🛡️ Debate Hdr Debate

I realize I'm a new kid on the block here and I don't want to piss anyone off (too much) but I have to agree with the skeptics on this thread. If HDRKid is going to tell bold face lies, get caught red handed, and then just continue on as if nothing occurred then people are going to respond "unkindly" to say the least. I was interested in this HDR thing and I have read a lot of the back ground concerning it and after the effort I have made the following conclusions.
1 HDRKid is delusional and a liar.
2 Steven Gibbs is a fraud and his device may even be harmful to anyone using it.
3 Carlosx is a prime example of " a village is missing it's idiot".
I am aware this site deals with the paranormal among other things but I can not see any reason to continue the HDR/ HDRKid folly except to solicit the very kind of reaction that is being rebuked. If HDRKid keeps posting his nonsense people are going to call him on it. If they are then reprimanded for it eventually HDRKid will be the only one posting in "his" threads. Maybe that's the best way to handel it any way.
 
Peregrini said:
I realize I'm a new kid on the block here and I don't want to piss anyone off (too much) but I have to agree with the skeptics on this thread.
Click to expand...
I don't agree that merely by reading about something and based on 1 person's predictions, you can make a judgment call on anything, but it's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

I fully agree with you that there is no sense in carrying on an endless thread. If he is indeed a liar or fake, then just ban him and you will not hear from him on this site. It's as simple. It's more fruitful to engage in meaningful threads than getting worked up on something like this which is pretty much all I've seen :)
 
StarLord, Zeo, I appreciate your latest comments regarding this debate.

I'm not reprimanding anyone here and now. If I was, it would be about rudeness and lacks of respect, but never for the debate itself.

I did put on my moderator hat in this topic for a few posts, in order to avoid an escalate towards something we experienced a year (or is it 2 years?) ago with a member called Dr Z. Some members were excessively rude with him and he became ... really ... pissed. That wasn't nice to see.
 
I see a lot of negativity in this forum. What I do not see is an attempt to learn what is going on.

Who developed remote viewing?

The russians did back in the 50's. The US had to play catch up. These technologies are now available for free to all users. Rather than learn these technologies skeptics prefer to attack me. SOP is to use profanity laden posts.

OK the way you prove a metal detector works is you bury your pennies. Then you send to people to the back yard, one has a metal detector and one does not - and you see which one finds more pennies.
 
gold_30_day_o_usd.png

Did you see this one coming in your imagination?
I've an idea. Take a picture of all the gold you've bought in prearation for the future doom and gloom you predict setting on todays news paper, like you did for your new HDR, and post it here. That would atleast verify that part of your fictional story.

Himalayan Hermit;
I dont base my opinion on just reading about HDRKid and the HDR unit. I also base it on many years of study and work in science but I dont really need to rely on that to call BS when I see it. Have you ever seen a large electromagnet picking up metal in a junk yard? If Gibbs device "worked" like he and HDRKid claim. The employees in the junk yard would be "remote viewing" their ass off all day and never get any work done.
 
"Who developed remote viewing?

The russians did back in the 50's. The US had to play catch up. These technologies are now available for free to all users. Rather than learn these technologies skeptics prefer to attack me. SOP is to use profanity laden posts."

OK bub, you don't need an electromagnet to remote view. That medium can be done with paper, pencil, and a quiet room. The whole metal detector analogy is tripe...bottom line. Of course you are going to find more coins with one than without. It makes no sense that you would even write these sentences. As for profanity laden posts...I haven't read one in quite some time....unless you are just so sensitive, that you take every word as criticality as you do your predictions. So here's the deal Kid.....you want folks to take you seriously...then post some science behind the device. Not a link, actual science. That would involve using the Scientific Method. If you do not know what that is...I would be more than happy to explain it to you.

The Oxford English Dictionary says that scientific method is: "a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

A linearized, pragmatic scheme of the four points above is sometimes offered as a guideline for proceeding:]
  1. Define a question
  2. Gather information and resources (observe)
  3. Form an explanatory hypothesis
  4. Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner
  5. Analyze the data
  6. Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
  7. Publish results
  8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)
See this is why we ask you for video of you using the HDR. Not because we want to ridicule you, but because we want to observe the device in question. Not many people are going to strap that thing to them to test it. I once saw Dr. Z use the device. I was not impressed at all. You can probably still find the video on YouTube. Use the Method I listed.......Post full and detailed results of your findings, and allow the community (some members have backgrounds in the Sciences) to review the results of your hypothesis. This not only allows for a more civilized debate, but it puts to rest the questions regarding the device, and your bias towards it. (Definitions taken from Wikipedia)
 
Himalayan Hermit said:
I got you mate. I still don't see any sense in what I saw an ongoing rant between the Kid and a few fellows, but it's individual decision, so you're right. :)

"Look, most folks who understand this topic, it's main advocate(s) and the device, know that it is not what it claims to be"
>>I am curious and want to know how many of the folks above you mention in your line have "actually tried using the machine"? And I mean a full usage and multiple experiments to arrive at the decision that what you have in your hand is no more different than a dead piece of wood or plastic? Or are you saying something else about the Unit and simply refuting HDRKid's claims?

Cheers
Click to expand...

Himalayan Hermit,

If you had seen what the folks who had been around a long time ago had watched as the hdr Hoax stillbirth was constantly being reconstructed, resuscitated, revamped and revamped time after time after the hoaxers learned new concepts, this would be a no brainer for you. This by no means is any sort of sleight in your direction. In fact, you lucked out and missed a ton of nonsense.

As far as your second point, Call it a nanoseconds worth of fair dinkum on your part for all would have been clear had you witnessed it for yourself, that even bothering to consider asking "what if" about using the fake time machine placebo would be beneath your logic threshold. It borders on someone trying to expound on the positive points of Russian Roulette...
 
HDRKID said:
I see a lot of negativity in this forum. What I do not see is an attempt to learn what is going on.

Who developed remote viewing?

Say What? What happened to your "Astral Time Travel Machine"????

The russians did back in the 50's. The US had to play catch up. These technologies are now available for free to all users. Rather than learn these technologies skeptics prefer to attack me. SOP is to use profanity laden posts.
That's patent nonsense . The Russians did not "develop" remote viewing. AGAIN, Had you done your home work, you would have never brought this up as an example.
http://www.remoteviewed.com/remote_viewing_history_before.htm

OK the way you prove a metal detector works is you bury your pennies. Then you send to people to the back yard, one has a metal detector and one does not - and you see which one finds more pennies.
Click to expand...
Pfff. Your "Claim" that gibbs ripoff placebo actually works and your Track Record, which you would rather not have anybody know about or remember, says something absolutely 180 degrees different.
If you were able to do what you claim, you would have never been forced to copy information from other sources, use them AS IF it came from you during your penny searches. You have never been able to prove anything except your continued lame attempts at copying something some other peple had already wrote about. Stick to real live facts, show every body how you can see the next score from a sporting event this coming week. Give the score and the names of who scored what. No lies, No guesses, just plain facts.
 
The russian did develop rv in the 50's
http://www.whale.to/b/rifata.html

In the 70's US had ingo swan working with cia on rv.
The russian are always ahead of us. That is a sad fact and will only become more obvious as time goes on.

Right now, they are way ahead of us in quantum potential and scalar waves. The russians have intelligent engineers and we have debunkers who scream HOAX! It does take an Einstein to see the ending of this game.

Most of the technologies are easy. They do not require a genius.

 
Sorry to crush your fantasy bubble about the Russians in the 50's, OBE, Out of body expereices were known almost 2,000 years ago:
THE PRACTICE OF REMOTE VIEWING OR traveling clairvoyance, as I said in last week?s column, is not at all a modern discovery of Western science?only the name is. In fact, a good example of it can be found in the Christian Bible itself.

Chapter 5 of the Book of Kings 2 tells the story of how the prophet Elisha ?saw? what his servant Gehazi did outside his house without being there. According to the biblical story, the commander of the King of Aram?s army, Naaman, suffered from leprosy and was willing to give his great wealth to anyone who could cure him. A servant told him that a prophet of the Lord named Elisha in the land of Israel could help him. So he went with his horses and chariots to Elisha, who told him to wash himself in the River of Jordan seven times and his leprosy would be gone. He was at first reluctant to do so because it sounded ridiculous to him, but was later persuaded to do it. As soon as he finished washing in the famous river the seventh time, his leprosy was miraculously cured and his skin restored to normal.

So Naaman offered Elisha a present but Elisha refused no matter how strongly Naaman persuaded him to accept it. So, Naaman thanked Elisha and left with his chariots and horses. Unknown to them, Elisha?s servant Gehazi heard everything and said to himself that his master?s guest should not get away without getting something from him. So he ran after Naaman and his men outside the gate of Elisha?s house.

When Naaman saw somebody running after them, he stopped his chariot and asked Gehazi what was wrong. Gehazi told a lie and said to Naaman that his master sent him to say that two prophets from another land just came and they needed ?a talent of silver and two changes of clothing.?

Naaman was only too glad to oblige and gave Gehazi ?two talents of silver in two bags with changes of clothing.?

When Gehazi returned to the house, Elisha asked him where he had been. Gehazi lied again and replied, ?Your servant has not gone anywhere at all.?

But Elisha said to him, ?Did I not go with you in spirit when someone left his chariot to meet you? Is this a time to accept money and to accept clothing, olive orchards and vineyards, sheep and oxen and male and female slaves?? ?Therefore,? Elisha said, ?the leprosy of Naaman shall cling to you and your descendants.? And immediately Gehazi became leprous, as white as snow. (Source: The Holy Bible, New Revised Standard Version)

The above story is clearly a case of remote viewing because Elisha saw what his servant Gehazi did at a distance without being there. This could also be a case of astral projection, which sometimes happens during a remote viewing exercise.

The next remarkable case of remote viewing I found happened in the 18th century and was told by no less than the eminent and highly respected Swiss psychologist Carl G. Jung in his book ?Psychology and the Occult? as translated by R.F.C. Hull. This story was verified and commented on by the great German philosopher Immanuel Kant. I shall merely summarize the story here to save space.

On a Saturday afternoon in late 1759, Emanuel Swedenborg, the well-known Swedish mystic and seer, was invited by a friend to a party in Gottenburg, about 50 miles from Stockholm where Swedenborg lived.

Two hours later, at 6 p.m., Swedenborg went out of his friend?s house and announced that a terrible fire had broken out near his neighborhood. He said the house of one of his friends had already been burned and his own house was in danger. He went out several times to check on the progress of the fire, which was not visible from where he was at the time. At 8 p.m., Swedenborg gave a sigh of relief and announced the fire had been extinguished just three houses away from his.

The other guests were of course puzzled at what Swedenborg was talking about. The governor was told that evening what Swedenborg had seen, and the next day, Sunday, he was questioned by the governor about what he saw. Swedenborg, according to the comment made by Kant, ?described the fire precisely, how it had begun and in what manner it had ceased and how long it had continued.?

The official intelligence report released on Tuesday and submitted to the governor confirmed in detail what Swedenborg had told the governor about the fire, including the exact time the fire was put out, at 8 p.m.

What the guests witnessed in that party in 18th-century Sweden was clearly a case of remote viewing or the ability to project one?s awareness or consciousness to a distant place and describe it accurately. It is not a modern phenomenon but is as old as ancient history. The SRI scientists merely confirmed such ability exists in most people and gave it a scientific name.http://lifestyle.inquirer.net/welln...5/Remote_viewing_known__since__biblical_times

Nazi delves into the occult, OBE, RV way before the Russians thought of it:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_mindcon52.htm

However, this debate is about you proving your hoax isn't a hoax. This debate is about you proving you are not wasting everybody's time shilling gibbs placebo.

Prove that it works. Quit tossing out useless Red Herrings.
 

Top