The problem with problems

[freeweaver]

Software for the Brain

Hi Guys,

I think the below pdf might be a good place to start for those wishing to kick the bad thinking habits programmed into them at school.

Software for the Brain
http://www.schoolofthinking.org/software.pdf

If the needle in the haystack is not literal for example and is the proverbial one of hidden or secret info in a spiritual context as Harvey mentioned, the fastest way to find the needle is to access the collective directly and get that needle by direct knowledge.

Empirical trial/error is very slow. Having the obvious answer pop into
one's mind in full detail is the way to go, is one method of how Tesla
realized answers and it is a skill that is possible to learn by one of many
very specific and systematic methods.

@Aron - I wonder if you have noticed that the aim of those wishing to control us would very much like us to think collectively ("hive mind"). In fact, isn't tv creating exactly that kind of a supposed reality?

One thought is much easier to control than many.

peace

[Farmhand]

Matthew,

The point is not whether your genius or not. The point is can read the rules...
The second point is do not drag in pre conceived rules or notions that are not applicable to the situation and things get alot easier.

Consider for a moment that as you are about to jump the last pin, when somebody covers all the remaining holes on the board with thier hand.

Is ok if you push the golf tee through the persons hand and into the hole to complete the puzzle ? The rules don't say you can't.

That was part of my point if you burn the hay then start looking in the ashes and find the needle you would have found a needle in a pile of ashes NOT a HAYSTACK. Therefore by burning the haystack you can no longer solve the problem because there is no haystack.

The problem was how do you find a needle in a haystack, so when the needle is found it would need to be still in the haystack.

Regards
Andrew

[Matthew Jones]

@ANDEW

Mattew,...
Is OK if you push the golf tee through the persons hand and into the hole to complete the puzzle ? The rules don't say you can't.

Yes I would push the tee through the hand if compelled too. I am an Anarchist and believe that these things are correct no matter the consequences.

I am sorry if the original post reminded me of something that is apparently so offensive you cannot take the time and check your spelling.

I will end the conversation before you become irrational any further, and screw up all your spelling and the use punctuation.

LOL
Matthew Jones

[Armagdn03]

I believe intent is getting distorted. I think Allcanadian was pointing to our propensity for self imposed limitation. Many replies I see here are the proof in the pudding as they say!

I wish you all the best.

[Farmhand]

To Matthew, I do appologise for spelling your name wrong sorry.

I didn't ask if you would do it if compelled. Thats the second question you have side stepped like a politician.

Here is the other.

Matthew, I don't believe for one second that anyone and everyone who solves that puzzle down to one last pin is a genius.

Do you ?

Just to be polite i'll answer your question even though you didn't answer mine.

I don't feel heavy on my feet at all. And for the record I am in no way offended by what you wrote.

What would it take to compel you to push a golf tee through a persons hand ?
Don't forget that person could be a child.

Andrew

[Farmhand]

Dowsing Works

Well I just tried dowsing and it worked, Two pieces of No.8 fencing wire about 600 mm long with a 90 degree bend at one end is what I used, I think the method is well enough known there is no need to explain it.

In my opinion with the result I got Dowsing is the most effective way I have found. No need for me to have placed it myself.

Did any one else actually try any method ?

Cheers

[Allcanadian]

@Farmhand

Well I just tried dowsing and it worked, Two pieces of No.8 fencing wire about 600 mm long with a 90 degree bend at one end is what I used, I think the method is well enough known there is no need to explain it.

I like dowsing as it is completely nonsensical to the trained and logical mind, how can two pieces of wire in the right hands be more effective than a $6000 machine to detect buried lines? Here is something to consider which I think is a problem----

In a study in Munich 1987-1988 by Hans-Dieter Betz and other scientists, 500 dowsers were initially tested for their "skill" and the experimenters selected the best 43 among them for further tests. Water was pumped through a pipe on the ground floor of a two-story barn. Before each test the pipe was moved in a direction perpendicular to the water flow. On the upper floor each dowser was asked to determine the position of the pipe. Over two years the dowsers performed 843 such tests. Of the 43 pre-selected and extensively tested candidates at least 37 showed no dowsing ability. The results from the remaining 6 were said to be better than chance, resulting in the experimenters' conclusion that some dowsers "in particular tasks, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can scarcely if at all be explained as due to chance ... a real core of dowser-phenomena can be regarded as empirically proven."[19]-----http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowsing

Now the logical mind may conclude that dowsing is simply a function of chance or statistics however this very act of statistics tends to dilute the most relevant data. Consider that there is a one in a million chance of dying in a plane crash, however these odds change the moment you approach the plane, they change the moment the plane is airborn, they change the further the plane flies but most important they change due to the prior history of you and the plane. This is the problem, statistics only apply to large groups of people as an average and never to individuals specifically but it should be obvious that we are individuals. Thus statistics are irrelevant in terms of individuals because we have a sort of "bubble" surrounding us related to time, space and conditions which continually change the odds relevant to us specifically. This is where the science and math fail miserably, they do not recognize individuality and assume we are all the same, lol. As if one can have no effect on our environment or interact with it which is pure delusion.

If you apply this "reverse statistics" to dowsing you will find that some individuals in specific instances can be 100% accurate within a short time frame, that is to find a target 10 out of 10 times, I know this because I have proven the matter for myself. I am afraid averages and average simply do not count with individuals because there is nothing average about it.
Regards
AC

[Aaron]

direct knowledge

@Aron - I wonder if you have noticed that the aim of those wishing to control us would very much like us to think collectively ("hive mind"). In fact, isn't tv creating exactly that kind of a supposed reality?

Hi Freeweaver,

Yes, ideas/paradigms are intentionally crafted and are pumped through
movies, advertisements, etc... the average person doesn't have many original
thoughts - what is in their mind is the product of what has been pumped
into it over and over and over by the external world.

But that is a different type of collective - what you mention is social
engineering by our own government/corporations.

The collective I'm talking about is the "akashic records", matrix,
collective unconscious, in the Bible it is the "Book of Life", etc...
We are separated by all of that by a veil, which only gives us normally
very small glimpses into that infinite database of everything in the
past, present and future and in all possible timelines.

But it is a learnable skill to be able to directly bypass the veil and
directly download data from the collective unconscious about any
person, event, location in any time. It isn't just theoretical, it is
applied through technical remote viewing and other methods.

And that is a method to get direct knowledge about something without
needing the 5 senses.

[Farmhand]

Actually I was about to try dowsing as Duncan suggested (Brilliant idea) when I found myself standing in front of my newly constucted haystack needle in hand, wondering what I would do if I could not find it again because the hay feeds the animals and I wouldn't want one to eat the needle, so I threaded the needle with red cotton, which made it difficult to lose. Lightbulb moment.

I was shown how to dowse by a man that looked like a bear wearing shorts the sounds he made were also similar, the first time I tried it was shockingly accurate. Bit spooky really but I do what works.

I was surprised to also find the bone needle I made, I didn't expect that, i've only ever looked for water pipes or electrical cables.

Cheers all.

[Harvey]

Dowsing PDF

Georgius Agricolae in his book De re Metallica in chapter IV stated: “the twigs [dowsing rods] will not move for everybody, but only for those who employ incantations and craft.”

Jacques Aymar-Vernay could find living murderers using his twigs. (See Awesome Or Off-Putting: Jacques Aymar, The Murder-Solving Dowser | Hecklerspray)

Is dowsing a form of divination? Some refer to the rods as divining rods. If it is a form of divination then perhaps this admonition can give us some clue as to where the power originates - Deuteronomy 18:10: “There should not be found in you . . . anyone who employs divination, a practicer of magic or anyone who looks for omens or a sorcerer.”

Personally I prefer not to be so narrow minded so as to assume that we do not share this planet with other creatures. Instead I prefer to exercise my own thinking on the matter rather than be told by some other human what does or does not exist. I prefer to entertain the possibilities rather than close my mind to them. Then we can use that possibility and see if it aligns with observations and see if it provides a scientific explanation for them.

One of the early questions regarding dowsing was why was it so selective? It seems to be switched on and off by the thoughts of the person rather than by some physical interaction. A real dowser can stand 20 feet from a river and detect an underground water source 30 feet down. Why doesn't the rod fling toward the river? Maybe the two streams have different properties Or is it because the Dowser is looking only for "underground" water . . ..

It would be interesting to have another person place large pieces of Bone and Metal in the haystack along with the needles (so they knew where they were) and see if the Dowsing found them all, or just the needles. If if found them all, then that would be a false positive right? - because you are looking for needles. And if it only found the needles, then we could rule out any material cause (other than shape) which puts the matter into the psychological or spiritual realm - mind over matter, paranormal and all that.

So if the evidence supports the possibility that certain persons are the ones who are able to accurately perform these actions, then we would begin to search out what makes those persons different. What was it, 6 out of 43? It would not surprise me to discover that all six of those persons had some history with contacting the spirit realm in some way or another. And this is precisely the possibility that I was speaking of earlier, that we share this planet with these other creatures, spirit creatures.

After all, the power of the Dowsing must be an intelligent power. Otherwise, how could it identify the murderers for Aymar? Or how could it distinguish between a small piece of straw and a needle? Or between underground and above ground water? Or the really confusing one, the same rod in America gives the depth in feet, but Europe gives the depth in meters Surely, this has an intelligence behind it, wouldn't you agree?

If now, that intelligence lies within the individual, then we need to evaluate how the individual is able to acquire the knowledge of things unseen and things not experienced before hand. How does that understanding come to the person so as to cause actions of exposure?

I am open to all valid explanations. But until a better explanation comes along I am inclined to accept the possibility of spirit creature involvement as the most satisfying answer to fit all the observations.

[Stealth]

Dowsing

It is interesting that we went from looking,as in visually trying to see the needle in the haystack, to dowsing for the proverbial needle. I have been a dowser for years, and can tell you that everyone can do it. It is not selective, as has been stated. Although anyone can dowse, some can do it better than others. It is like almost everything lese, practice makes perfect. And, some can't dowse without some instruction from those who do. These things can be taught to anyone. There are also different aspects of dowsing. So in essence,yes, you can find that needle in the haystack by dowsing,whether steel or bone. There are some so advanced as to not even use an instruments, only their mind. Good Luck. Stealth

[Farmhand]

Hi all,

I would do more dowsing experiments but it is difficult to get an assistant to take me seriously and do what ask. It is refreshing to see people with open minds, I like to work by the theory that nature will provide the answers if I ask and am open to receive the answer and to recognise it, though the answer does not always come quickly and it can't be rushed, Force Begits Resistance kind of thing. Maybe I turned my brain into a negative resistor and thats what drew me to it

I pesonally believe that anybody could do it, but it would be very difficult to get good results without believing it's possible. A negative person present could also influence the result I think.

A study was done with two basketball teams with similar shot averages which indicated that using visualisation techniques alone and without actual practice one basketball team was able to improve thier penalty shots much more than the one that actually did practice. The theory they put forward I think was that the ones visualising themselves practicing didn't miss and did not experience failure. Though I don't completely agree with the theory the results were interesting.

Does a human have the ability to store knowledge in thier own organic mass?

Or is all our knowledge only stored in a form of an electrical nature?

Regards
Andrew

[Allcanadian]

@Harvey

If now, that intelligence lies within the individual, then we need to evaluate how the individual is able to acquire the knowledge of things unseen and things not experienced before hand. How does that understanding come to the person so as to cause actions of exposure?

In my research I have found that many great minds in history have studied this subject. They found persons called "sensitives" or "seeers" who could literally see or detect different fields which appeared as different colors. Wilhelm Reich did extensive studies in this area which were well documented. I have also done experiments whereby I could interact with special circuits generating a field from a distance of 20 feet or more. I have proven that we do indeed have a quite large electrical field associated with our body and if a person was somehow "aware" of minute changes in their field as it relates to external fields then this should be no more magical than the sense of sight or hearing. I also did some "whacky" experiments many years ago whereby I used an ultrasonic detector/emitter to measure distance and emit a proportional tone to headphones. I used two emitter/detectors one facing more left at one tone and another facing more right at another tone and each detector was tied to a seperate side or channel of the headphones. I could then hear as a seperate tone the distance of where "things" were in a dark room, the mixed tone of both channels also gave me an indication of general distance or presence. After a while and with some practice I found my mind started to learn how to make sense of the seperate and mixed tones faster and more accurately, I could throw a ball and "hear" it's motion, that is what direction it was travelling and how fast. By moving your head you could also detect a slight phase shift in regards to moving and stationary objects, where objects were in relation to me. I was quite literally "seeing" with my ears in a room with no light which was pretty weird. My point here is that most people have completely underestimated both the power of our senses as well as the minds ability to learn to make sense of the information provided by these senses. I have found most people may have all their senses but can still be literally "blind" in regards to the environment around them.
Regards
AC

[Farmhand]

Harvey,

I am open to all valid explanations. But until a better explanation comes along I am inclined to accept the possibility of spirit creature involvement as the most satisfying answer to fit all the observations.

Would you be inclined to accept the possibility we humans are also spirit creatures, just that we have a manifistation of mass present at this time, so to speak.

AC

I wish I had the knowhow and equipment to conduct experiments like that. Thats very interesting. The large electrical field theory needs exploring somehow. Makes sense to me.

Cheers

[Harvey]

Harvey,


Would you be inclined to accept the possibility we humans are also spirit creatures, just that we have a manifistation of mass present at this time, so to speak.

AC

I wish I had the knowhow and equipment to conduct experiments like that. Thats very interesting. The large electrical field theory needs exploring somehow. Makes sense to me.

Cheers

Given my current state of understanding and having evaluated the present data available to me, my inclination is that most humans throughout history are not materialized spirit creatures but instead have entered the earth by natural birth. But even though I am not inclined toward that direction of accepting that we are spirits, I am still open to the possibility and certainly would welcome any solid evidence to support the hypothesis.

It is interesting that historically in both biblical and mythological terms, spirits and humans have always been recorded as distinctly different. Spirits are recorded to have powers that humans do not. For example, in one biblical account a girl was able to foretell the future with remarkable accuracy and when the apostles expelled the spirit from her, the merchants became quite angry over the matter because they were profiting from her predictions but afterward she no longer had the power. The Egyptians, Greeks had spirits and even the Biblical "Sons of God" were recorded as spirits who had the ability to take on human form and even procreate with humans. But in all of these cases, these spirits were viewed as different from humans and even their offspring were viewed as different, stronger, more violent etc.

Are all humans good? By extension, are all spirits good?

From the research I have done, I have learned that a war broke out in the spirit realm during the early part of the 20th century and all those spirits who were not good were confined to the "vicinity of the Earth". I do not know how big that vicinity is nor do I know how many are confined in this area but I am convinced the problems this planet is experiencing are the direct result of their involvement here. You can read about that war in Revelation 12:7.

Personally, I prefer not to allow myself to be manipulated by humans or spirits regardless of the form they take. Instead, I prefer to use my own thinking ability and reason to decide for myself what I will believe, accept or reject based on the evidence available. And quite frankly, I think that is something that is expected of us by the creator himself. He created us with powers of reason and discernment and he expects us to use them. The Boreans were commended for this, being called 'noble minded' because they would not take the words of others at face value but instead would research for themselves to see if what was being told to them was true or not. (See Acts 17:10).

One thing I have learned over time, is that no matter how many millennia we may live we will never learn everything there is to know about this universe. Gaining knowledge is an ongoing perpetual process. Does this change the fact that the things we have learned to be true are true? Not in the least, the truth never changes - facts change, but the truth does not. For example, is it a fact that the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West? Yes, it is a fact and a matter of perspective. But the truth has always been there, and the truth is that the Earth rotates on it's axis, and that too is a fact, but is also the truth. So while points of view may give different perspectives or facts regarding a specific truth, they must all agree for that specific truth. So it goes with everything we seek the truth about. One of mankind's current endeavors is to seek the truth regarding Gravity. We have facts and perspectives to throw into the mix, but none of us truly knows the truth yet. Did Jesus really walk on water or did all the fish line up and let him walk on their backs? Or was it something like the parting of the Red Sea where the water was turned to a gelatinous state? Who knows. All we know according to the record is that Peter jumped out of the boat, took a few steps and started sinking but somehow managed to get back into the boat with some help. Those are the facts, but what was the truth? Did they truly defy gravity? My dad told me that he walked on water all the time during his childhood but when he got older he didn't do it so much. I asked him what his secret was - he said he would wait for winter. So the fact is he walked on water, but the truth is it was frozen at the time.

So the "problem with problems" is usually our perspective and point of reference. We have preconceived notions that often lead us astray or completely blocks our powers of reason. An example of this is converting fractions to decimals and vice-versa in ones head. We are fine as long as the fractions match some monetary value or common measurement we use all the time like a quarter foot or one third of an hour. But when it is something like 25/32 people freeze. We have a preconception that decimals and fractions need to equate in some table in our mind and without an entry in that 'table' or at least a 'process' to evaluate the problem we find ourselves looking for an outside tool like a calculator. Some people 'fake' it by rounding it out to the nearest workable number and then approximate an answer - like 26/32 = 13/16 and that is bigger than 3/4 and smaller than 1 so the answer is somewhere between 0.75 and 1 Others may try and do the long division in there head - "thirty two goes into twenty five uh . . . two fifty . . ." etc. And still others, if they are fortunate enough to know what the reciprocal of 32 is will try and multiply that by 25 in their head. A savant on the other hand may take the parts in chunks and just add them up through a series of differential actions of subtraction and addition like taking the 12/16 away from the 13/16 to get 1/16 and then dividing that by two and adding that decimal result back to the 12/16 to get the answer. Or if they are really good, they will just take the 24/32 and add 1/32 [0.75 + 0.03125]to it but it requires that they know the reciprocal of 32.

So sometimes when we find it difficult to solve a problem, it may be a good idea to see how many different ways there are to find a solution and then determine what is the best method for a given case.

Is there a needle in the haystack?