Scientific method and Image Streaming. Question about researches on IS.

On 12/18/06, lmneedham <lmneedhamyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>  It's all in those words:
>
>  'I truly believe'.
>
>  What more does anyone want but to uphold the faith?
>
>  Bugger if their mind gets
>
>  buggered.
>
>  Science and scientific proofs?
>
>  That ain't nothing but truth and consequences.

Now, now, let's not start a holy war...

Is ImageStreaming harmful?  Well, if one wants to make that
claim,
they would need to cite at least one study that shows that
actively
thinking about something could ever be harmful.  To the best
of my
knowledge, no scientific study has ever shown that the act
of
'thinking' is harmful to the individual.  Too bad, too. 
Then maybe
all those people who want to censor what other people think
would be
justified...

Does it do 'nothing'?  fMRI has shown that no matter what
you think
about, it causes an increase of blood flow to the active
regions of
the brain.  Anything that gets blood flowing to the brain
has got to
be a good thing, right?

Sounds to me like the REAL question is, does ImageStreaming
do XYZ
(insert your favorite claim here).  Seems to me like we have
had this
discussion ad nauseum on this forum.  The short answer to
the question
is:  THAT DEPENDS.

For example, will a body builder used to bench pressing 300
pounds as
part of his daily routine receive any measurable benefit
from adding
another routine where he bench presses 50 pounds 10 times? 
Probably
not.  Will the 75 pound weakling get benefit from bench
pressing 50
pounds every day?  Absolutely.  Does the fact that different
people
get different results indicate that it is 'scientifically
unsupported'
or does it mean that somebody is asking the wrong question?

The same is going to be true of ImageStreaming.  How much
benefit you
get, and how measurable it is, really depends on who you
are, and
where you are in life, and how you process information
BEFORE you
begin.  Any 'scientific' study that is conducted would have
to take
this into account.  If it doesn't, it is no more valid than
all this
pissing and moaning that people do back and forth on this
list.  The
only difference might be that people will feel that much
more
justified in their dogmatic adherance to a particular
viewpoint.  Not
that they would BE more justified, just that they would FEEL
more
justified.

Instead of complaining about the lack of scientific support
for
ImageStreaming as a means of accomplishing XYZ, why not look
and see
if there is any scientific support for accomplishing XYZ at
all, by
any means?  Then, if there ARE means of accomplishing it,
see if there
are any similarities between those 'scientifically' proven
methods and
ImageStreaming.  If there are, ask yourself how likely the
results of
the one might transfer to the other, and what might cause it
to be
less transferable than what might be desired?

If all that isn't good enough, then you need to ask yourself
why you
are asking the question.  Are you trying to find a way to
accomplish
XYZ, or are you just looking for something to argue about?

-- John
--------------------------------------------------
John Arrowwood
John (at) Hanlons Razor (dot) com


 To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank e-mail from the
address you subscribed under to: 

       imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://gro
ups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http:/
/groups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:imagestream-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:imagestream-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.c
om/info/terms/
 

Hello,
Thanx John for that. Before I began to take seriously image
streaming 
I read on the forum the numerous people who were writing
F.O.C. and 
not for any personal gain- the positive changes in their
lives.
I may be a little bit naive but I take people like that at
face value 
and believe that these people are genuine. I just can't
imagine 
people posting long lists of improvements if they weren't
true. I 
mean what is the point. I believe that image streaming
intensifies 
considerably the union between the left and right side of
the brain. 
I can see that because I am remembering loads of dreams and
that to 
me is a clear indication.
I honestly don't see what is the problem. If you don't like
it, then 
why spend your precious time trying to knock it down. What
is to be 
gained?
I admit that I also am "all" for scientific
studies and think that 
they can do nothing but prove there is a wider range of
mental 
activity. Meditation is similar to me. 
The technique of image streaming to me seems to be therefore
a 
positive experience. In myself, I have felt no negative side
effects. 
I am working at it. I am trying to take the imagery that is
coming 
and seeing where it leads me. To me, working with dreams is
similar- 
you have a message from a deep part of yourself and you are
working 
to find meaning and apply what you learn- to grow. 
Others may spend their time trying to knock it down but
there seem to 
be a lot of people out there who are benefitting from the
effects. I 
don't expect to discover a new theory of physics to be
perfectly 
honestly with you like Einstein but then again, I am
working, open 
and willing to admit that my mind can produce what could be 
termed "genius"- I want to tap that.
Best regards,
Dean





--- In imagestream@yahoogroups.com, "John
Arrowwood" <jarrowwx...> 
wrote:
>
> On 12/18/06, lmneedham <lmneedham...>
wrote:
> >  It's all in those words:
> >
> >  'I truly believe'.
> >
> >  What more does anyone want but to uphold the
faith?
> >
> >  Bugger if their mind gets
> >
> >  buggered.
> >
> >  Science and scientific proofs?
> >
> >  That ain't nothing but truth and consequences.
> 
> Now, now, let's not start a holy war...
> 
> Is ImageStreaming harmful?  Well, if one wants to make
that claim,
> they would need to cite at least one study that shows
that actively
> thinking about something could ever be harmful.  To the
best of my
> knowledge, no scientific study has ever shown that the
act of
> 'thinking' is harmful to the individual.  Too bad, too.
 Then maybe
> all those people who want to censor what other people
think would be
> justified...
> 
> Does it do 'nothing'?  fMRI has shown that no matter
what you think
> about, it causes an increase of blood flow to the
active regions of
> the brain.  Anything that gets blood flowing to the
brain has got to
> be a good thing, right?
> 
> Sounds to me like the REAL question is, does
ImageStreaming do XYZ
> (insert your favorite claim here).  Seems to me like we
have had 
this
> discussion ad nauseum on this forum.  The short answer
to the 
question
> is:  THAT DEPENDS.
> 
> For example, will a body builder used to bench pressing
300 pounds 
as
> part of his daily routine receive any measurable
benefit from adding
> another routine where he bench presses 50 pounds 10
times?  Probably
> not.  Will the 75 pound weakling get benefit from bench
pressing 50
> pounds every day?  Absolutely.  Does the fact that
different people
> get different results indicate that it is
'scientifically 
unsupported'
> or does it mean that somebody is asking the wrong
question?
> 
> The same is going to be true of ImageStreaming.  How
much benefit 
you
> get, and how measurable it is, really depends on who
you are, and
> where you are in life, and how you process information
BEFORE you
> begin.  Any 'scientific' study that is conducted would
have to take
> this into account.  If it doesn't, it is no more valid
than all this
> pissing and moaning that people do back and forth on
this list.  The
> only difference might be that people will feel that
much more
> justified in their dogmatic adherance to a particular
viewpoint.  
Not
> that they would BE more justified, just that they would
FEEL more
> justified.
> 
> Instead of complaining about the lack of scientific
support for
> ImageStreaming as a means of accomplishing XYZ, why not
look and see
> if there is any scientific support for accomplishing
XYZ at all, by
> any means?  Then, if there ARE means of accomplishing
it, see if 
there
> are any similarities between those 'scientifically'
proven methods 
and
> ImageStreaming.  If there are, ask yourself how likely
the results 
of
> the one might transfer to the other, and what might
cause it to be
> less transferable than what might be desired?
> 
> If all that isn't good enough, then you need to ask
yourself why you
> are asking the question.  Are you trying to find a way
to accomplish
> XYZ, or are you just looking for something to argue
about?
> 
> -- John
> --------------------------------------------------
> John Arrowwood
> John (at) Hanlons Razor (dot) com
>




 To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank e-mail from the
address you subscribed under to: 

       imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://gro
ups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http:/
/groups.yahoo.com/group/imagestream/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:imagestream-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:imagestream-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    imagestream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.c
om/info/terms/