1911817?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) You might actually learn something about science. And none of this is germaine to Jim Gould's claims, and the testing (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) thereof.

Randall Sexton
17th March 2003, 15:46
Tony:

Randall,
You're arguing in circles. For me to experience Reiki assumes that Reiki works, but we haven't established that yet.

Randy:

But others have. I give you a book that says it has an edition geared for people such as yourself(philosophers) and a list of scientific studies and you even refuse to look at them. Take the test!!!

Tony:

The so-called tests to which you refer broke the cardinal rule of the Baloney Detection Kit: The accepted the hits and ignored the misses.

Randy:

And you determined that how?? Some looked like pretty respectable journals.

Ok, moderator, I think we really see what we're dealing with. Someone who can't or won't accept the results cause they have difficulty "seeing" period. Please close this thread.

Kimpatsu
17th March 2003, 22:50
Of the four 'studies' listed under the heading 'Reiki Scientific Studies', there's no data, just pseudoscientific bull with a load of buzzwords thrown in for good measure. There is no peer review. This is not science, it's sensationalism. You said it yourself, Randall: they look impressive, so ergo they must be. But you don't know.
Also, the only study on that page which claims in the title to be double blind is none other than Elizabeth Targ's work on the power (or lack thereof) of prayer. You're probably already familiar with the details of that one, since it's been done in several times. But if not, I can fill in the details for you.
HTH.

JimGould
17th March 2003, 23:15
I'm looking for 10 volunteers .. any offers? ;)

Striking Hand
17th March 2003, 23:35
Originally posted by Kimpatsu
I want to test that claim. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) What do these other woo-woos have to do with anything, unless they too make such claims? .

Problem being that TONY wants a test and thus insists that everybody need to follow HIS program.

Tony if YOU want to test it, don't hide behind JREF but go out and test/research it for yourself.

Calling People woo-woos and other names and insisting that your bpoint is the right one will get you NOWHERE and only alienate people.

Remember YOU came on the threads and started telling people that they are liars, frauds and woo-woos.

So far I only see one person here having a serious problem and that I unfortunately have to say is YOU.

So what if he believes that he can do those things, it doesn't matter.
Many peole across the world believe in many things and many of those can't be prooven.

I belive in Ki/Qi/Chi and that it exists will I take the Randi Challenge to proof to anybody else that it exists.

HELL NO.

Honestly time for you to move on and put the issue to rest.

UKPatrick
18th March 2003, 00:40
Steve,

two points. You say that you are not going to NZ, and therefore,by inference, cannot experience Reiki. Come to Coventry, only 70 miles away, and experience Reiki with the share group I am with. I'll even buy you a pint afterwards. Drop me a line and I will give you the time and address for our (group) meeting.In fact, if you look carefully, you might even find some practitioners closer to you. I would personnaly suggest someone linked to a martial arts group.

Secondly, I note that although you confirm that Tony exists, and I accept your word without reservation, you have not denied that Tony is in fact Jims mum.

Patrick

JimGould
18th March 2003, 00:50
Point in case ( I tried this 200 times with 2 blindfolds on)

Your search - Tony Kehoe Shorinji Kempo - did not match any documents.

However

Tony Kehoe is my mum (On Google) produced 150 Web Sites

I rest my case :D

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 00:58
Originally posted by Striking Hand
Tony if YOU want to test it, don't hide behind JREF but go out and test/research it for yourself.
Peter, people who are best qualified to design the protocol should do so. And the reason I suggest JREF is because they have experience in these matters and offer a $1 million carrot.

Originally posted by Striking Hand
Remember YOU came on the threads and started telling people that they are liars, frauds and woo-woos.
Because they are.

Originally posted by Striking Hand
So what if he believes that he can do those things, it doesn't matter. Many peole across the world believe in many things and many of those can't be prooven.
Because Gould makes specifically testable claims about his supposed paranormal powers. These should be tested, not least because a positive result will fundamentally change the way we understand the universe.

Originally posted by Striking Hand
I belive in Ki/Qi/Chi and that it exists will I take the Randi Challenge to proof to anybody else that it exists. HELL NO.
I don't understand. Are you saying that you won't take the test?
And your last statement leads me back to my original question: why do you believe in something for which there is absolutely no evidence?

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 01:00
Originally posted by JimGould
Point in case ( I tried this 200 times with 2 blindfolds on)

Your search - Tony Kehoe Shorinji Kempo - did not match any documents.

However

Tony Kehoe is my mum (On Google) produced 150 Web Sites

I rest my case :D
Typical woo-woo way to do research.
Now go balance an egg on end at the vernal equinox.

JimGould
18th March 2003, 01:06
Thats Mr Gould to you

JimGould
18th March 2003, 01:08
The reason I want 10 volunteers is that it will take that many people pulling on ropes to get Tonys head out of his arse

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 01:21
Originally posted by JimGould
Thats Mr Gould to you
No, that's woo-woo to me.

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 01:24
Originally posted by JimGould
The reason I want 10 volunteers is that it will take that many people pulling on ropes to get Tonys head out of his arse
More ad hominem. When are you going to take the test? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 06:15
I am willing to stand up and take this test

- however -

I will take the opportunity to have my say first.....

As I "believe" in and practice Reiki I therefor do NOT need to prove it to myself. My personal research and consequent results with Reiki have led to my belief.

Only those that "believe" or have at least the willingness to form a valid conclusion by trying it out for themselves, seek my assistance and not one has NOT benefited by what they have received in some way.

I "believe" that each individual, no matter how narrow minded, open minded, broad minded, close minded or even small minded, have the right to create and follow their chosen beliefs.

I do not "believe" that I should up end my life to prove my beliefs to anyone. I am NOT a preacher.

With these thoughts in mind, I put forth a challenge to anyone out there willing enough!!!!

I challenge anyone to come to me with whatever test they feel is appropriate to dis-prove my belief of Reiki.

I have spent years believing some things and have had those beliefs shattered in the space of seconds at times.

This I call "learning" and "personal growth." Something I am NOT afraid of.

I have thoroughly researched the word "believe" just so there is no confusion. I will share the meaning of the word but as I did not write the dictionary I cannot make personal claim that this meaning is the truth.

BELIEVE - to take as true, real etc. To have confidence in a statement or promise of. To suppose or think

(For those that would like to cross reference my research I have used the Collins dictionary as my source)

Ohhhhhhh I am so eager for a response I must admit!!!!

:D Sue WooWoo

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 06:29
Sue, to start the testing procedure and design a suitable protocol, please go here and complete an application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Upon receipt, local members of CSICOP or a similar organisation will get in touch.
Looking forward to seeing you in action.

JimGould
18th March 2003, 06:30
Ah yes Sue but Mohamod is waiting for the mountain to come to him ;)

JimGould
18th March 2003, 06:35
You see Tony, this is like a biggest dick question. The person with the small one keeps saying 'ok if your's is so big show me'
The person with the biggest one just smiles quietly to himself ;)and gets on with enjoying life occasionally teasing the poor sap with the small one :P

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 06:39
Originally posted by JimGould
Ah yes Sue but Mohamod is waiting for the mountain to come to him ;)
Do you mean Mohammed, by any chance?
If your Reiki spells are as bad as your English spelling, it's no wonder Reiki doesn't work. :rolleyes:

JimGould
18th March 2003, 06:45
Ahhh but ain't that just ad hominem Tony ;)

I'm a much better fisherman thant you will ever be ;)

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 07:02
I don't like to repeat myself but for the lack of obvious ability to read and follow written word I will in this case.

I said earlier and I qoute myself, "I challenge anyone to come to me with whatever test they feel is appropriate to dis-prove my belief of Reiki"

Tony - I will point of the section of this statement that I feel you might have missed first time round.

I challenge anyone to come to me

This to me means that if YOU do not believe me then I await for you to knock at my door and present your disbelief and test to me.

I do not seek out those that come to me for assistance, they just come to me. I do not see why I should seek out those that do not believe as I do.

I will happily email my address and even offer you lodgings while in my country. Hey in the interests of this debate, I will even pick you up from the airport.

What do you say Tony - are you up to my challenge??

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 07:07
Originally posted by JimGould
Ahhh but ain't that just ad hominem Tony ;)
No, because it was a question. Do you understand what a question is?

Originally posted by JimGould
I'm a much better fisherman thant you will ever be ;)
I don't understand this surreal remark, except to say that it's very likely, because I don't fish.
There's much that is fishy about Reiki, though. ;)

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 07:12
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I challenge anyone to come to me
So you're not really prepared to be tested. You just want to give the appearance of being so. Why am I not surprised? Complete the application, (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html) and the experts will come. What's the matter, Sue? Don't you want $1 million? Not even for charity? Not very in tune, are you?

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 07:40
So you're not really prepared to be tested. You just want to give the appearance of being so. Why am I not surprised? Complete the application, and the experts will come. What's the matter, Sue? Don't you want $1 million? Not even for charity? Not very in tune, are you?

I am as prepared to being tested as any person is prepared to bring their test to me.

Why am I not surprised that you respond in this manner, it's seems throughout this debate, to be the only response you are capable of applying.

Hey, go ahead, bring your experts with you. I am not bothered in the slightest. If they prove I cannot do Reiki, I'm willing to accept that and admit it out loud.

What's the matter Tony, has Mr Gould outwitted you to the point that you now throw the same tired arguement in my face?

As for the million dollars - I am not inspired by such things and contrary to your obvious belief, there are people out there that are not driven by money.

In tune???? Do you mean while singing?

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 07:51
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Hey, go ahead, bring your experts with you. I am not bothered in the slightest. If they prove I cannot do Reiki, I'm willing to accept that and admit it out loud.
Glad to hear it, but first, you need to complete the application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) There's a lot of money riding on this, so things have to be done properly. To design a suitable protocol, we will need the cooperation of local scientists, who will not be involved unless the application is made formally.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
What's the matter Tony, has Mr Gould outwitted you to the point that you now throw the same tired arguement in my face?
Your friend (I take it he recruited you to this board for backup) hasn't outwitted me on anything. He just keeps dodging and ducking the issue of being formally tested. I wonder why?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
As for the million dollars - I am not inspired by such things and contrary to your obvious belief, there are people out there that are not driven by money.
This is an old argument for ducking testing. As I said, if you personally don't want the $1 million, give it to charity. Or don't you care about AIDS research (perhaps you think AIDS can be cured using Reiki), famine relief, clean water in Africa, schools in barrios... Hey, why not take the $1 million and open a Reiki school? Demonstration of Reiki would radically change our understanding of the cosmos, so you would be inundated with people wanting to learn.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
In tune???? Do you mean while singing?
Joke too subtle?

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 08:08
Tony

What connection do you have with this test and why are you so insistant on seeing someone fill in the form?

Are you paid for how many times you can post the link?

Is it really as simple as that, I wonder.

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 08:24
I have no connection with the test, and I don't get paid a dime. Stop filibustering and complete the application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html)
If you really can change our understanding of the universe so radically, you'll win a Nobel prize. Isn't that worth trying for? And what about all those charities? C'mon, Sue, we're waiting. Or you can tell you pal Jim Ghoul ;) to go for it himself. After all, he put you up to joining e-budo, didn't he?

JimGould
18th March 2003, 08:35
I see you has regressed to the age of 7 and has now started name calling. It's often the way when someone has lost. I see Tony has not once answered a serious question anyone has asked him nor does he actually want anyone to take the star trek test. He knows that no one has passed the prilim test because that is a hookie piece of crap made to ensure that no one can actually get through to the main part where a set of protocols are made.

So tell us again where all the money goes Tony? and why you refuse point blank to test Reiki yourself. We are waiting Tony... Take the test .... Or is something wrong? Dick too small? Actaully have one?

You would think that someone with 1/2 a brain sitting in the caprital of Reiki could at least walk down the road and find out... but no no no Tony... You too scared you may find the truth so you challenge people 1/2 way round the world (to more than one thing)

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 09:01
Originally posted by JimGould
I see you has regressed to the age of 7 and has now started name calling. It's often the way when someone has lost.
Where do I call you names, moron? :D
What you really mean is that I've stuck a pin in that monstrous ego of yours. Well, get used to being debunked a lot more often.

Originally posted by JimGould
I see Tony has not once answered a serious question anyone has asked him nor does he actually want anyone to take the star trek test. .
Sorry, where were these serious questions? And what is the Star Trek test? By all means, ask a serious question and I'll answer it, if I haven't already.

Originally posted by JimGould
He knows that no one has passed the prilim test because that is a hookie piece of crap made to ensure that no one can actually get through to the main part where a set of protocols are made.
This is absolute rubbish, and typical woo-woo backpedalling. the reason no one has ever passed a preliminary test is because once the protocol is properly double-blinded, the so-called paranormal ability goes away. Either you know this and are being wilfully deceitful, or you're totally deluded. Take your pick.

Originally posted by JimGould
So tell us again where all the money goes Tony? and why you refuse point blank to test Reiki yourself. We are waiting Tony... Take the test ....
Wait a moment, when you say "take the test", you mean you're not inviting me to be tested, but to perform the testing? Your poor use of grammar created ambiguity, and thus the confusion.
OK, I'll do what I can here in Tokyo with my limited resources, and get back to you. Do you know any Reikiya in Tokyo who would be willing to be tested? Of course, being tested by actual university professors, experts in their field, and for $1 million (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) would be a lot more interesting, and a lot more convincing. If the woo-woos here fail my tests, they can always claim unfair, something that can't happen with a big setup like Randi's. Of course, they can also then slink away quietly, rather than being held to ridicule on the world stage. Maybe that's what you're counting on?

Originally posted by JimGould
Or is something wrong? Dick too small? Actaully have one?
More ad hominem. The difference between you and me, Gouldilocks, is that I have a big dick, and you are a big dick.

Originally posted by JimGould
You would think that someone with 1/2 a brain sitting in the caprital of Reiki could at least walk down the road and find out...
OK, I'll divise a protocol and get back to you. This will be fun...

Originally posted by JimGould
but no no no Tony... You too scared you may find the truth
I'm never scared of the truth, Jim.

Originally posted by JimGould
so you challenge people 1/2 way round the world (to more than one thing)
That's because, as I keep repeating (you obviously have poor comprehension skills), YOU are the one who made the claim, so YOU are the one who should be tested. The very fact that you keep declining says a lot about the faith you have in your own abilities.
Like I said, I'll consult JREF (http://www.randi.org/) about divising a protocol and get back to you. I realise you must be feeling frustrated, putting your non-MA friend up to joining e-budo to back you up, but your name-calling does nothing to change the truth. Reiki is scientifically impossible, and if I can get any of your buddies here to agree to testing, I'll show them. Not that you'll be convinced, of course; woo-woos never are.
Been abducted by any alien proctologists recently?

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 09:18
Filibustering - an interesting term from someone that has had only one response throughout this entire thread.

Why Tony, do you continue to obstruct the believers of Reiki, yet fail to offer any valid claim to your disbelief?


After all, he put you up to joining e-budo, didn't he?

Are you assuming that because I live in the same country as Jim Gould that therefor means there is some connection?

I think that in itself proves this Tony chap is limited in his ability to think outside the square.

I will however look this man up and buy him a beer for his tolerance of such idiocy and his analytical mind. Shouldn't be hard to find him somewhere amongst 4 million others.

JimGould
18th March 2003, 09:22
I didn't put anyone up to joining ebudo..they call that paranoia Tony...

Do I know anyone in Tokyo that would be willing to be tested? Ummm nope but the headquarters of the leading Reiki Ryu is in Tokyo ... maybe in the yellow pages... look them up...


get used to being debunked a lot more often Never had it happen once in my lifetime Tony so dont know what it feels like... You tell me ;)


This is absolute rubbish, and typical woo-woo backpedalling. the reason no one has ever passed a preliminary test is because once the protocol is properly double-blinded, I couldnt find any mention of protocols for the prelim Tony ... You have to pass a prelim before you make the protocls ... I prob missed something.


you mean you're not inviting me to be tested, but to perform the testing? Your poor use of grammar created ambiguity, No thats not what I said at all.. My grandmas fine but your understand lacks a lot.


I'll do what I can here in Tokyo with my limited resources But you have a gold card, a telephone and can get from A to B I assume.... Go try Reiki out



Of course, being tested by actual university professors, experts in their field So an expert in the field of Reiki would test them? Or would it be an expert in star trek? How can someone who is an expert in one field possible test someone in another when they know nothing abouit it? This is pure drivle.


that I have a big dick, and you are a big dick. hahaha pure speculatuion and wishful thinking on your part but at least you made me smile.


OK, I'll divise a protocol and get back to you Ahh at last Tony is willing to do some of the work


That's because, as I keep repeating (you obviously have poor comprehension skills), YOU are the one who made the claim, so YOU are the one who should be tested And I keep repeating that I am willing to if you fund it and that why should I be tested to prove what you want to believe.. I am happy with what I know... It is you who want proof..Not me... I dont feel the need to prove anything and I certainly dont need an ego boost as you have pointed out so I have nothing to gain..


Reiki is scientifically impossible, So was traveling above 17 mph without suffocating until they did it anyway. Science can only prove something works after it had been discovered or done. It needs something to already work so that a set of protocols can be drawn up to test it.

Tony ,. please explain why you think aliens have anything to do with Reiki.

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 09:48
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Why Tony, do you continue to obstruct the believers of Reiki, yet fail to offer any valid claim to your disbelief?
OK, here we go again: There is no such thing as a human energy field. You cannot manipulate it by waving your hands around. Therefore, reiki is a load of nonsense. And remember, Sue: You can't prove a negative. Don't you get that?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Are you assuming that because I live in the same country as Jim Gould that therefor means there is some connection?
Let's see: You sign up under a name I used for Jim, you don't complete the MA field in your CP, implying that you don't train, and your posts have all been on this thread. Hmm...

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I think that in itself proves this Tony chap is limited in his ability to think outside the square.
The term is "think outside the box".

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I will however look this man up and buy him a beer for his tolerance of such idiocy and his analytical mind. Shouldn't be hard to find him somewhere amongst 4 million others.
You're offering to buy me a beer? Great! :toast:

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 09:54
Originally posted by JimGould
I didn't put anyone up to joining ebudo..they call that paranoia Tony...
Hell of a coincidence, then, isn't it?

Originally posted by JimGould
Do I know anyone in Tokyo that would be willing to be tested? Ummm nope but the headquarters of the leading Reiki Ryu is in Tokyo ... maybe in the yellow pages... look them up...
So, assuming they're willing to be tested (unlike you), and I prove them wrong, will you accept that as evidence that YOU can't perform, either?

Originally posted by JimGould
So was traveling above 17 mph without suffocating until they did it anyway. Science can only prove something works after it had been discovered or done. It needs something to already work so that a set of protocols can be drawn up to test it.
The mistakes of the Victorians are commonly quoted by woo-woos. The plain truth is, the Victorian model of physics was flawed, hence the erroneous calculations. We've got it right now, and we know that there is no such thing as "human energy". Consequently, any claims based upon such (e.g., Reiki) are nonsense.

Originally posted by JimGould
Tony ,. please explain why you think aliens have anything to do with Reiki.
Because one of your grand masters said that they did. Didn't you read the quote? Do you disagree with him, then? And tell me, why is he wrong, and you right?

JimGould
18th March 2003, 10:01
Because one of your grand masters said that they did. Ummm no they didnt... Some looney fruit claiming to be a reiki master did.. I can't account for other peoples claims Tony. maybe you should ask him why he said it. Please post the web site here for me to see.


Hell of a coincidence, then, isn't it? ummm Yeah I guess, so what?


So, assuming they're willing to be tested (unlike you), and I prove them wrong, will you accept that as evidence that YOU can't perform, either? Yup Okay.

Sue Woo Woo
18th March 2003, 10:12
Yes Tony - I get the negative proof point. I think the point that you don't get is that you have not tried Reiki for yourself so how can you for certain say within yourself that you do not believe it is possible. How do you form your belief structures?

Did you believe in MA before you tried it for yourself?

Why am I here??
I came here because of my interests in Ki energies. It is a well known fact that people that study MA's incorparate such energies into their beliefs. Made perfect sense to me to come to such a forum board. I then discovered this thread on Reiki and after following it since the beginning I just couldn't hold back any longer.

Nothing stirs me more than a good debate on beliefs. I believe in Reiki.

As for the Woo Woo name - I like the way it went with Sue.

Now that I have joined, I will be posting on other threads.

Ohhh look - you even had to correct a term. Box or square - perhaps that is the difference of a saying - you say potatoe - I say potato.
What is the big deal?

We'll have that beer at the airport when you arrive shall we Tony?
I'm sure Jim Gould will happily join us.

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 11:14
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Yes Tony - I get the negative proof point. I think the point that you don't get is that you have not tried Reiki for yourself so how can you for certain say within yourself that you do not believe it is possible. How do you form your belief structures?
I don't have belief; I have logic and rationality. Reiki cannot work because humans don't have the capacity for psychic powers.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Did you believe in MA before you tried it for yourself?
"Believe" is the wrong word. I had empirical evidence of the existence of MA, and I have seen demonstrations of techniques working under test conditions. Books have been written on the physics involved. What are the physics of reiki?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I came here because of my interests in Ki energies.
Which don't exist. Show me evidence of their existence.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
It is a well known fact that people that study MA's incorparate such energies into their beliefs.
Only the woo-woos. The scientists don't.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Nothing stirs me more than a good debate on beliefs. I believe in Reiki.
Why do you believe in something for which there is no evidence? Remember: Anecdotes and placebo effects don't count. Only proper double-blind testing.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
As for the Woo Woo name - I like the way it went with Sue.
Like I said, helluva coincidence.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Now that I have joined, I will be posting on other threads.
I look forward to it.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Ohhh look - you even had to correct a term. Box or square - perhaps that is the difference of a saying - you say potatoe - I say potato..
No, this isn't a question of pronunciation, it's a question of misusing an affective expression. (But then I'm anal retentive about grammar. ;))

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
What is the big deal?.
You make a mistake and it doesn't bother you? Guess that dovetails nicely in believing in things with no physical evidence.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
We'll have that beer at the airport when you arrive shall we Tony?
I'm sure Jim Gould will happily join us.
What, you mean you aren't coming here? Surely you'd want to train with the top reiki woo-woos?

Kimpatsu
18th March 2003, 11:21
Originally posted by JimGould
Ummm no they didnt... Some looney fruit claiming to be a reiki master did.. I can't account for other peoples claims Tony. maybe you should ask him why he said it. Please post the web site here for me to see.
What's this, a "no true Scotman" defence? He's a reiki master, and he said it. The "master" in question didn't post the comment on the web, but made it in print. I'll see if I can track down the original publication.

Originally posted by JimGould
ummm Yeah I guess, so what?
So, like I said, big coincidence... unless I happen to be right...

Originally posted by JimGould
Yup Okay.
So, you're still unwilling to be tested, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) not even for $1 million and a Nobel prize? C'mon, you'd convert the whole world instantly if you could just perform as advertised. And you'd make me look completely stupid. (Unlike you do right now with all the dodging and ducking.)

Sue Woo Woo
20th March 2003, 02:47
Why do you believe in something for which there is no evidence? Remember: Anecdotes and placebo effects don't count. Only proper double-blind testing.

Is double blind testing THE ONLY way to prove or disprove things in your honest opinion Tony? If so, have you applied this concept to EVERYTHING that you now believe in?


No, this isn't a question of pronunciation, it's a question of misusing an affective expression

:nono: Expressions are quite often different depending on country and interpretation, I have grown up with "think outside the square"
but I guess I am now at fault for the generations before me, that have taught me wrong. I will be sure to pass on your displeasure Tony. Maybe if you got out of your box, you would see that the World is a varied and interesting place that differs immensely from culture to culture.
I would suggest opening your eyes a little wider. :rolleyes:


Guess that dovetails nicely in believing in things with no physical evidence.

As I stated earlier, I have gained my physical evidence over the years, using methods that suit me. Perhaps they have not been under scientific boundaries as per the requirements of Tony, but I have done enough to prove to myself and those around me that Reiki does exist. Come back and continue this debate Tony, when you have at least tried it and have something other than your usual much-repeated response.

No I am not ducking, diving or weaving. I will still take your test when you bring it to my door. I do not ask for money to give Reiki nor do I expect to pay money to prove my beliefs.

You want it so bad Tony - go out there and find it for yourself.

Surely your not afraid of the big wide World and the mysteries it contains.

Wait for it.........

Here it comes..........

Soon now........

:wave: Look everyone! It's Tony arriving with his test.

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 04:16
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Is double blind testing THE ONLY way to prove or disprove things in your honest opinion Tony? If so, have you applied this concept to EVERYTHING that you now believe in?
To every scientific claim, yes. Why haven't you?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Expressions are quite often different depending on country and interpretation, I have grown up with "think outside the square"
but I guess I am now at fault for the generations before me, that have taught me wrong. I will be sure to pass on your displeasure Tony. Maybe if you got out of your box, you would see that the World is a varied and interesting place that differs immensely from culture to culture.
Care to wager which of us is more travelled, Sue? Oh, BTW, how many languages do you speak?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I would suggest opening your eyes a little wider.
Already wider than yours, my dear.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
As I stated earlier, I have gained my physical evidence over the years, using methods that suit me.
Methods that suit you? Science must be objective, but I understand you don't know this. if you really have evidence, Sue, please post it here. Remember: anecdotes don't count. Hard evidence from double-blind testing only, please.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Perhaps they have not been under scientific boundaries as per the requirements of Tony, but I have done enough to prove to myself and those around me that Reiki does exist.
So show me this evidence, please. "Proving something to yourself" is really just wishful thinking; have you had your results independently verified?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Come back and continue this debate Tony, when you have at least tried it and have something other than your usual much-repeated response.Try what? I'm trying to get reikiya in Tokyo to agree to testing at the moment. I'll keep you updated on that.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
No I am not ducking, diving or weaving. I will still take your test when you bring it to my door. I do not ask for money to give Reiki nor do I expect to pay money to prove my beliefs.
This is dishonest. You must be really selfish. As I said before, if you don't want the money, give it to charity. The fact that you keep dodging the test (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) shows you don't really hold out much hope of passing. As Richard Dawkins said, "Paranormal phenomena have a habit of going away whenever they are tested under rigorous conditions." Your belief is proof of nothing except your propensity to believe. I want to see hard evidence.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
You want it so bad Tony - go out there and find it for yourself.
As you keep demonstrating, you're afraid to be tested. How am I supposed to "find it" if you and your ilk won't cooperate? You're like a three-year-old confronted with a needle. Your struggling to escape makes drawing blood that much more difficult.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Surely your not afraid of the big wide World and the mysteries it contains.
Just call me Daredevil...

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Wait for it.........
Yes, we're all waiting for you to be tested.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Look everyone! It's Tony arriving with his test.
Yes, here I am, knocking on your door with $1 million, and just begging to give it to you, or to charity. All you have to do to feed the starving orphans is demonstrate your powers. Please? To end with another quote from Richard Dawkins:

Consider this. If a paranormalist could really give an unequivocal demonstration of telepathy (precognition, psychokinesis, reincarnation, whatever it is), he would be the discoverer of a totally new principle unknown to physical science. The discoverer of the new energy field that links mind to mind in telepathy, or of the new fundamental force that moves objects around a table top, deserves a Nobel prize and would probably get one. If you are in possession of this revolutionary secret of science, why not prove it and be hailed as the new Newton? Of course, we know the answer. You can't do it. You are a fake.

Sue Woo Woo
20th March 2003, 04:44
I would like to see Tony prove that I am dishonest or selfish.

I walk a two way street Tony.
You want me to prove my ability to do Reiki then bring your test.
I have offered several times to take your test and you keep insisting that I will not be tested.

I am happy to be tested for my Reiki ability.

You can come and test me Tony.

I will take Tony's test.

How many ways would you like me to say the same thing?

I WILL DO YOUR TEST TONY - BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!

I'm not afraid of my ability nor the results of your test.

C'Mon DareDevil - I dare you.

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 05:13
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I would like to see Tony prove that I am dishonest or selfish.
You have the chance to make $1 million (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) for charity (because you have eschewed personal wealth), but refuse to do so. That makes you selfish.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I walk a two way street Tony.
You want me to prove my ability to do Reiki then bring your test.
That's what I keep trying to do, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) but you won't complete the application form.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I have offered several times to take your test and you keep insisting that I will not be tested.
Rubbish! Test step 1: Complete the form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I am happy to be tested for my Reiki ability. You can come and test me Tony.
Logistically, it's a bit far for me to travel, which is why local scientists will actually conduct the testing. Unless you want to come to Japan, or go to Florida, at your own expense?

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I will take Tony's test.
It's not "my" test; the protocol will be designed by impartial scientists to ward off cries of "unfair".

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
How many ways would you like me to say the same thing?
I WILL DO YOUR TEST TONY - BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!
Great. First complete this application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Then we will start to design a protocol. If, however, you refuse to complete the form, then your statements about willingness to be tested are lies. (See your first statement above: Dishonest for claiming to accept testing, but refusing to apply for said testing, and selfish because you claim such evidence of paranormal ability will be a cakewalk, but refuse to demonstrate and give the money to charity.)

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I'm not afraid of my ability nor the results of your test.
Great! Just complete the form, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and we can get the ball rolling.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
C'Mon DareDevil - I dare you.
I'm not the one who has thus far consistently refused to be tested. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) We're all waiting...

Sue Woo Woo
20th March 2003, 05:35
All expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs.


Clause 6 of the form you have asked me to fill out Tony.
I'm sure you are familiar with it.

Let's walk the 2 way street Tony. I'll do my bit and you do yours.

When you provide me with a written and lawfully binding contract that you will cover the costs incurred under this clause then I will happily fill in the form.

To test Reiki to the degree that they are suggesting, is going to cost a small fortune. I don't have one to spare.

You are so insistant to prove or disprove Reiki's existance then cough up the cash Daredevil.

I have never consistently refused to be tested Tony.
I have consistently refused to pay for such testing - there is a difference.

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 05:45
As I keep saying ,what's that cash to you, when you're going to win $1 million? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) This is a tired old excuse. How much will it cost you to travel to the local university for testing? You keep talking as if you'd have to fly to Florida, when you clearly know that is not the case.
As to me "disproving" Reiki, I will say it again (sigh!): It is not incumbent upon me to disprove anything. You're the one making the claim, you must demonstrate said claim, or if you were honest, you would stop making the claim until it had been tested and verified. Instead, you keep dodging testing, spouting off about being willing to be tested (and yet won't even complete the application form), (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) and make irrational statements about having me disprove your claims. You really should learn some science first, Sue. Now complete the form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) we're STILL waiting...

Sue Woo Woo
20th March 2003, 06:04
How many people will I need to Reiki before your experts agree that I can do Reiki?

How long will their testing take until they are satisfied that I can do Reiki?

This all costs money and takes me away from my responsibilities which no matter how far I have to travel, I am not willing to do for you or anyone else in this world.

I'll tell you what Tony, you pay the money and you can have the million in the end.

I'll do the test (with your money only!) just to see the smug look wiped from your face.

Are you a scientist Tony?

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 06:39
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
How many people will I need to Reiki before your experts agree that I can do Reiki?
That depends on the protocol. One may be sufficient, depending on what you claim you can do.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
How long will their testing take until they are satisfied that I can do Reiki?
However long a Reiki session lasts. 30 minutes? One hour? You tell me.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
This all costs money and takes me away from my responsibilities which no matter how far I have to travel, I am not willing to do for you or anyone else in this world.
Not even for $1 million, (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) the opportunity to feed starving orphans, and the chance to show me I'm completely wrong. OOOkaayyyy... :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I'll tell you what Tony, you pay the money and you can have the million in the end.
No thanks, because I don't believe you can win the $1 million, so I'd be out of pocket in the end. YOU'RE the one who claims the powers; show us and donate the money to charity. (Which I wouldn't do if I could win it; I'd keep the money. But at least I'm upfront about parsimony.)

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I'll do the test (with your money only!) just to see the smug look wiped from your face.
Not with my money. You'd stand to win $1 million, so you won't be out of pocket. Therefore your claims of financial loss are meaningless, and just an excuse to get out of being tested. (Yawn. Why am I not surprised?) Take the test, keep as much of the million as you spent getting to the test, and donate the rest to charity. If the patients (sic) are your own, you can charge them for the session as usual and not be out of pocket that way, either. All you're really doing here is fudging to get out of being tested.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Are you a scientist Tony?
Yes.

Rogier
20th March 2003, 06:40
well what is the real problem? You're asking how many people you have to do reiki on.. If you just contact the right person for the testing they will be able to tell what the conditions of the prelims are.

As I understand it they usually first give you the chance to prove claims in the way that you want to, and after that you go on to do the double blind testing...

So far I haven't seen any really good reason given by you why you shouldn't try for the 1 million. As Tony states you can give it to charity......

Sue Woo Woo
20th March 2003, 07:20
The only claim I have made is that I can do Reiki.
I am willing to be tested on that fact.

I can see now that the response will be - but how can you do something that has not been proven to exist?
That will therefore open the doors for someone being needed to prove that Reiki exists. That would take longer than I think you are willing to wait for.
If I were to take my own people to this test, and do Reiki on them, then naturally they would say "Yes she can do Reiki"
They already do, so testing under any situation would not change their response.
All that will prove is that my friends also believe I can do Reiki.
It will not prove that Reiki exists by your definitions.

If your scientists friends are willing to pay me a million for doing Reiki on my friends then hey cool.

Just out of principle now - I will fill your form in when you provide me with proof that you have gotten out of your box and gone out and tried Reiki for yourself.

Nothing for nothing in this world.

I will not waste any more of my energy and valuable time playing round the mulberry bush with you until this has occured Tony.
Yes you may see that as me backing down, but I don't like talking to brickwalls and I don't have to prove anything to anyone to know that what I do helps people feel better. The people have already told me. Proof enough in my eyes which are the most important after all!

Randall Sexton
20th March 2003, 07:32
Reiki Technique Study to Control Chronic Pain in Diabetic Neuropathy

http://www.med.umich.edu/1libr/topics/alt03.htm

Boy, I hope they are using a properly designed double-blind protocol!

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 07:53
Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
The only claim I have made is that I can do Reiki.
I am willing to be tested on that fact.
Then complete the application form. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Otherwise, you're lying.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I can see now that the response will be - but how can you do something that has not been proven to exist?
No. We just want you to show us. Our current understanding of physics precludes the possibility of Reiki; perform Reiki under proper observing conditions, and you change our paradigm forever. You will be $1 million richer, and a shoo-in for a Nobel prize.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
That will therefore open the doors for someone being needed to prove that Reiki exists. That would take longer than I think you are willing to wait for.
Rubbish. Read the application again. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) All you have to do is perform one successful demonstration. Either you haven't read the application, or you're fudging to get out of being tested. I think it's the latter.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
If I were to take my own people to this test, and do Reiki on them, then naturally they would say "Yes she can do Reiki"
They already do, so testing under any situation would not change their response.
We're not going to ASK them if the Reiki was successful; any protocol will make it obvious. For example, if you claim you can heal a broken bone instantly, we don't need the patient to TELL us the bone is healed; an X-Ray will show everyone whether the bone has healed or not.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
All that will prove is that my friends also believe I can do Reiki.
It will not prove that Reiki exists by your definitions.
That's right. Agreed. Emphatically. That's why we're not testing whether your friends BELIEVE you have paranormal powers; we're testing whether or not you actually DO have those powers.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
If your scientists friends are willing to pay me a million for doing Reiki on my friends then hey cool.
If you can demonstrate Reiki healing under proper observing conditions, then you get the $1 million.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Just out of principle now - I will fill your form in when you provide me with proof that you have gotten out of your box and gone out and tried Reiki for yourself.
So, in other words, you'll wait until I've tested Reikiya here, before applying yourself? Ooookaayyy... As I said earlier, I've tried to contact some Reikiya here and invite them to take the test. I'll keep you appraised. BTW, why do you need other people to be tested before you'll agree to be? Still sounds like a copout to me.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Nothing for nothing in this world.
This isn't about wheeler-dealing; it's about you proving you can do what you claim. Otherwise, you're a liar.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
I will not waste any more of my energy and valuable time playing round the mulberry bush with you until this has occured Tony.
Like I said, this is not about making deals. You don't want to be tested, it smells like you're afraid. But I'll humour you. Once a Reikiya here has been tested, you are now honour-bound to apply for the test.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
Yes you may see that as me backing down, but I don't like talking to brickwalls and I don't have to prove anything to anyone to know that what I do helps people feel better.
Yes you do have to prove it. Otherwise, you're just a quack. And what makes you think I'm a brick wall? If so, I would deny any chance of testing you, so that my preconceptions could never be shattered. Your refusal to be tested speaks volumes about your unwillingness to put your claims on the line. And let's not forget: your refusal is denying charity $1 million, which makes you selfish by anybody's standards.

Originally posted by Sue Woo Woo
The people have already told me. Proof enough in my eyes which are the most important after all!
Thereby proving you have no idea what double-blind testing and proper scientific protocols are. Their just telling you means nothing. There must always be independent verification. Read the Baloney Detection Kit (http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/baloney.htm) to understand why. And I'll leave you once again with a quotation from Richard Dawkins:

Yet scientists are required to back up their claims not with private feelings but with publicly checkable evidence. Their experiments must have rigorous controls to eliminate spurious effects. And statistical analysis eliminates the suspicion (or at least measures the likelihood) that the apparent effect might have happened by chance alone.
See now? (Probably not!)

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 08:10
Originally posted by Randall Sexton
Boy, I hope they are using a properly designed double-blind protocol!
So do I. As they haven't actually posted their research, however, we can't be sure. To which peer-reviewed journal have they submitted their results?
This sounds like one of several possibilities.
1. A complete woo-woo is running the department.
2. The federal government, being easily hoodwinked, has been scammed into funding this daft research. Hey, it keeps the grad students employed!
3. A combination of 1. and 2. above.
4. Reiki is real... but if so, where are their results?
Note in their spiel they mention that Reiki "has been practiced in Japan for many years", as if longevity were somehow an indication of quality. By that argument, because female circumcision is traditional in the Sudan, it should be allowed to continue...
Randall, once you have genuine double-blinded results to show me, do so. Posting hype does not qualify, and just because there is a university involved does not grant automatic validity. Look at astrology and the Sorbonne (http://www.randi.org/jr/040502.html) to see what I mean. Also read the baloney detection kit (http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/baloney.htm) for further clarification.
Now, I'll just wait for those test results...

UKPatrick
20th March 2003, 23:21
Hello all, I'm back (OK that may not have impressed you, but I can live with that.

Having enjoyed the fun of the first four million mails in this thread, I now find it boring.

Sue Woo Woo has brough some fresh challenges to Tony, but he still continues to behave like a somewhat unpleasent person, and does seem to have an extremely limited ability to find new ways of saying the same rubbish, even though he has had a lot of practice, and seems to think he has some linguistic abilities.

Some unkind soul on another thread suggested that Tony is only generating these mails so he can become the highest mailing person on this site. Tony, could this possibly be the truth?

If it is true (Tony, you may need to read a dictionary to find out what 'true' means) we could really piss him (Sorry, upset his plans)by not responding any more - TO ANYTHING HE POSTS.

Finally, not even the one person to confirm that they actually know/knew Tony Our beloved moderator) was prepaired to say that he is not Jims mum.

Lastly (Yes, I will buy a dictionary to find out what finally means)when I was young, and starting in Budo, over thirty years ago, respect , both self, and for others, was an expression of ones training. Tony, when I read your mails, I so no respect for anything, as as you tag your Shorinji Kempo on everything you write, I guess you have no respect for that either.

This will be my thirtyth mail, which means I have doubled my mails on this topic alone - eat your heart out Tony.

Patrick

Kimpatsu
20th March 2003, 23:45
How can I let a challenge like this go unanswered?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Having enjoyed the fun of the first four million mails in this thread, I now find it boring.
I feel the same way. Why won't you woo-woos agree to be tested? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html) Scared?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Sue Woo Woo has brough some fresh challenges to Tony,
You have it backwards. I brought the challenges to HER; she keeps dodging and ducking, and refusing to be tested. Why is this? $1 million, for her or for charity, and she won't do it. What about you? Game to show us?

Originally posted by UKPatrick
but he still continues to behave like a somewhat unpleasent person,
Yes, the truth can often appear unpleasant to people like you.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
and does seem to have an extremely limited ability to find new ways of saying the same rubbish, even though he has had a lot of practice, and seems to think he has some linguistic abilities.
I have better linguistic abilities because I'm more intelligent and better educated. I have to keep repeating myself because you woo-woos keep ducking and evading the real issue, which is testing your claims. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Some unkind soul on another thread suggested that Tony is only generating these mails so he can become the highest mailing person on this site. Tony, could this possibly be the truth?
No, it isn't. It's because he shrugs off lies and nonsense posted on this board, whereas I feel compelled to challenge such nonsense and expose the truth. Your prejudices (note: from the Lain to "pre-judge") fuel your personal animosity, but that doesn't change the fact that your claims are unverifiable and physically impossible.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
If it is true (Tony, you may need to read a dictionary to find out what 'true' means) we could really piss him (Sorry, upset his plans)by not responding any more - TO ANYTHING HE POSTS.
Actually, if you stopped posting, it won't piss me off--I'll be delighted. Yet another woo-woo quits the boards. Then the intellectuals like Jason (Yamatodamashii), Aaron (Elder999), Harvey (ShitoRyu Dude) and I can continue to discuss things civilly, and with sense.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Finally, not even the one person to confirm that they actually know/knew Tony Our beloved moderator) was prepaired to say that he is not Jims mum.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. For this, and further understanding of the proper approach to take, read the Baloney Detection Kit. (http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/baloney.htm)

Originally posted by UKPatrick
Lastly (Yes, I will buy a dictionary to find out what finally means)when I was young, and starting in Budo, over thirty years ago, respect , both self, and for others, was an expression of ones training. Tony, when I read your mails, I so no respect for anything, as as you tag your Shorinji Kempo on everything you write, I guess you have no respect for that either.
Bruce B, another woo-woo, tried this tack too. My response remains unchanged. You are NOT entitled to my automatic respect; you must earn it. Shorinji Kenshi fight for TRUTH and JUSTICE. Where I see truth being bent and justice denied, I respond with appropriate action. You think that Shorinji Kenshi are obligated to treat you with kid gloves. You are wrong. We are obligated to protect others from the damage that you do. I shall continue to oppose your woo-woo nonsense until you demonstrate under proper observing conditions that you can indeed do what you claim. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)
Why are you all so scared of being tested? That fact, more than any other, speaks volumes.

Originally posted by UKPatrick
This will be my thirtyth mail, which means I have doubled my mails on this topic alone - eat your heart out Tony.
I have over 3,000 mails, and unlike yours, mine all make sense. 30? You've got a ways to go yet. So, when are you going to agree to be tested? (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

JimGould
21st March 2003, 02:10
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

dixi :D

And so Tony proves our case with his own words.

chrisdo14
21st March 2003, 05:11
hi i beleive in ki or chi energy and practice energy work. where were you guys when i posted about ki/chi in the medittion section i could of used some people telling me it was real instead of just negative opinions. also i think some of you may be insulted by this fact but ki/ chi is also used for self defense purposes.idlike to know your opinions on this

Randall Sexton
21st March 2003, 07:30
I'm not going to accept Randi's challenge because of his # 3 condition:

Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the testing may be used freely by JREF in any way that Mr. Randi may choose.

BUT, since I have access to the medical community, I'll get enough real scientists together to designed a "proper protocol" and conduct research. Then, I'll have the results to do as I wish and not worry about Randi burying it somewhere.

"What someone can do or cannot do is absolutely not proportional in any way to anyone's else's belief or disbelief. What you believe someone else can do or can't do hasn't got beans with the doing. Or lack of doing. Just go back through your history books and you'll discover that just about everything you take for granted today in your daily lives was absolutely impossible not so many years ago.

---Martin Caidin

And Tony, you admitted to being a scientist. Is that a lay scientist as I thought you were a translator?

Randall Sexton
21st March 2003, 07:47
Hello...anyone home?

Clinical Studies Not Always Superior to Simple Observations

Conventional wisdom has always suggested that only clinical trials conducted under strictly controlled conditions can accurately determine if a treatment works. However, two new reports show that two different study types yield similar results, even though one is considered to be a less-than-definitive type of study.

Researchers compared results of studies looking at vaccines and heart disease drugs as well as treatments for appendicitis and infertility.

The 2 types of studies analyzed were "clinical trials" and "observational studies".

In "clinical trials", study subjects are randomly assigned -- or randomized -- to one treatment or a placebo (inactive) treatment.

In the best case scenario, neither doctors nor patients know which patients received either treatment -- a status known as "double blind."

In "observational studies", doctors collect data on patients who happen to have undergone certain treatments or are taking certain medication.

"For the past 20 years, scientists have generally believed that only evidence from randomized controlled trials was valid for comparing medical treatments," states one of the researchers. "Our results suggest that at least in some cases, the analysis of routinely collected clinical data may provide useful information…our results do suggest that there may be a greater role for observational studies than previously believed."

The New England Journal of Medicine June 22, 2000;342:1878-1886, 1887-1892, 1907-1909.

We must be getting screwed by the most prestigious journal in medicine!!! How dare they!

Steve Williams
21st March 2003, 10:30
Originally posted by Kimpatsu
I have over 3,000 mails, and unlike yours, mine all make sense.

Sorry but I have to state that no, not all make sense.

Probably about half to two-thirds make sense..... ;) :p :D


Still more than his 30 though ;)

Steve Williams
21st March 2003, 10:42
This thread is not really going anywhere.

If you want to debate it then see the "sticky thread"