Tyrone Huckstepp

This conversation is closed.

Is channeling real/possible or just a hoax?

I've read a few books and articles about channeling and even attempted it my self with little success. There seems to be evidence in so called book and information as well as otherthings which people have channeled which are quiet compelling. 
The sorce of where some people get the information seems to be scattered tho, as some people claim it to be from higher guides/angels/old souls which is believable, but some claim to channel with deities/gods such as Dionysos and Medusa even planets such as Saturn. These seem to be a little more far fetched.

Channeling is acceptable in a variety of cultures and religions, so is it possible or is it just in people's heads? Or are some people just plain making it up? What are your thoughts?

  • Jul 22 2011: Channeling is not necessarily a hoax, it's just not real. There's already been so much written and said showing why it doesn't stand up to scrutiny as a real phenomenon and why people still believe in it, and all the other non-real supernatural claims, that the real question is how in the modern world we can finally and permanently move beyond these primitive beliefs. Then we can actually progress as a species, try to alleviate the majority of the suffering in the world, and move out to exploring the rest of universe, hopefully contacting other intelligent life so we can progress even further.

    The huge amount of work already done dealing with this issue includes the following:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jod7v-m573k&feature=related
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T_jwq9ph8k
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xswt8B8-UTM
    http://www.michaelshermer.com/weird-things/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demon-Haunted_World
  • thumb
    Aug 1 2011: I have no reason to "believe" in channelling. And lots of reasons not to.

    First, believing in it does not contribute to my understanding of my world or of the universe. My friend believes aliens will be "coming out" (and conducting worldwide enlightenment seminars) in a few months. His source? Several "reliable" channellers.

    Second, I have no personal experience that would support the existence of channelling.

    Third, I do have personal experiences that (if I so desired) could be misconstrued as channelling.

    Fourth, if channelling is possible, why don't the entities simply talk to all of us directly? - they could set up a TED forum or a psychic twitter account.

    Fifth, all of the channellers I have encountered seem to be using channelling as a form of self-aggrandisement.

    Sixth, it is easier to explain "channelling," and more plausible, using simple principles of human behaviour and cognition.

    Is it a hoax?

    Certainly, sometimes it is. But I believe "channellers" - some of them anyway - actually believe they are channelling another entity; not simply accessing their own "unconscious" mind and their own intuition.

    Is it possible?

    ANYTHING is "possible" ... and the aliens might be announcing their presence any day now.
  • thumb
    Aug 1 2011: I'm not sure whether the information is coming from where they say it is coming from, but if you want to read some INTERESTING shit ('scuse, I have a potty mouth), then I suggest you read "The Law of One" as channeled by the "Social Memory Complex" called "Ra."

    http://www.lawofone.info/

    There's a lot of information there in various categories, but I suggest you start from Session 1 and progress through the texts that way. If you do end up reading it I'd be very interested to know what you think!
    • thumb
      Aug 1 2011: Or you could just read this again! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channeling_(mediumistic)#Criticism
      • thumb
        Aug 1 2011: Really? Your source for disclaiming metaphysical inquiries is Wikipedia?

        I'm not simplistic enough to think that I know everything about existence. I also do not only acknowledge truth with my eyes. I am more than willing to believe in consciousnesses without incarnate flesh and meat bodies, as well as consciousnesses that do not necessarily communicate with mouths and language.

        If you have a problem with that, just remember that it's your problem.
        • thumb
          Aug 1 2011: Good comment, thanks I will check out the link. Referring to some of the other earlier comments, I can understand that people could be making it up, or active. But when I read some of the channeled books and text, it seems possible that this information is coming from a higher source than just someone's imagination. 

          If you are to believe in consciousness and see it as the foundation of life, this changes the paradigm from a simple physical, science based explanation for everything and opens up the possibilities for many thing that are undetectable by our senses. There for the possibility of channeling seems possible so do things suck as astro traveling, and levitation of objects using your mind. This idea comes from the point that all matter arises from consciousness and our minds seem to have a unique relationship with consciousness so there for maybe the possibility is there to connect with the the consciousness of an object and manipulate it in such a way. Just a thought :)
        • thumb
          Aug 2 2011: Well, you've already made up your mind haven't you? I checked your sources and I must say that my short wiki seems more reliable...
          But I'm not going to participate in this any more, I leave it to someone with the energy...
        • thumb
          Aug 3 2011: Everyone already has there set beliefs and ideas, and it is very difficult to give them new ideas, let alone change their mind, or view on things.

          To a point yes my mind is set on the idea that what you see isn’t what you get, and science cant reduce everything to a most basic form, so there for be able to explain everything through equations, that point alone is to say that we think we are above and beyond the universe.
          We are vulnerable if we do not know something or can’t explain it, when we are walking home in the dark and we see a strange shadow. Vulnerability is seen as weak and insignificant, If we are able to expose something, understand it, and explain it, we are beyond it. We have broken it down to something smaller and are now superior to it. The scary shadow in the dark vs. oh it’s just a tree. We have reduced the possibilities of what it could be to something we can understand and control.
          Science wants reduce everything to something smaller and so we can understand it, there for we can control it, and are beyond it. We will be the master of the universe. How arrogant we must be.

          I have made up my mind yes, not is saying this is how it is, but more being open to new ideas and possibilities, not just saying “well science can’t prove it, so your wrong.”
          I’m sure your mind is set as well, but I could only guess that you haven’t put much research into the subject, as your reference was Wiki, which it states it’s self that it makes no guarantee of validity of its content. (Just wiki search Wikipedia). To look at limited sources of information and look for the parts you agree with will only add confidence that your ideas are right. I m not trying to put your method down as i and I’m sure many people do it, we listen for what we want to hear. I only encourage you to open your mind a little to other possibilities and not just shrug off an alternate idea by thinking you know the answer and are beyond it by saying “I leave it to someone with the energy.”
      • thumb
        Aug 1 2011: I'm in agreement, Tyrone.

        In fact, I have a conversation related to what you've said above, here: http://www.ted.com/conversations/4380/beyond_just_science_and_religi.html

        Only difference is that I believe consciousness is the result of the infinite omni-universe experiencing itself. ;o)

        Thanks for being willing to step out of the "conformity lines" in your topic matter!

        P.S. As an Australian (or someone who lives there), you might be very interested to look into the philosophies of the Aborigines if you haven't already!
        • thumb
          Aug 1 2011: I've just read the first session of the link you posted, it's interesting so far :)

          I also like that idea; When we look up at the stars at night in awe and wonder, we are truly aware and conscious of our selves.

          I have read a little into the beliefs of aborigines and a few other primal people's. I love how simple and in touch with nature and the university hunter and gatherer people's where, if only we could have the same compassion and respect in this time
  • Jul 23 2011: Watching people who channel is like watching a movie. Some actors are more convincing than others. Channeling is just trying to act like you know without actually knowing. Lots of mumbo jumbo, strange tongues, shaking, mumbling just enough to make it seem real. All that is left is the placebo effect and the con is finished. People believe what they want and ignore the rest.
  • thumb
    Jul 21 2011: I'm sorry for not putting to much time into this but simply put - It's all bogus!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channeling_(mediumistic)#Criticism
  • thumb
    Aug 1 2011: Did any of these books or articles detail an experimental methodology that might provide evidence of said channelling? The James Randi Educational Foundation has been offering for years to give up the extravagant sum of money (1 million US dollars) to anyone who can perform the paranormal under proper observing condition:

    "At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event. The JREF does not involve itself in the testing procedure, other than helping to design the protocol and approving the conditions under which a test will take place. All tests are designed with the participation and approval of the applicant. In most cases, the applicant will be asked to perform a relatively simple preliminary test of the claim, which if successful, will be followed by the formal test. Preliminary tests are usually conducted by associates of the JREF at the site where the applicant lives. Upon success in the preliminary testing process, the "applicant" becomes a "claimant."" -JREF

    Now that's an offer most of us wouldn't pass up! I wouldn't why there hasn't been that many applicants?

    You can believe whatever you want, but in my opinion, evidence from hearsay is no evidence at all.
    • thumb
      Aug 2 2011: I don't 100% believe in channeling or paranormal abilities, in saying that I don't disregard them on the basis that there is no Proof or evidence.  Somethings are beyond our perception, you only limit your self if you have the belief that everything has to be proven.

      Can you hear radio waves with out the use of an instrument? No you can not. If I was to tell a someone in the year 800 that I was able to send a sound half way across the world they would of thought I was mad. My point is that many phenomena exsist, just because we havnt developed a technology or instrument to measure it doesn't mean it is not there. 

      Here is an idea about the prize of a million dollars:
      I'm sure some people do pretend to be able to channel, and do so for many reasons, including money; so there for can not prove it. Let's look at a deeply spiritual master who is one with the universe, and can connect with trees and the stars, he can hear the flowers telling him that they would like a drink of water, he connects with a manifestation of consciousness from another dimension,  he can hear the universe tell him the secrets (which arnt really secrets) that we are all connected and one. Do you think even if this spiritual master could prove that he could channel different sources, he would be even slightly interested in 1 million dollars? If I where in that position I would be much happier sitting quietly watching the grass grow.
      • thumb
        Aug 2 2011: "I've read a few books and articles about channeling and even attempted it my self with little success. There seems to be evidence in so called book and information as well as otherthings which people have channeled which are quiet compelling."

        You talked about evidence, I challenged the nature of this evidence.
        • thumb
          Aug 3 2011: Your right, I did mention that there seems to be evidence. So to challenge that evidence whether it is real or not would seem only fair, that is what I also have done in a way, by asking the original question. The seemingly evidence that I referred to (but did not exactly reference or specify) have all come from text I have read, so your previous comment would be right, to a point , if you where only focusing on these types of “evidence”.

          Also keep in mind that the original thought was not can it be proven but is it possible?
          This is where the hypothetical spiritual master comes in. Is it possible that someone who is so in touch with spirit would live a material, egoistic life, and broadcast what we see as a paranormal ability, but what is only natural for him, by written text through book or internet?
          I would say yes it is possible, very possible actually. Because we don't have the evidence, we cannot test it, so there for it isn’t real??
    • thumb
      Aug 2 2011: Besides, Matthieu, does existence require our species to observe it in order to do what it is doing?

      I hardly think so. Therefore, from my perspective, our species' "approval" of whether something is "true" or "not true" is only a safety mechanism we have socialized ourselves to "require" in order to determine what is "real" or "not real."

      It's all real, because it's all Existence. Existence is real, even the "crazy" formations.

      It's just so unfortunate, really so arrogant and Earth-centric to assume that we are the only living beings capable of determining "the Truth" in only our language(s). We've proscribed what is and isn't "acceptable language," we've created the technologies, we've determined - though still contest - what is "natural" and "unnatural," "possible" and "impossible."

      Seems like we have a pretty large stake in the outcome of our experiments of perception. So even our take on science is skewed. Science and "proper observing conditions" are not on some "holy" untouchable ground.

      At the end of the day, if I was to surmise whether our species knows EVERYTHING or NOTHING, I would determine - from the actual look and application of what we DO as a species - that we do not know shit.

      Therefore, I am not confident when it comes to boasting about Existence. Mostly I am just comfortable praising and appreciating it. There have been times when it has presented itself to me in unorthodox ways. I would have learned very little, and would continue to learn very little, if I only allowed Existence to teach me what I already think I "know."