TED Conversations

Tyrone Huckstepp

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

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?

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • 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."

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.