As A Scientist, I Didn’t Believe In Psychic Powers. Then I Experienced Something That Changed My Life.

[George-ananda]

That is the key piece that I created this thread to focus on. And specifically where in the brain the scan found the change:

And that is a good point and very important. It suggests the process involves some non-normal mechanism in the brain which would be consistent with a paranormal ability.

But for most readers just the acceptance of xenoglossy has to come first before such brain scans would be important.

 

[Firenze]

Note that this is not about whether or not a God or gods exist, but about the capabilities of the human brain. It is to me about testing some claims using the tools of science and demonstrating that what we're capable of goes beyond our ordinary awareness. Thus I've started this thread under "paranormal discussion only"

As A Scientist, I Didn’t Believe In Psychic Powers. Then I Experienced Something That Changed My Life.

...
I began reading magazines like The Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptic, which used critical thinking to debunk extraordinary claims. From this perspective, humans were simply viewed as very good at deluding and fooling ourselves. Rational and logical thinking dictates that we see belief in ghosts and paranormal abilities as psychological reactions and tricks of the mind.

Meanwhile, my psychology training program was shaping a particular way of viewing the world — that an atheistic, logical, and rational approach was the only one with validity. Belief in the paranormal was associated with immaturity (at best) and psychopathology (at worst). Consciousness was seen as arising from the neural connections of the brain. When we stop breathing and the brain ceases its functions, consciousness is lost, and the body decays. There is no God. There are no ghosts. Nothing is real unless science can prove it. I was no longer open to experiences and possibilities outside the realm of what was considered “normal,” but that was all about to change.
...
Apparently, Janet began spontaneously speaking South American tribal languages after participating in a holotropic breathwork session. What a relief! No bad news after all. Wait, what!? Spontaneously speaking South American tribal languages? I can see why he would be cautious about sharing this news. It sounded ridiculous.
...
Janet knew that I conducted EEG brain imaging and was open to participating in a series of experiments to measure what was happening in her brain when she allowed the languages to come through. One of the first things I noticed was a significant change in the EEG signals coming from sensor locations in the back right quadrant of the brain. Instead of the normal, nice, neat patterns we expect to see, these signals jumped off the screen and almost looked like seizure activity. After double and triple-checking my equipment and finding the same change in activity on several testing occasions, I had to accept that something dramatic was happening in Janet’s brain.
It turns out that the specific location involved was in the right parietal lobe (RPL). This part of the brain is involved in defining and perceiving the self, self-related thoughts, perception of the body, and autobiographical memory. Basically, when this part of the brain is doing its job, it creates an understanding of the “self” as a separate and discrete entity associated with the definition of “me.” When this part of the brain is damaged or goes “off-line,” like it did with Janet, it is associated with feelings of spiritual transcendence and a softening of boundaries between “self” and “other.”

Somehow, it appeared Janet was able to temporarily disrupt the functioning of her RPL, presumably allowing her to shift her consciousness in a way that some would claim allowed other forms of consciousness to speak through her. Despite what I thought I knew about reality, and as crazy as it sounded, I was left with the conclusion that Janet was somehow channeling several people, beings, or entities.
...
However, I have seen enough to make me believe that our minds are capable of much more than most of us dare to imagine. While we may not fully understand how or why, it seems clear to me now that psi abilities are a natural and normal part of human experience, and that scientists should dedicate more time and resources to exploring them.
...
Personally, this exploration has opened my mind to a whole new world of possibility. Having witnessed “the impossible” on numerous occasions — in scientific settings, no less — I have come to accept that consciousness can extend far beyond the physical body. ...

FYI - his scientific papers: Jeff Tarrant

Perhaps I missed it - but who determined that Janet was speaking tribal languages and that she didn’t already know them?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Materialists are also skeptical of work by other materialists.
There could be error, fraud, or a materialistic explanation
not yet thought of. Fans of the supernatural are always
making claims of evidence. The vast majority turn out to
rank up with sightings of Elvis & Sasquatch together in a
Wallmart in Topeka KS. Yet sometimes what at first seems
paranormal is not, eg, witch doctors employing what turns
out to be the placebo effect.

If you read the article a single source was used to "confirm" that she spoke these languages, and not even the woman that supposedly had that ability was aware of what language that she used. Okay, the hard part was finding the supposed languages that she spoke. Why didn't they confirm it with others that spoke the same language?

Fraud? Maybe. Wishful thinking on everyone's part? That is far more likely in my opinion. An actual event? That is the least reasonable explanation.

Unfortunately this is just more inadequately supported woo woo. Nothing to get excited about.

 

[George-ananda]

Perhaps I missed it - but who determined that Janet was speaking tribal languages and that she didn’t already know them?

From the article:

The late Dr. Bernardo Peixoto, an anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution and a shaman was originally from the Urueu-Wau-Wau tribe in Northern Brazil, where he was known as Ipupiara or Ipu. He recognized something in Janet’s recordings and indicated that she was speaking Yanomami, a South American tribal language.

 

[George-ananda]

If you read the article a single source was used to "confirm" that she spoke these languages, and not even the woman that supposedly had that ability was aware of what language that she used. Okay, the hard part was finding the supposed languages that she spoke. Why didn't they confirm it with others that spoke the same language?

Who said they didn't use any other sources after the initial identification? Common sense would think that quite likely would have been done so but this was not intended to be an exhaustive article. I mean the guy doing the research was a skeptical scientist per the article.

And then there is the corresponding unusual brain activity.

To me it adds up to a compelling case at this point. And this xenoglossy case does not stand alone.

 

[sun rise]

Why didn't they confirm it with others that spoke the same language?

They did.

inadequately supported woo woo

And the brain scan? Are you asserting that the part of the brain that showed altered activity is not accurately identified? Are you asserting that the scan was faked? What are you objecting to with respect to the brain scan and the identification of the region affected when she spoke another tongue?

 

[Subduction Zone]

They did.

Where in the article does it say that? I must have missed it.

EDIT: I just went over the article again. Nothing about confirming the languages.

And the brain scan? Are you asserting that the part of the brain that showed altered activity is not accurately identified? Are you asserting that the scan was faked? What are you objecting to with respect to the brain scan and the identification of the region affected when she spoke another tongue?

The brain scan only shows that a part of her brain was activated during the process. It tells us nothing either way about what was going on.

 

[Revoltingest]

Where in the article does it say that? I must have missed it.

EDIT: I just went over the article again. Nothing about confirming the languages.

The brain scan only shows that a part of her brain was activated during the process. It tells us nothing either way about what was going on.

Sounds like bias confirmation rather than evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Who said they didn't use any other sources after the initial identification? Common sense would think that quite likely would have been done so but this was not intended to be an exhaustive article. I mean the guy doing the research was a skeptical scientist per the article.

And then there is the corresponding unusual brain activity.

To me it adds up to a compelling case at this point. And this xenoglossy case does not stand alone.

In effect the article did. That is one of the first things that a scientist would do. That there are no such records is a strong indication that the claims were never independently verified.


This person claims to be a scientist, but I do not see anything that indicates that he is. He is a psychologist and has some training in technology, but the way he handled this case was not very scientific at all.

 

[George-ananda]

In effect the article did. That is one of the first things that a scientist would do. That there are no such records is a strong indication that the claims were never independently verified.


This person claims to be a scientist, but I do not see anything that indicates that he is. He is a psychologist and has some training in technology, but the way he handled this case was not very scientific at all.

The article in no way addressed ALL who heard the language and confirmed it. You are critiquing the thoroughness of the article not the scientist’s work. The skeptical minded scientist has a book and who knows what else we haven’t seen out there.

How you could have reached that conclusion suggests someone throwing random daggers at a disliked subject.

The article even mentioned three or four other South American languages by name. The article is just to give us the gist of the case.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The article in no way addressed ALL who heard the language and confirmed it. You are critiquing the thoroughness of the article not the scientist’s work. The skeptical minded scientist has a book and who knows what else we haven’t seen out there.

How you could have reached that conclusion suggests someone throwing random daggers at a disliked subject.

The article even mentioned three or four other South American languages by name. The article is just to give us the gist of the case.

Thank you for agreeing with me. The case made is so poor that no rational person would accept it.

 

[George-ananda]

Thank you for agreeing with me. The case made is so poor that no rational person would accept it.

No rational person would just dismiss it:

 

[Subduction Zone]

No rational person would just dismiss it:

Quite the contrary. It is poorly supported. It is just like a thousand other woo woo stories that never go anywhere.

You want scientific confirmation but ironically you never follow the scientific method. In a case like this repeated confirmation by other sources is a must. And to make it proper one would have to use other experts and provide them with a double blind test for the claims.

For example if one had an expert that claims to know "Language A" you would need at least one tape of a person that spoke that language using it. At least one tape of a person speaking another language. At least one tape of a person faking it. And at least one tape of our test subject. The tapes would have to be similar enough so that none of them stuck out. The claimed expert would be only given numbers and told to write his opinion of each.

If he kept identifying her speech as the same then you could begin to claim to have evidence.

 

[George-ananda]

Quite the contrary. It is poorly supported. It is just like a thousand other woo woo stories that never go anywhere.

You want scientific confirmation but ironically you never follow the scientific method. In a case like this repeated confirmation by other sources is a must. And to make it proper one would have to use other experts and provide them with a double blind test for the claims.

For example if one had an expert that claims to know "Language A" you would need at least one tape of a person that spoke that language using it. At least one tape of a person speaking another language. At least one tape of a person faking it. And at least one tape of our test subject. The tapes would have to be similar enough so that none of them stuck out. The claimed expert would be only given numbers and told to write his opinion of each.

If he kept identifying her speech as the same then you could begin to claim to have evidence.

We don’t fully know what he did or didn’t do. And the unusual brain activity was his real thrust not even the foreign language.

But you can feel free to dismiss without knowledge. I’ll remain quite intrigued and think at this point that his work suggests something interesting.

 

[Nakosis]

Note that this is not about whether or not a God or gods exist, but about the capabilities of the human brain. It is to me about testing some claims using the tools of science and demonstrating that what we're capable of goes beyond our ordinary awareness. Thus I've started this thread under "paranormal discussion only"

As A Scientist, I Didn’t Believe In Psychic Powers. Then I Experienced Something That Changed My Life.

...
I began reading magazines like The Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptic, which used critical thinking to debunk extraordinary claims. From this perspective, humans were simply viewed as very good at deluding and fooling ourselves. Rational and logical thinking dictates that we see belief in ghosts and paranormal abilities as psychological reactions and tricks of the mind.

Meanwhile, my psychology training program was shaping a particular way of viewing the world — that an atheistic, logical, and rational approach was the only one with validity. Belief in the paranormal was associated with immaturity (at best) and psychopathology (at worst). Consciousness was seen as arising from the neural connections of the brain. When we stop breathing and the brain ceases its functions, consciousness is lost, and the body decays. There is no God. There are no ghosts. Nothing is real unless science can prove it. I was no longer open to experiences and possibilities outside the realm of what was considered “normal,” but that was all about to change.
...
Apparently, Janet began spontaneously speaking South American tribal languages after participating in a holotropic breathwork session. What a relief! No bad news after all. Wait, what!? Spontaneously speaking South American tribal languages? I can see why he would be cautious about sharing this news. It sounded ridiculous.
...
Janet knew that I conducted EEG brain imaging and was open to participating in a series of experiments to measure what was happening in her brain when she allowed the languages to come through. One of the first things I noticed was a significant change in the EEG signals coming from sensor locations in the back right quadrant of the brain. Instead of the normal, nice, neat patterns we expect to see, these signals jumped off the screen and almost looked like seizure activity. After double and triple-checking my equipment and finding the same change in activity on several testing occasions, I had to accept that something dramatic was happening in Janet’s brain.
It turns out that the specific location involved was in the right parietal lobe (RPL). This part of the brain is involved in defining and perceiving the self, self-related thoughts, perception of the body, and autobiographical memory. Basically, when this part of the brain is doing its job, it creates an understanding of the “self” as a separate and discrete entity associated with the definition of “me.” When this part of the brain is damaged or goes “off-line,” like it did with Janet, it is associated with feelings of spiritual transcendence and a softening of boundaries between “self” and “other.”

Somehow, it appeared Janet was able to temporarily disrupt the functioning of her RPL, presumably allowing her to shift her consciousness in a way that some would claim allowed other forms of consciousness to speak through her. Despite what I thought I knew about reality, and as crazy as it sounded, I was left with the conclusion that Janet was somehow channeling several people, beings, or entities.
...
However, I have seen enough to make me believe that our minds are capable of much more than most of us dare to imagine. While we may not fully understand how or why, it seems clear to me now that psi abilities are a natural and normal part of human experience, and that scientists should dedicate more time and resources to exploring them.
...
Personally, this exploration has opened my mind to a whole new world of possibility. Having witnessed “the impossible” on numerous occasions — in scientific settings, no less — I have come to accept that consciousness can extend far beyond the physical body. ...

FYI - his scientific papers: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeff-Tarrant

So she started speaking "something" that sounded like it might a language but nobody, not even she knew what she was saying.
Along comes a shaman who said it kind of sounds like a South American language spoken by an Amazonian tribe, then proceeds to go about making translations by himself with no third party verification. You'd think at least someone might have thought to bring an outside expert on the Xiriana language that he claimed she was speaking.

Our group of experts here are a spiritual medium, a spiritual psychologist and a shaman.

I can think of a number of ways they could have gone about verifying their claims which didn't seem to happen.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We don’t fully know what he did or didn’t do. And the unusual brain activity was his real thrust not even the foreign language.

But you can feel free to dismiss without knowledge. I’ll remain quite intrigued and think at this point that his work suggests something interesting.

Yes, we do. He claimed to be a scientist. One thing that scientists do is to double and triple check dubious data. That data was extremely dubious. Also as a scientist one reports all of the evidence, how one got it, one's methodology, etc.. If he had checked he would have told.

Would you like to go over the scientific method. If you want scientific confirmation you really do need to understand how science is done.

 

[George-ananda]

Yes, we do. He claimed to be a scientist. One thing that scientists do is to double and triple check dubious data. That data was extremely dubious. Also as a scientist one reports all of the evidence, how one got it, one's methodology, etc.. If he had checked he would have told.

Would you like to go over the scientific method. If you want scientific confirmation you really do need to understand how science is done.

Not really sure that short ‘ give the gist’ article was ever intended to document the scientific method.

Interested minds are encouraged to go further and judge what is interesting and compelling.

Determined skeptics are just in insecure defensive mode. IMO.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not really sure that short ‘ give the gist’ article was ever intended to document the scientific method.

Interested minds are encouraged to go further and judge what is interesting and compelling.

Determined skeptics are just in insecure defensive mode. IMO.

I was intended to show that he was not a kook just following woo woo. He claimed to be a scientist. A scientist would know how he failed time after time in that article. He only demonstrated confirmation bias at the best. He did not approach this problem as a scientist.

Once again, I know that you desire scientific confirmation of your beliefs. He failed at that. Any rational reasonable person would not be swayed one iota by that article. I am trying to help you, even though you do not realize it. It is almost as if you know that you are wrong and are doing your best to avoid acknowledging that.

If you learn how the scientific method works you might be able to apply it to your beliefs.

 

[George-ananda]

I was intended to show that he was not a kook just following woo woo. He claimed to be a scientist. A scientist would know how he failed time after time in that article. He only demonstrated confirmation bias at the best. He did not approach this problem as a scientist.

Once again, I know that you desire scientific confirmation of your beliefs. He failed at that. Any rational reasonable person would not be swayed one iota by that article. I am trying to help you, even though you do not realize it. It is almost as if you know that you are wrong and are doing your best to avoid acknowledging that.

If you learn how the scientific method works you might be able to apply it to your beliefs.

And to me you are an example how rational skepticism (a good thing) becomes an attitude and eventually leads to 'irrational resistance to claims of the paranormal'.

Arguing rationally that the article was only meant to give us a quick gist of a case and not be a full report is not going to fix irrational resistance. A person with irrational feelings will then only double-down unable to be really honest with themselves. Do they have the courage to ask themselves 'Why?'.

 

[HonestJoe]

There seems to be a fundamental double standard being presented here. He criticises the principles he (says he was) taught in his psychologically training were "atheistic" (which isn't exactly true), "logical and rational" (which is perfectly valid and what he claims he is still applying). He also said "belief in the paranormal" was dismissed, which is probably true but largely justified in the concept of it being belief in specific causes of observed phenomena.

That is distinct from scientific study of unexplained or emerging phenomena and considering the possibility of novel explanations. That is always valid in science - after all, it is how pretty much every scientific discovery and understanding once was. The problems come up when working in the areas of those beliefs and when efforts are made to confirm to established beliefs rather than being open to all possibilities, including misunderstanding, confirmation bias or outright fraud. And yes, "conventional" science can be just as guilty of that kind of blinkered approach.

The scientific observations he reports here are presumably perfectly valid and legitimate, but he seems to be making unjustified logical leaps to specific conclusions to account for them. I'd say it is perfectly possible (even likely) that our brains and bodies are capable of more than we currently understand, but that doesn't mean that will turn out to be anything like any of the massive range of different "paranormal beliefs" people have held. Indeed, anything that is demonstrated to be a real, explainable physical phenomena won't be "paranormal" by definition.

So ironically, I'd suggest this shouldn't have been posted in a "Paranormal Discussion Only" but actually the exact opposite.