This is a story on how Anne Schmidt was finally found. Using dogs and 'psychic information/intuition'.

It is not a 'perfect' example of 'intuition' but has the key elements ----- a lot of coincidental things happened.

I normally don't post things but since we have had a number of 'highly questionably accurate spirit articles' lately I thought one story that has key elements of a valid 'intuition/psychic' experience should be posted for a change.

Key elements in my mind (based on personal experiences):
---- A vision and or very strong feeling of what happened and 'approximately' where.
---- Daughter confirming that she believed Anne would be found by her mother.
---- Mother was firm on her 'belief' of the general location.

I agree it would have been better if she saw the exact location and didn't need the dog but apparently Anne's body was in bad shape and covered by leaves, etc. and it took a few dogs and good conditions to locate her body.

I think it is interesting the person with the 'intuition' was a Christian, not a Mormon. Mormons maybe should have expected with so many Prophets being inspired by God and in the True church, they would have been able to help the family instead of someone worshiping at a 'false' church.

http://www.standard.net/Local/2016/11/18/Finding-Annie-Schmidt-1-woman-s-calling-to-find-Piano-Guys-lost-daughter.html#disqus_thread



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2016 09:03PM by spiritist.

Makes sense. Not to me, but it makes sense.

To me it makes more "seance" than "sence"

Terribly sad story, every mother's nightmare.

I watched a couple of speeches by this guy a couple of weeks ago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Targ

he was a government physicist and they were conducting government experiments and as far as his team is concerned, they have more proof of remote viewing as real than physiologists have proof of aspirin being a reliable pain-killer.

Here's one of the speeches from the tube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgyYms376Mg

He did this research at standford.

That's so tragic.

Glad for her family her remains were found.

The woman's perseverance paid off, big time.

There is something to psychic intuition. In this case it didn't lead her directly to the body, but it provided key insights as to where she was, and how Anne Schmidt had fallen. Can/does heaven speak to us sometimes in such a way? I have no doubt it does, and can use people as conduits aka messengers from those above who watch over us.

For something as 'simple' as trying to get inside Anne's head to determine where she'd gone off hiking, Lydia's intuition was right there too. When her daughter had the spiritual insight during her church meeting that her mom would be the one to find Anne's body, that was another channeling from above. They are in tune with the divine that's all around us.

A friend of mine once stated that what seems like intuition is often grounded in reasonable clues. In other words we have perfectly sensible, rational reasons for thinking as we do.

The woman who found Annie was an experienced, local hiker who knew that area well. She tried to figure out where Annie might like best to go. She knew that Annie liked to take shortcuts. Assuming that a missing hiker fell off of a precipice is a reasonable guess. Some dogs assisted them. Previous searchers had not gone off the trails.

I'm not seeing intuition at play here. Just solid experience and good detective work.

Yes, but why keep explanations simple, when with a little bit of 'frosting', a pet theory can be validated?

You're discounting Lydia's own testimony of what happened to her to get her to go back to the site that the searchers had previously given up on searching ...

"That night, McGranahan had an intense dream. She felt herself falling, and as she fell, she saw Schmidt’s face — as if she were somehow inside her.

“I felt strongly, when I woke up from that, that Annie had fallen,” McGranahan says. “And that she was at Munra Point.”"

That is pure intuition at work, and her determination that led to the recovery of Annie's body. If not for the combination of her 'inspiration' and then returning to the place other searchers had given up on, Annie's remains would still not have been found.

The woman isn't claiming to be a psychic. She is a woman of faith who isn't ashamed of that fact. She was a conduit for channeling the higher energy sources to find the missing girl's remains. It wasn't something she sought out, for her it became a calling.

I think you make a lot of good points here. Especially, that we are not dealing with someone who claims to be a 'psychic' and any claim she does this 'psychic' stuff all the time. Everyone, has this 'potential ability' in my opinion but has to be 'open' to the possibility of it.

I get a lot of psychic information and would love to 'prove' that it is possible, however, I can't control it and maybe no one can ---- I don't know.

However, it shows up when 'some' people need it and whether we link it to God (as we know a lot of people, me included, prayed and wanted some closure for the family by finding her ---- dead or alive) or not doesn't bother me.

The 'belief' that there is potential 'help' from some source, we don't seem to understand yet, is what is important to me.

I could care less about the skeptics. There are hundreds of these type of stories and many of course not commented on, in news papers, on line, etc. because of the way they 'fear' others would take them.

That was certainly true in my sister's case after she had one she was elated only to find out some of her 'friends' questioned her ----- the 'peer pressure' seemed to affect her. Now she questions herself what happened and doesn't seem to bring it up anymore.

I disagree. I think she was literally "sleeping on it" -- the same way when you can't immediately remember something that you know you know, your mind will work on it while you go off and do other things. Later, the needed fact pops into your mind.

It's like a computer doing an anti-virus scan in the background while you do other tasks.

carl jung reckoned we all connected with the 'collective subconscious' whilst we are asleep. Mystics often claim it is possible to travel within 'other realms' whilst asleep.

I agree that 'sleeping on it' does help a lot of people a lot of the time, to find a solution to a problem. No doubt most of the solutions come from recall that the mind tracks down in the vaults of our memories whilst we are sleeping, however, on some occasions something different happens and this is debatable whether or not a person has received what could be described as 'inspiration'. Some might say the person always knew the answer, they just needed to 'remember' they knew.

One thing we can probably all agree on is that there are many different beliefs regarding the phenomenon of 'intuition' or whatever else it may be called.

If you watch the previously linked russel targ speech (his TED talk was removed) he claims there is as much evidence of remote viewing, ie non locality of consciousness, as is needed in science to say something is indeed a scientific fact. He compares his teams' statistical findings with the statistical findings regarding the reliability of aspirin to demonstrate how much more evidence they have for non-localised consciousness than is required by scientific peers.

Fascinating stuff.

Haven't had time yet to review what you posted above.

However, I have had 8 hours of RV training.

During the on line course I got 2 of the 3 targets correct. identifying targets were their 1st goals. They have gone far beyond that now that they are out of government (even though their funding is highly government) and doing their own research. They have got into aliens and even God type things.

I really like the idea they use to have multiple RVr's working independently on the same subject then cumulate the results to see if there is consensus ---- some claim over 90% accuracy through this method.

I follow a few RVr's and like what they have gotten as it agrees with my world view. However, their timing sucks ---- unless it is a true RV of right now.

Some have 'prophesied' of future events that they are still trying to get better timing for ---- they have to id intermediate events first.

I try to use it periodically.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree. I think she was literally "sleeping on
> it" -- the same way when you can't immediately
> remember something that you know you know, your
> mind will work on it while you go off and do other
> things. Later, the needed fact pops into your
> mind.

Exactly. When working on difficult math/computer problems during the day, if I don't solve them, I'll sometimes come up with a solution in my sleep. Not because of "spirits" or supernatural energies or anything else for which there's no evidence, but simply because my mind continues to work on the problem "in the background."

Sorry, guys, there's still no evidence here of anything "supernatural," no matter how much you want there to be. There's just evidence somebody's *brain* came up with a solution.

agree that a lot of 'sleeping on it' merely leads to recall from memory, however, have you reviewed russell targ's work? He is a theoretical physicist who claims to have proven non-localised consciousness and to have been taught how to remotely view actual things. I have no experience or knowledge of remotely viewing the future, but I do believe it is possible for some to 'remotely' view and identify real objects and places without any prior knowledge for their brain to recall.

Not claiming this to be supernatural, just something we do not yet recognise the mechanisms of.

Nothing is supernatural if all of nature is super.

anonuk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> however, have you reviewed
> russell targ's work?

Yes.

> He is a theoretical
> physicist who claims to have proven non-localised
> consciousness and to have been taught how to
> remotely view actual things.

Yes, that's what he claims. Yet he has zero evidence to back up his claims. So his claims are worthless.

> Not claiming this to be supernatural, just
> something we do not yet recognise the mechanisms
> of.

But we *do* understand the "mechanisms" of what happens with our brains when we sleep. Or at least a good part of it. Our brains sort through the day's thoughts and observations and events, sticking some in long-term memory, and discarding others. As new connections are formed for the storage of new long-term memory, existing memories are "activated," and that's what results in dreams. We're not conscious, but our reasoning still operates.

Look at the example of this "case:"

What was given in her "intuition" was all information her brain already had, or conclusions drawn from it. What her brain *didn't* have was an exact location and condition of the body.

And what's missing from her "intuition?" The exact location and condition of the body. The information her brain *didn't* have in the first place. No new information came from the "intuition," only a reasonable conclusion without exact specifics that from information her brain already had.

Had her "intuition" provided an *exact* location of the body, and its condition (covered with leaves, etc.) this might be a slightly more compelling case (though still not evidence of anything supernatural or paranormal). That it doesn't provide any such information leads directly to the conclusion that this came from her brain, not some "spirit."

I see that you are refuting the claims of a stanford research institute theoretical physicist because you know better than he? Good to know.

Now, to address the bulk of your post:

If you read my earlier posts you will see that I do agree that in a lot of instances 'inspiration' or 'intuition' is merely recall from subconscious memories which our brains retrieve whilst we sleep. But this is only the case in a lot of instances, there are other instances when this criteria does not fit.

Please do not take the conversation backwards by covering points raised earlier in this thread by other posters.

Glad to know where you stand on appeals to authority: your authority is obviously of greater worth to you than anyone else's, even if they have occupied a very high 'expert' role in their field of expertise. This is displaying an attitude just like mormons. Perhaps you too have not recovered completely either, as suggested in general by 'sickenedatthis'.

As I said, good to know where you place your trust and there I was thinking you were an advocate of changing your opinions if presented with factual evidence. It is certainly something you have promoted in other threads. It is a shame that you reject the factual evidence provided by an expert in the field you claim expertise in: physics.

If you watch the entire speech, he presents evidence - obviously you do not credit his research or evidence with any value. Good to know.

Many other theoretical physicists/scientists with equal credentials to Targ have repeated the experiments. Not a single one has found that remote viewing is accurate. Science is an ongoing process and a hypothesis is only as good as its ability to be repeatedly proven and verified. Remote viewing never has. Scientific claims aren't based on the person's experience or intelligence...just their ability to be verified. I think it's worth continuing to explore and it is certainly a fascinating concept, but there is no evidence as of yet.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 11:25AM by woodsmoke.

For sure, it makes total sence

Count the "hits" and forget the "misses." Therefore it makes sense that the "hits" are meaningful. Yup... that's irrational thinking for you.

HH. =)

I agree there are 'misses' when we (me or any psychic) attempts to 'get' psychic information. When it comes to me (for who knows whatever reason), when not asking specifically for it, it has been 100% accurate every time. Trying to 'get' future/unknown existing information however, is definitely an 'art' not a 'science'.

Someone brought up Randi. If all he wanted me to prove was that I had 'psychic' ability ----- and could prove better than what statistics would say I should have ----- I would be there to test in a 'New York Minute' if he would give me $1 million to just beat the 'odds'. I do believe with a little focus and training for an event I could do better than the odds (70-80%) ---- because I constantly can do that with certain games/tests I 'play' around with.

However, that is not what Randi expects, from what I have seen. He expects perfection ----100% accurate. I believe he fully well knows 'no psychic' claims they can do 100% ---- they are not perfect or they would not be doing shows or giving readings to earn money! Obviously, there are some 'people' possibly with some psychic experiences that say why not try for a $1 million ----- what is there to lose. Major league psychics do not take the Randi challenge because I think they know they are not 100%.

It is important to note here, someone can correct me if I am wrong, but 'NO' legitimate psychic or person claiming some psychic ability claims they can forecast/foretell/prophesy something 100%! I have done some study in this area.

Maybe some 'stage psychics' appear to 'infer' they are 100% accurate (know all and tell all mumbo jumbo advertising) but I have never heard a 'major league psychic' ever make that claim or read that claim in books or when specifically asked. Actually, most don't give you their percentage of accuracy at all as they don't track it.

Remote viewing (in which I had a little training over 16 years ago so maybe they have got better?) claims to be over 90% (based on the Army head of the project). This is the highest I have ever heard anyone claim as most psychics do not mention their accuracy rate. That certainly doesn't mean each RV psychic is over 90%. They have a strict protocol where they work a spreadsheet listing of items, etc. as independent teams (maybe 3-5 or more), it is not a long process. Then someone reviews their results and determines 'similarities'. They may rerun tests over and over to try to refine their results in certain areas identified on the initial attempts. Anyway, it takes a number of independent teams of people working the same 'target' a number of times, before RVrs come up with a 'final product'.


In the class we had one chance and that is where I got around 70% accuracy on 3 'targets', they didn't say what the average was but inferred most people got some things right on every 'target'. As certain 'things like water, mountains, etc.' normally are normally 'easy' for anyone in training to 'get'. Most of their targets involved a combination of many objects.

As far as the video above: One slide showed they got 9 of 9 silver trades correct by RVing. Actually, I don't consider the markets 'random' so that 100% is not as 'significant' to me than getting 100% of random RV targets. I do use this stuff, a little, in investing and 'yes' I 'believe' it does help! That is where 'real bucks' could be made if one wanted to display 'valid' abilities. You don't need to be 100% to make a good income in the market with psychic/intuition, etc. abilities.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/2016 07:34PM by spiritist.

I dunno. I don't claim to be a psychic, but have had numerous dreams that were intuitive, warnings for my family, and some were outright psychic premonitions (a couple had to do with complete strangers,) that came to fruition.

When Chandra Levy was murdered and went missing, it bothered me for days on end what had happened to her. Then 9/11 happened, and in the ensuing chaos the media all but forgot about her.

Prior to 9/11 and long before her skeletal remains were found at a Washington DC park by a jogger, I had a dream where her body was encased inside cement and buried at some obscure place (where it was I hadn't a clue.)

Weeks later in the news there was a break where someone involved with her murder had leaked some information to the media that she was entombed inside cement and buried at an obsolete military base somewhere not too far from where she went missing.

When her remains were found at the park, it was long after she'd been murdered. She was completely decomposed. It's very possible someone transferred her bones to there so she'd be found, which she was.

The paid for hire hit man was part of an organized crime group who Gary Conti had ties to.

I wasn't part of the search and rescue for Chandra, and yet was able to channel part of her horrific murder and coverup through a dream state of awareness.

That Lydia was able to envision the fall that Annie suffered causing her death, and even the location out of the multiple possibilities there were, was highly intuitive IMO and in plain English, psychic.

Amyjo said:

"I wasn't part of the search and rescue for Chandra, and yet was able to channel part of her horrific murder and coverup through a dream state of awareness."


So you're saying--with confidence--that Chandra Levy was murdered by an organized crime organization linked to Gary Condit and then buried encased in cement? And that the official investigation, which did NOT report any such findings, is just an extensive cover-up/conspiracy to hide the truth?

Whose to say she's not correct?

I've gt a feeling that Amyjo is really close to the truth of the Chandry murder. Only Condit had motive. I have a lot of respect for motive.

But you could come up with that line of reasoning without dreaming. Intuition would be enough!!!

That's how I got there. I considered the evidence of a pregnant aide and a married public figure. Plus the body was found in a place that had already been searched. Was the body meant to be found where it was dumped? It was a public place with foot traffic.

Intuition says the one with the most to lose most likely did it.

According to the Wikipedia coverage, the area where her body was found was NOT searched, due to a miscommunication between "the brass" and those delegated to do the searching.

Then after the body was found, "The brass" said "be sure to search the surrounding area!", but after they concluded their search, the Levy family private eyes went there to search and found a shin bone about 25 yards from where the body was found.

There was no mention of evidence suggestive of the body having been entombed in concrete for a period of time. But they were just using their waking efforts.

The problem with that reasoning, at least to me, is that we can't possibly know how many other people had motives to kill her.

1) Condit. Yes. But he had a lot of affairs. Was his wife unaware of his other affairs? Was the Levy pregnancy sufficiently worse than his other dalliances to represent an irremediable threat to him? If so, did he have the ability personally or through others to kill her?

2) Other married men with whom Levy had affairs. Perhaps there were none, but she apparently did not feel constrained by marital conventions; and to that extent there may have been others who wanted to keep her quiet.

3) A rapist. Perhaps not the man who was convicted of the crime, but someone else. There were other rape-murders in that part of the part in the months before Levy's demise.

What we have is one person with a motive but no knowledge of who else may have wanted to kill her. It's also relevant that the FBI's personality profile of Condit said he as just "a garden variety sociopath" (1-3/100 in the adult male population) and almost certainly not capable of murder.

Sometimes a possibility presents itself so forcefully that it blinds us to other possibilities. That may well have happened with Levy.

Did not say I solved the murder. Only said I may have channeled some aspect of Chandra's murder and how her body was disposed of in the early days following her disappearance.

The dream I'd had was well in advance of the news source that had an organized crime figure come forward to disclose some details of her murder. That she'd been entombed inside concrete and buried in an isolated abandoned military base, where no one would be looking for her or find her, is how it was described by the informant.

I dreamt of her being entombed in concrete during the time I was wondering like others were what had become of her. I believe it was a channeling from some psychic awareness that I had that insight. It isn't unique. Lydia, who had her psychic precognition as to where Annie Schmidt had died, turned out to be spot on. It wasn't chance or pure reason she found the body.

There were other forces at work you dismiss, because your mind does not accept there are higher powers involved with Lydia's intuition that aided in locating the girl's body, which you're unable to fathom.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 07:11AM by Amyjo.

Chandra Levy was entombed in concrete? Is there evidence for that other than the notion that somebody might have said as much? Was there ever any evidence presented in court?

Levy was killed by a hitman? Where is the evidence for that?

The hitman was part of an organized crime group? Where is the evidence for that?

The crime group had ties to Gary Condit? Evidence?

If there is evidence for any of this, I'd enjoy perusing it. If not, I'd ask why a pile of suppositions is more persuasive than each individual one.

Who needs evidence? It's like a plot line out of Goodfellas.

I used to believe a dude arose from the dead after three days, floated in the sky to America, and visited the ancestors of Native Americans based on a lot less evidence than Amyjo provides.

it was anecdotes similar to this, and the archetypal symbols used in the diaries of unconnected alchemists and mystics from different parts of the world in different centuries, that helped lead to Carl Jung penning his theory of the collective unconscious.

Once I was dreaming that I was awake. And when I woke up, I WAS!

baura Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Once I was dreaming that I was awake. And when I
> woke up, I WAS!


Hey!!!!!!!! Me Too !!!!!!!!!!! we must be psychic.

This made my eyes roll, which made absolutely no scence to me but it did make sense.

Because dreaming about some tired old mafioso body disposal technique (encasing someone in cement) is tantamount to psychic ability.

Dreams are not psychic. And spiritist, if you profess to not care about unbelievers and doubters, then why do you consistently and frequently bring up your beliefs- often when they are not remotely relevant to the topic at hand- on a site with people who are already proven to be skeptical of supernatural claims. Like, say, angel s visiting early 19th century teens to tell them where golden plates can be found a convenient length away from ones home?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/2016 08:52PM by midwestanon.

Excellent points made.

If you or anyone else doesn't like these threads ----- don't post!!

As far as my beliefs, I am 'recovering' from Mormonism and I believe certain things that I believe do pertain to the threads I post on ------ everyone is posting beliefs. It would be pure 'delusion' on your part to suggest anything else!

Of course you are not 'delusional' or posting 'beliefs' when you make statements that can totally be supported scientifically like:

---- Dreams are not psychic

---- you consistently and frequently bring up your beliefs- often when they are not remotely relevant to the topic at hand

---- site with people who are already proven to be skeptical of supernatural claims
----------Comment ---- Who says they are supernatural??? I claim everyone has the ability to receive these 'claims'.

Also, can you read? It is not just me citing 'experiences' or beliefs ---- read your own comments!

I suggest you learn how to communicate more 'specifically' in English and not be under the influence when posting!

.
Get ahold of yourself. YOU don't tell me or anyone else

where to post. We all post where ever we want. Your's are

quite amusing. Get over it.

Recovery from Mormonism isn't anything like Scampering to Lunacy, at least in my humble opinion.

Maybe if you labeled your threads OT?

Amazing!!!!!!

Have you read the 'topic list' lately and which ones are labeled OT?????

Wake up and Get Real!

Your statement was really funny!!!!!

I was trying to promote laughter...

and you were successful mi amor...

spiritist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amazing!!!!!!
>
> Have you read the 'topic list' lately and which
> ones are labeled OT?????
>
> Wake up and Get Real!
>
> Your statement was really funny!!!!!


Oh so psychic intuition stories are on topic????? The subject is relevant to recovery from mormonism ? Is that what you are claiming? See, I thought it was more like a national enquirer material, you know, I saw the face of Jesus on my toast.... or The martians landed on my roof. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

saucie,

I once lost my keys. I looked everywhere.

Then I had this feeling- all it could be is inspiration! It told me to go look harder in a place that I could have been.

Lo and behold. They were there! I'm a psychic! There is no other possible way anyone could have ever thought to look where they were! The most plausible explanation is that my dog saw me drop them and we had psychic communication OR an angel/spirit prompted me!


LOLOLOL

dagny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> saucie,
>
> I once lost my keys. I looked everywhere.
>
> Then I had this feeling- all it could be is
> inspiration! It told me to go look harder in a
> place that I could have been.
>
> Lo and behold. They were there! I'm a psychic!
> There is no other possible way anyone could have
> ever thought to look where they were! The most
> plausible explanation is that my dog saw me drop
> them and we had psychic communication OR an
> angel/spirit prompted me!
>
>
> LOLOLOL

I always knew your dog was psychic... Damn you DAgny, you
get all the breaks... ahahahhahahahahahha I love you.

Earth calling Saucie!! Come in please from where ever you are!

If you can read ---- read the op!!!!!

I am talking Mormons. I am talking Christians. I am talking revelation. I am talking 'prophets'. I am talking inspiration. I am talking about the 'true' church. I am talking about 'false' churches.

If that's not appropriate on an RFM site please tell me what is!

I suggest you learn how to 'read' English and not be under the influence when posting!

you are talking psychic/intuition about solving a murder mystery.... that has nothing to do with recovery from mormonism.

You are talking bull shit.

You are talking Woo Woo.

You are talking about things that have nothing to do with

recovery from mormonism, or any other religious ism for that

matter. Don't insult us with the notion that this topic is

deserves serious consideration.

Woo who? You didn't step out of line until you put being right above being nice. Doing that here gets a slap-down because it's so... Mormon.

If the woo is real, it doesn't bode well for old Joe. His Jupiter talisman gave him what he asked for, at a terrible price.

There's a lot more evidence, in terms of scientific experiments and instrumentation that mind is non-local. It really is overwhelming. But still, perception is a matter of indoctrination. No amount of evidence is enough to overcome indoctrination because our societies run on that. We start brainwashing our kids the day they are born.

Isn't there a corner of your mind that still entertains an ancient Nazarene?

It was my fault for even engaging him. There is no point in trying to have a rational discussion with someone who is so deeply ingrained in a belief system that relies on what is so clearly irrational, unprovable, and distinctly unscientific and unsupported by basic analysis and proof. You know, that whole 'scientific method' thing.

It almost reminds me of having to engage with a group of people that most of the people on this forum are attempting to recover from...

I would tell you to go away, spiritist, but you won't.

did you review russell targ's speech? he is a theorectical physicist, now retired, and was employed by the stanford research institute and his department provided enough proofs to the CIA that they received funding for 20 years researching and finding (to his scientific mind) more than enough evidence to prove non-localised consciousness is a scientific fact, and that it is an ability latent within each of us that can be developed with training and practice, like most other skills be it bookbinding, carpentry, drawing, playing an instrument, etc.

This theoretical physicist claims the scientific proof that consciousness is not tied to the locality of our physical being is more abundant than proof that aspirin is a viable analgesic.

I disagree with spiritist's belief system, but that imparts no special right to attack what (s)he chooses to believe as an avenue of recovery.

I normally do not feel defensive enough about my non-belief to join threads concerning belief. There are believers of various systems on this board, and I believe we are asked to respect one another, as long as no one is preaching.

To some of my fellow non-believers, you still display a distinctly group-think mormon ugliness in your attacks on believers, and your mocking and cruel enforcement of your designated "right" paths for recoveries, and the misguided notion of "where" they "should" be (arrived at your definition of non-belief) belie the "superiority" to which you simultaneously lay claim.

I suggest that you put your own mental houses in order BEFORE you feel the need to click on and respond to a poster you already KNOW to be at a different place in recovery. Why not just go to all the believers you personally know, the ones actually harming you, and tell them how wrong you think they are? It's as obvious a situation as the serial killers who kill everyone except the mothers who tortured them.

How very cowardly to anonymously group attack a believer, here, on a recovery board. spiritist was not preaching, merely made a comment on a subject in align with beliefs in which (s)he finds comfort. You go on goading spiritist to defend what you understand to be BELIEF, but not yet sated, go on to attack the very defense you personally provoked.

Or, maybe you BELIEVE you can bully spiritist into non-belief?

Some of you need to review the board rules. I am an atheist, but feel no need to mark each and every post as non-believer "territory." spiritist has every right to be spiritist, especially here.

Not all ex-Mormon atheists are hateful. It is threads such as this one I've noticed on RfM, that draws them out to attack the OP who just happens to believe differently because he (or she) has beliefs in a higher power and spiritual forces at work in our lives.

They are some of the most hateful people I've encountered on the Internet. To have thought they once identified as LDS makes me wonder if they were as militant then about their dogmatic Mormon beliefs as they are now about their atheist beliefs?

I've met some loving atheists before coming to this site. I didn't know how hateful some of them are until finding this site. It sickens me too when I see the personal attacks. Some are directed at me because I too share some of spiritist's beliefs. Although we differ in some key aspects, I still respect his right to believe as he does - even as it differs from mine. I also respect the right of atheists to believe in nothing at all but themselves &/or science. Here, where it's more accepted to be an atheist, the hateful ones team up to form an alliance against those who share faith experiences.

I'm sure I wouldn't have liked or cared for them as Mormons. As hateful atheists, they have about as little to be desired as they did back when.

Intolerance or bigotry is not unique to one religion or cult.

For those who are hateful, militant atheists, they are no better than a cultist of a fringe religious sect.

This OP is about a Christian woman who was able to find a missing woman's remains because of her reliance not only on rational wisdom, but some divine source of inspiration that guided her. She is a woman of faith. So what's so hard to believe or accept about that? Even if you don't believe, what's so hard to respect about her faith experience? I'm pretty sure the family of Annie Schmidt are giving thanks for her insight and dogged determination to not give up on searching in that place where others didn't have her vision or foresight.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 10:08AM by Amyjo.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They are some of the most hateful people I've
> encountered on the Internet.

Pot, meet kettle.
Dozens of times people have tried to have a calm, rational discussion with you, and you have turned to insults and rants. I can quote the relevant posts if you like.


> This OP is about a Christian woman who was able to
> find a missing woman's remains because of her
> reliance not only on rational wisdom, but some
> divine source of inspiration that guided her.

The entire point of the discussion was around whether or not there WAS any such "divine source of inspiration." It's not a fact because the woman says so. And evidence clearly doesn't support her claim. Just because people don't agree with your conclusion doesn't mean they're "hateful."

> Even if you don't believe,
> what's so hard to respect about her faith
> experience?

Respect is earned. Making outrageous claims of supernatural interventions *needs* to be challenged. It's the same stuff mormons have done throughout the history of the mormon church, claiming supernatural experiences as the basis of their "authority," and that it justifies their "faith." And just like in mormonism, the "faith" here isn't justified by evidence, and blindly "believing" it can lead people to irrational choices, bad decisions, and really ridiculous places.

You believe -- great. But you don't have the right to demand that everyone who doesn't believe "respect" your beliefs (or anyone else's), or accept them. Everything is open to challenge and discussion and criticism, whether you like it or not.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amyjo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They are some of the most hateful people I've
> > encountered on the Internet.
>
> Pot, meet kettle.
> Dozens of times people have tried to have a calm,
> rational discussion with you, and you have turned
> to insults and rants. I can quote the relevant
> posts if you like.
>

Please do. By all means! Isa waiting.
>
> > This OP is about a Christian woman who was able
> to
> > find a missing woman's remains because of her
> > reliance not only on rational wisdom, but some
> > divine source of inspiration that guided her.
>
> The entire point of the discussion was around
> whether or not there WAS any such "divine source
> of inspiration." It's not a fact because the
> woman says so. And evidence clearly doesn't
> support her claim. Just because people don't
> agree with your conclusion doesn't mean they're
> "hateful."
>
> > Even if you don't believe,
> > what's so hard to respect about her faith
> > experience?
>
> Respect is earned. Making outrageous claims of
> supernatural interventions *needs* to be
> challenged. It's the same stuff mormons have done
> throughout the history of the mormon church,
> claiming supernatural experiences as the basis of
> their "authority," and that it justifies their
> "faith." And just like in mormonism, the "faith"
> here isn't justified by evidence, and blindly
> "believing" it can lead people to irrational
> choices, bad decisions, and really ridiculous
> places.
>

It's only outrageous to you. It isn't to those who have faith. Fact is you once were a faith believing person yourself. I understand your ditching all religion in lieu of your newfound atheism. Not all of us felt so inclined as you. Some of us have had faith building experiences. Sorry you haven't.


> You believe -- great. But you don't have the
> right to demand that everyone who doesn't believe
> "respect" your beliefs (or anyone else's), or
> accept them. Everything is open to challenge and
> discussion and criticism, whether you like it or
> not.

There you go - admitting you are unable to respect the right of others to believe as we do. Being open to challenge, criticism, or debate does not include insults and putdowns. Something that flies right over the heads of some ex-Mos on this board.

I like there are atheists here. I enjoy the dialogue and banter when it's friendly. I also enjoy posts like spiritist's because they come from another place - one of faith and belief in a higher dimension than our own.

No one, including me, has the right to demand anything of anyone. Same goes for you. It's a big enough sandbox for all to play in. Some of us play more fair than others.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 10:47AM by Amyjo.

Waaah. Can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen. This is not a one time occasion; review spiritists post and you will see that he invokes his beliefs in almost every post he makes regardless of the situation, or whether it is even called for or not. I would guess something about 75 to 90% of the time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 08:29AM by midwestanon.

midwestanon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Waaah. Can't take the heat stay out of the
> kitchen. This is not a one time occasion; review
> spiritists post and you will see that he invokes
> his beliefs in almost every post he makes
> regardless of the situation, or whether it is even
> called for or not. I would guess something about
> 75 to 90% of the time.


you claim there is *no* scientific evidence -- yet my response in an earlier post was ignored. Here I will repeat it: please watch russell targ's speech or at least review his work, done at stanford research institute under funding from the CIA.

Obviously he gave them (the CIA) enough proof to continue funding the research for 20 years so they believed the evidence and believed the uses of the phenomenon would be beneficial for the US government.

Will you reject the evidence presented by a theoretical physicist? Is your 'knowledge' greater than his? Or will you continue to avoid looking at evidence that meets the criteria of 'scientific method' yet contradicts 'facts' that you hold dear?

That is behaviour programmed into you by the mormon church that you are displaying if you do ignore the information I linked to earlier in the thread. Are you scared you might find out evil anti-atheist information that has been manipulated to discredit non-believers? Mr Targ does not believe in a 'god' so he is an 'unbeliever'.

I think you cannot stand the heat, as demonstrated by your refusal to look at evidence which may cause you to readjust your own opinions. It would appear 'sickenedbythis' may be correct in stating that some in 'recovery' are still far from completely over the effects of mormonism.

anonuk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you claim there is *no* scientific evidence -- yet
> my response in an earlier post was ignored. Here
> I will repeat it: please watch russell targ's
> speech or at least review his work, done at
> stanford research institute under funding from the
> CIA.

MWA is correct -- there is no scientific evidence. Targ has *claims* -- he doesn't have evidence.

> Obviously he gave them (the CIA) enough proof to
> continue funding the research for 20 years so they
> believed the evidence and believed the uses of the
> phenomenon would be beneficial for the US
> government.

That some people "believe* is not evidence. If it were, then there would be millions of people providing evidence of the truth of mormonism, because there are millions of "believers." In the end, the CIA cancelled the program -- because the "believers" couldn't ever deliver on what they claimed.

> Will you reject the evidence presented by a
> theoretical physicist?

Appeal to authority fallacy. That he's a physicist (or not) is irrelevant, even physicists are wrong or dishonest.

> Is your 'knowledge'
> greater than his?

Irrelevant, even people with lots of "knowledge" can be wrong or dishonest.

> Or will you continue to avoid
> looking at evidence that meets the criteria of
> 'scientific method' yet contradicts 'facts' that
> you hold dear?

There is no such evidence, only claims that aren't supported by evidence.

oh you tie yourself in knots the way mormons do - what a hoot - honestly made me laugh!

So glad you found your role, MWA. Defend "your" kitchen on others' posts, scapegoat believers, respond to the current topic based on past interactions, avoid discussion through apologetics of your own behavior. Your non-thinking is clear enough for anyone to see.

These threads always get out of control, lol.If anyone is interested in reading a research evaluation of remote viewing, you can find one here. There was no real evidence, but they do say there were more "hits" than not and discuss why that might be. Interesting stuff.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.lfr.org/lfr/csl/library/airreport.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjcipapkbrQAhWHqlQKHbS4CXQQFgh0MAw&usg=AFQjCNGTWFnaD2wATd7oPz2k7gWJ52QskA&sig2=_eeiyBBJFunlgUV10CzAQg

From that report:
"In summary, two clear-out conclusion emerge from our examination of the operational component of the current program. First, as stated above, evidence for the operational value of remote viewing is not available, even after a decade of attempts.

Second, it is unlikely that remote viewing—as currently understood—even if existence can be unequivocally demonstrated, will prove of any use in intelligence gathering..."

Done and done, and so much for Targ's unsubstantiated claims.

I agree. I read it. I certainly didn't provide it to prove the opposite...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2016 10:34AM by woodsmoke.

You'll understand my pun below. Interesting posts. I don't know what to make of the remote viewing idea, exactly. Anyway, here's my experience with ESP, clairvoyance or . . . whatever.

Mom's beloved tiny dog went missing. Mom was beyond devastated. We had posted fliers offering a reward, searched the neighborhood, searched by car all surrounding neighborhoods and nothing. We wondered how far a tiny toy dog could go.

After the dog had been missing three days (and Mom unable to stop crying), out of sheer desperation I started looking on the (at that time "new-fangled") internet about lost pets thinking perhaps there was a lost pet service I could hire to do something different than we were doing.

Among the sites I came across was one for a pet psychic. Okay, this struck me as ridiculous beyond belief. But, given Mom's emotional state, I thought, "What could we lose (except the small fee)?" Plus, we could then tell mom we had tried absolutely everything.

My brother and I set up an appointment with the woman for a phone consultation (she lived in another state). When we started speaking, my brother asked whether it would be okay for me to stay on the phone, telling her I was a complete skeptic. He wondered if my presence might "inhibit the woo woo" (not in so many words, but you get the idea). She said it didn't matter, so I stayed.

Very quickly she told us that the dog was quite a few miles away in the home of a couple that was feeding him and had numerous other dogs. She said the only way to get the dog back would be to post a much larger reward -- and really publicize it around town -- not just on fliers in the neighborhood. We took out ads in several newspapers offering the much increased reward. A couple of days later, Mom was contacted by a woman who said she had found the dog and taken her home (some 10 miles away). (Of course, the dog was over 10 years old and had never left the yard before -- ever. My view is the woman made extra money taking pets from yards and watching for reward notices, but . . . whatever.) She brought the dog home, collected the reward, and household sanity was restored.

Fast forward a few years. Mom's beloved dog had died and we had replaced him with another tiny dog of the same breed. This dog was a rescue from a puppy mill. She'd been kept in a cage in a barn for five years with numerous other dogs and knew nothing of people or of the larger world when Mom adopted her.

This dog then goes missing a week or so after Mom got her. We searched the neighborhood and surrounding neighborhoods. Again, nothing.

What to do? Call our pet psychic, of course. We did and she said, "No need for a reward." She told us the dog is close by in the neighborhood. She is hiding deep in the bushes of a neighbor's yard not far from your Mom's house. She told us the dog is terrified and doesn't know what to do.

She said, "Go yard to yard, with some treats, looking way back in bushes and calling her name". We immediately set about doing that -- my brother going one way and my sister going the other. A few doors from mom's house, my sister found her hiding way back in the bushes near the corner of the neighbor's house, shaking and afraid to come out.

Not scientific, I know. Not proof by any means. But, I've always thought it interesting. Two very different scenarios for where a lost dog could be -- and the pet psychic was right both times.

Anon for this Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not scientific, I know. Not proof by any means.
> But, I've always thought it interesting. Two very
> different scenarios for where a lost dog could be
> -- and the pet psychic was right both times.

Was the pet psychic "right?"

Why couldn't the "pet psychic" give you an address or exact location?
Why could the "pet psychic" only give generalities -- ones that anyone could conclude from the available information?

Why is it that, as in the OP case here, "psychic intuition" is never able to conclusively provide information that *isn't* available to real, live, living people -- when usually it's that information that real, live, living people don't have that would actually be of most importance?

By the way, I'd bet real money that if you actually tracked the "hits" and "misses" of this "pet psychic," they'd match up quite nicely with chance. They always do.

That is quite remarkable!

Thanks for sharing.

Look guys. I am an RV expert. I have one with its own bedroom and powered canopies. I can travel to many places and see many things.

Thanks guys for the very 'open' discussion. I enjoyed it!!!!

Please know that anyone attacking me or my beliefs or me attacking them ----- I certainly hold no 'hate' or anything similar. I appreciate your 'passion'.

Also, please accept I am not 'preaching' as there is nothing to join except to become more 'open' people.

Now we should all take a deep breath and evaluate what we individually accomplished.

If what 'you' accomplished in the discussion was good for you ----- great!

If not you can take some time and look deeper at who you really are and who you want to be.

I don't often post but the last few 'spirit/intuition' posts were not very good examples of 'possible valid ones' and wanted to post one that was.

PS I am a guy and was the 'office comic' when I worked. Therefore, a lot of my wording was meant to be 'funny' as well as 'serious'. Sorry if I offended anyone!

I think you only offended those who see it as their new role in life to defend against the 'woo' everywhere they see it, even if they have 'shared' this belief before.

Bit like converts to a new religion - they are always more zealous than those born to it.