Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:39, 13 February 2007

Click here to start a new talk section.

• Archive - May 06
• Archive - June 06
• Archive - July 06
• Archive - August 06
• Archive - September 06
• Archive - October 06

hi inshanee , thought you might like my article nealparr and matrinphi are vandalising it at present and i am seeking arbitration ... see what you think.

The following piece of reasearch was done by Tim Crosby who was both the subject , with the condition known as clairsentience , and also the researcher who , much like research chemists in former times , on the edge of new discoveries , used themselves as white mice in white coats to test a new as yet untried compound.

He developed a philosophical aproach over 15 years of research which he found indispensable given the nature of the study area he was exploring. unlike empirical science which hopes to measure the matereal world and then to gradually reach understandings of its workings through repeated testing , the mind and its contents apears to be a somewhat more slippery fish . Descartes after many years of dedicated reasoning came to the conclusion that no one could prove beyond a doubt that anything coming into the self via the senses could be proved to be objectively existant including measurments , graphs ; other people`s research etc ; the whole external world , and as ethnobotanist terence mckenna put it , " you are at the centre of the only universe you will ever know ".

This pre amble is necessary when coming at the word clairsentience in a way which does justice to the nature of the self/reality which is implicit in its existence as a concept but also its very meaning which is embedded in human culture at large . The word itself pre supposes both a self ; a supra higher dimesional sense world and implicitly , a group of senses and sense organs of a new more highly developed nature.

For the most complete and detailed research in this area i suggest one takes a long look at the work of ex nasa scientist barbara brennan who after a research post at nasa exploring the nature of electromagnetic fields , later developed higher sense perception to a very advanced level. Her work in this area is pre eminent and gives a broader and deeper understanding on the relationships of higher sense perception including , clairaudience , clairvoiance , claircognisance and of course clairsentience ; and their relationship to higher worlds / dimensions of the universe and self.

for more information go to http://www.barbarabrennan.com/

Her aproach contextualises these newly discovered layers of reality within the framework of the holographic theory of the universe suggested by pysicist Dr. David Bohm in his book " the implicate order " in which he calls the manifest reality " the explicate enfolded order ", in which , " parts are seen to be in immediate connection , in which their dynamical relationships depend in an irreducible way on the state of the whole system......Thus, one is led to a new notion of unbroken wholeness which denies the classical idea of analyzability of the world into seperately and independantly existent parts." and also The Morphagenic field theory ( from morph, "form " , and genesis , " coming into being. " ) of Rupert Sheldrake which is explored more fully in his book "A New Science of Life ".

The action of this field involves " action at a distance " in both space and time . Rather than form being determined by physical laws outside of time , it depends on morphic resonance across time . This means that morphic fields can propagate across space and time and that past events could influence other events everywhere else.

An example of this is shown by Lyall Watson in his book , " Lifetide: The Biology of Consciousness ", in which he describes what is now popularly called the Hundredth Monkey Principle . Watson found that after a group of monkeys learned a new behaviour , suddenly other monkeys on other islands with no possible " normal " means of communication learned that behaviour , too.

Barbara brennans exaustive work in this area gives a broad and highly detailed context for understanding unusually developed senses and perhaps a new understanding of other mechanisms in the universe whereby knowledege , feelings , thoughts and other objects in time and space , might travel across boundaries , for example between bird and tree ; between monkey and monkey or between human and human via a connectedness previously thought not to exist .

As Robert Anton Wilson so aptly put it , " any technology or science sufficiently far removed from ones own will be percieved as magic" , and much like the idea of new and emergent higher facilities which are explored to dramatic effect in the three X Men films , the idea of a new emerging higher state of consciousness is being discussed by integrated philosophers such as Ken Wilber , whereby the next stage of human evolution is not to be a physical innovation as our relative matereal comfort and sedantary lives suggest , but will be one of the mind.

Just as roaming homonids , with a culture which didn`t change one bit for millenia , were replaced by homo sapiens , with their art , religion , language etc , for whom culture now was so varied that it could be differentiated by an explosion of creativity , which is characterised by the highly individual designs of their hand axes and countless other artifacts which are found to be different from one valley to the next across the entire planet; so , the next leap of human development will perhaps be just as huge and qualatively different.Thesource42 17:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC) Thesource42 04:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

References

Barbara Brennan ex Nasa scientist http://www.barbarabrennan.com/ also her two text books " hands of light " , and " Light Emerging ".http://en.wikipedia.org/Barbara_Brennan

Physicist Dr. David Bohm "The Implicate Order "

Rupert Sheldrake , " A New Science Of Life ", http://en.wikipedia.org/Rupert_Sheldrake

Lyall Watson ," Lifetide : The Biology of Consciousness ". http://en.wikipedia.org/Lyall_watson

Robert Anton Wilson , " Cosmic Trigger ", http://en.wikipedia.org/R.A.Wilson

Terence Mckenna , " True Hallucinations " , " Invisible Landscape ", and " Food of The Gods ", http://en.wikipedia.org/Terence_mckenna

Rene Descartes http://en.wikipedia.org/Ren%C3%A9_Descartes

David Horrobin , " The Madness Of Adam and Eve " .http://en.wikipedia.org/David_Horrobin

Ken Wilbur , http://www.kenwilber.com and http://wilber.shambhala.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/Ken_Wilbur

A key idea in Wilber's philosophical approach is the holon, which came from the writings of Arthur Koestler.As a Mahayana Buddhist, he believes that reality is ultimately a nondual union of emptiness and form, with form being innately subject to development over time

The X Men , http://en.wikipedia.org/X-Men

Star Trek Next Generation In which Diana Troy is Ship`s Empath or Clairsentient. ( see , above the Robert Anton Wilson Quote ) http://en.wikipedia.org/Star_Trek_Next_Generation

Emergence : http://en.wikipedia.org/Emergence

"Perhaps the most elaborate recent definition of emergence was provided by Jeffrey Goldstein in the inaugural issue of Emergence.(Goldstein 1999) To Goldstein, emergence refers to "the arising of novel and coherent structures, patterns and properties during the process of self-organization in complex systems."

Holism : http://en.wikipedia.org/Holism

Block

You blocked me for 24 hours, stating as a reason 'vandalism'. Care to explain what I vandalised and when? Care to offer a reason why I shouldn't think it was an incredibly petty block because I removed your 'paranormal' tag from Red rain in Kerala? Suggest you read Misplaced Pages:Vandalism, and also the bit in Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy about how admins are not allowed to block people they're having a content dispute with. 81.178.208.69 23:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

InShaneee, you should be aware that there is discussion on this block on the noticeboard here. Newyorkbrad 00:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you unable or unwilling to offer any justification of your actions? 81.178.208.69 23:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you not think an administrator is obliged to explain his actions? If you won't offer any reason at all why you shat on the blocking policy when you blocked me, I'll have to see about an rfc or rfa. 81.178.208.69 22:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You really shouldn't be an admin if you're not prepared to justify your use of the tools. 81.178.208.69 01:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

This continues to reflect incredibly badly on you. If you think your block of me was justified, all you have to do is say why. If you think it wasn't, then say so and apologise. Just ignoring the question is childish. 81.178.208.69 12:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

You're clearly just a witless moron. How you became an admin I cannot begin to understand. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.179.150.16 (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

What does this actually refer to? You attacked me by blocking me in complete violation of policy, accusing me of vandalism which, as you well know, was utter bullshit. You blocked me because you disagreed with me. You have been shockingly uncivil in ignoring repeated requests to justify your actions. By ignoring the question you give me cause to believe you're a witless moron. That's no personal attack, just a statement of belief. How about you finally show that you're not a witless moron by explaining why you blocked me? You've had a good few weeks to think about it now. 81.179.150.16 23:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you just don't think it's worth talking to IP addresses, except to block them and leave templates on their talk pages. It was me you blocked, and I want to know why. Offer some indication that you've understood the question, and why I'm angry, or indicate why you feel unable to answer the quesion, or best of all just answer it. Worldtraveller 15:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal attack

This is another in a series of personal attacks and uncivil conduct by this user. Another editor blanked the comment, but I think this user needs to be warned. Dreadlocke ☥ 00:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you saw it, but Belbo Casaubon deleted your comment Dreadlocke ☥ 04:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring

I know this is a bit late, but you've made 3 reverts in 24 hours at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct. I know that you are an experienced editor and you know that edit warring is unacceptable. It fosters bad feelings and prevents proper resolution. You ought to be using dispute resolution like mediation when in a conflict, not aggressively edit warring. Thank you, Khoikhoi 22:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Paranormal articles page

Feel free to delete it. However, one of the reasons for creating the page was to permit the recent changes function to be used, as indicated on the project page. To the best of my knowledge, having such a page is the only way to use that function. If, however, there is another one, than I would have no objections whatever to the removal of the page. Badbilltucker 01:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Point taken. It might be best if only one or two members actually added the articles to the page. The recent changes is determined by the presence of the page name on the article page, so they would all have to be added eventually. But it might make it easier if it weren't revised too often, potentially playing hob with the server. No disagreement if you wish to do so. Badbilltucker 01:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Intending to do so, actually. :) Badbilltucker 02:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Virtually certain of it. Am adding banners and assessments to the articles by category right now, to ensure that they all show up. Badbilltucker 02:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Acknowledged. However, having an assessment is often better than not having one. Categories and articles will be worked out as soon as all articles are reviewed and assessed. Right now, it looks like the Cryptids cat will be broken up at least three ways, into real, mythical, and other alleged, but I want to ensure that they're all assessed before I do the break up, and then try to find other projects that engage in assessments that can replace the existing banner. Then, the articles will be broken up into the various subcats. Badbilltucker 02:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Your userpage

I have blanked your userpage. The content was innapropriate, as Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. --InShaneee 14:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

No, you may not place it here, either. --InShaneee 15:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure; Whatever makes you happy is fine with me - take it easy Surena 15:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Reversion to Gaz

You recently reverted an edit to Gaz. While I am inclined to agree with your reversion, it appears to me to be a perfectly good-faith edit and should probably not have been marked minor. Regardless, I have started a new discussion on Talk:Gaz regarding this, your response would be appreciated. —INTRIGUEBLUE (talk|contribs) 01:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Formal warning

Excuse me, I have been trying to focus on content for nine months now, but all my attempts to improve the article Persian Gulf naming dispute by insisting on verifiability and neutral point of view are quickly reverted by a small group of editors with specious or irrelevant arguments, and my attempts to resolve this on the articles talk page, if responded to at all, are responded to with equally specious, illogical or irrelevant arguments. In those nine months I have effectively made no progress. Please scan my contributions on Talk:Persian Gulf naming dispute and the responses. Do you have suggestions how I should "focus on content" with more effect than writing to /dev/null?  --Lambiam 23:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Paranormallogo1.png

Just wanted to understand your rationale in deleting this image, especially considering the relevant discussion. --InShaneee 03:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I completely missed that discussion. I'm new to IfD, and I didn't know that relisted images get their discussion in a new place. I've restored the image. Thanks for pointing this out, and thanks even more for coming to me in a calm manner :-) —Mets501 (talk) 04:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Haham_hanuka

Hi, I saw you've made comments in the past on User talk:Haham hanuka about the conduct of this user. I just wondered if you're not too busy if you could take a look at Adolf Hitler where he is repeatedly removing serious and well-thought out sentences from the header with simplistic comments (the most recent being "rv vandal") generally aimed at me. His aim appears to be to trim out any reference to Hitler's crimes as regards general references to the second world war. Regardless of one's position on this, he is very incivil in his mode. He also appears to have broken 3RR today. Can you intervene in some way as an admin? For example a block for repeated incivility? MarkThomas 14:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Both of you need to stop referring to the other as vandals. --InShaneee 15:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 18:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Admin Oversight Board

As you are the only person who has responded negatively on the proposed project page regarding the project, I thought that it might be best to raise the matter directly to you. I had in fact contacted wikipedia's lawyer about the subject over a month ago, specifically requesting him to remove the proposal from the proposal page if he thought it would not be productive. He has not done so to date. Also, you said how you can't see how a project would affect a legal proceeding. The specific intention is to prevent the possibility of the legal proceeding ever being started, by providing an independent body which could be contacted short of a formal court hearing. So, basically, the intention is to, as it were, prevent the formal legal proceeding from ever taking place.

The idea was first proposed as a wikipedia guideline when one regularly hostile longtime contributor created userpages detailing what he saw as abuses of admin power. He did correctly raise the point that the admins are basically answerable to no one but other admins, and hinted at the possibility of collusion. Clearly, I don't think that is ever likely to happen, but a comparatively small group of people with power are often seen by conspiracy theorists in that light. There was also at least an indication of this user going further, possibly to court. Seemingly, as I don't think he's been banned yet, that hasn't happened. It however still could. When the idea was first proposed, I did note that the majority of the admins had taken umbrage at the idea in much the same way that you seemingly have, and more or less rejected it on the basis of it being perceived as being insulting to them. One person did get the idea, however. He specifically said that, something like Caesar's wife, admins not only have to more or less be pure, but they have to be perceived as being pure to be truly effective. Not giving others any outside recourse to appeal to does clearly mitigate that perception of purity, as admins are basically answerable to no one but other admins. Again, the wikipedia counsel himself has refused to weigh in on the point one way or another, despite my specifically requesting him to note if he thought it was a bad idea. As he has not done so, I have kept the proposal there, so that, when the worst does happen, as it almost certainly will, the proposal will still be there to be enacted upon if it is seen as being a possible remedy to the situation. I hope that this makes it a bit clearer to you. Personally, I don't think that the idea is likely to be enacted before it is, as it were, "too late" (whenever that may be), but still want the proposal to be there to be considered when and if that time does arise. Badbilltucker 19:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Josh d

Regarding attack articles like the above, please be careful in the future to remove the automatic deletion summary before finalizing the deletion in order not to perpetuate the damaging information in the deletion logs that are visible to everyone and that even oversight cannot remove. Thanks. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 20:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill Your President

Hey man, why was my page deleted? It is an actual band. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mintoisgod (talk • contribs) 21:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Invite,toolbox

Place your name in the "Favorite Admin" listings and make a copy of my toolbox. Martial Law 03:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Golfore

dont delete my words golfore that is a new term that i coined just as renaissance writers coined new terms all the time and you do not delete those words. You have noob on here which is also slang in case you havent noticed. Why should you have more power than I do, are you better than me, no you are human(i think) just like the rest of us.

dude

what's the deal?

I AM NEW TO THE SERVER! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The-dsu (talk • contribs).

HELP, please!

ZakuSage has now started an organized campaign to keep sticking his harassment pages back into my user space over and over again. This is beyond ridiculous. RunedChozo 20:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no "organized campaign". No such thing is in his userspace. This user is entirely out of line, and I'd like something to be done about him. - ZakuSage 20:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

RunedChozo and ZakuSage

Hope you're about, these two editors have now become involved in an edit war over ZakuSage's attempts to place RunedChozo on the list of suspected sock puppets page. RunedChozo even moved the material into the main article namespace. Since you commented on the noticeboard earlier in their argument, thought you might be able to/want to do something about it before it escalates further. Thanks. QmunkE 20:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I've already moved the things out of the main namespace one Qmunk informed me that was wrong. I'm trying to deal with ZakuSage who just keeps harassing me over and over again, deliberately lying about me too. RunedChozo 20:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

You consistently moved sockpuppet report into MY userspace. Most of this is visable in the history of that article, and some is now visable here after an accident while moving it. - ZakuSage 20:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I made a mistake because YOU kept leaving a confusing trail of redirects, and I apologized for that on the proper evidence page, and fixed the error as soon as I saw it again. Stop your lying ZakuSage. RunedChozo 20:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

What you did was clear and blatant vandalism. STOP THE LIES! - ZakuSage 20:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not the one lying, ZakuLiar. RunedChozo 20:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Runed, I hope your break last for a while, because if you come back and continue your accusations, it will become an enforced break. Zaku, if you touch Runed's userspace, make one more accusation against him, or call him a 'liar' or anything else, you will be blocked IMMEDIATLY. This ends here. --InShaneee 21:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the continued drama, but I actually haven't touched his userspace since the first day of this mess. I apologize sincerely for my actions and will be sure to avoid this user in the future. - ZakuSage 02:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Fadix

InShaneee, could you please take a look at this: The action is too slow, whilst he continues to harass by constantly reverting all edits he dislikes. --AdilBaguirov 02:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

could you please take a look, as it's not ending, but getting worse: Thanks. --AdilBaguirov 02:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Rogue Admin or not...

Rogue Admin or not, this award is for you:

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		This is for making Misplaced Pages a better website for all and for assissting me repeatedly. Martial Law 21:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Martial Law 21:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Also list yourself in my listings of Favorite Admins and make yourself a copy of my toolbox. Martial Law 21:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Madmod.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Madmod.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Sinosphere

Hi there, I posted a notice about Sinosphere article on the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive192. I wonder if you are gonna to do something about it. Thanks. Migye 19:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

u bugging me

but They didnt change it back... someone else removed it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeremybub (talk • contribs) 21:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

Criticism and response in parapsychology

I've been advised to create a sandbox for the Criticism and response in parapsychology article. It's here, renamed to Controversy in parapsychology. I'm not sure if people want to edit under my user page, or edit the main article. But, if it's decided to edit the sandbox, It would be great to have your input. I won't be editing in the beginning, while I see what format people want to use etc. I'm putting this on several talk pages. Martin _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 05:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)