Guide and Info - How to do precognition

[Joe]

Sure, he has multiple high scores. Does that prove precognition? Just this one guy on a web site? You have to be more rigorous than that. I wouldn't dismiss it but it needs further investigation.  For instance, we don't know how many times this guy Tim K has taken the test; keep trying and you're going to get a high score eventually just by chance! And again, maybe he was using a system or intuition (which isn't the same as precognition). The staring test is basically a coin flip, just like playing Baccarat. I personally quite often get into the 4th Standard deviation playing roulette even chances.

[precogmiles]

Now watch Joe claim those tests are not valid because it does not suit his zombie skeptical mentality.

......

Sure, he has multiple high scores. Does that prove precognition? Just this one guy on a web site? You have to be more rigorous than that. I wouldn't dismiss it but it needs further investigation.  For instance, we don't know how many times this guy Tim K has taken the test; keep trying and you're going to get a high score eventually just by chance! And again, maybe he was using a system or intuition (which isn't the same as precognition). The staring test is basically a coin flip, just like playing Baccarat. I personally quite often get into the 4th Standard deviation playing roulette even chances.

So you asked me to prove it on a test you believed does not prove anything. You are clearly being disengenous.

You are blind to your own ideological bias.

Or maybe you are just a sheep waiting for your high priests to give you permission to believe in precognition. Until then, you will continue be a valiant foot solider in their cult of materialism.

[Joe]

precog, I have given you good reasons for why it's far too hasty to conclude that precognition exists because Tim K has got high standard deviation scores (which by the way, are still within the range of randomness). It's not my idealogical bias which is at work, it's best practice statistical inference. If anyone has an idealogical bias, it seems to be you. You seem incapable of even conceding that your results could be anything other than precognition, perhaps because you're committed to a whole load of other 'new age' baggage which goes along with it.

[precogmiles]

Tim K has got high standard deviation scores (which by the way, are still within the range of randomness).

Ok let us put the EC/staring test one side.

For .. link:s://psychicscience.org/esp2

scored twice
24/50 (score)    4.7730(z score)    0.0000018(p-value)

So how many tests would Tim K have needed to do to get that results by chance?

And remember each test takes roughly atleast 1 min 20 seconds to do.

8 people in this thread know this works, but clever little joe is going to teach us about statistics. This angsty skeptical nonsense is why I call you a sheep.

[Joe]

So how many tests would Tim K have needed to do to get that results by chance?

It doesn't matter whether you're being tested on even chance or higher odds; standard deviation is 'standardized', meaning it has the same meaning whatever the odds.
But I'll grant you that 4.77 is very good, the corresponding probability is over 1 in a million. Of course that doesn't mean that you would have to take the test 1 million times before you got a score like that, just as the probability of 1/37 doesn't mean your number won't hit until the 37th spin. Due to variance, your number could hit on the very first spin, or 500 spins later.

However, the fact that Tim K has achieved those scores multiple times has definitely piqued my interest, and perhaps I should take winforus' advice and find out for myself whether there really is anything to this precog stuff. I'm still sceptical, but I'll give it another try. I did try it for a couple of weeks and got no significant results, but I guess I should give it longer this time.

I found this site : link:s://thepremonitioncode.com/tester/

It has a training regime and you can take tests, and the owner does have some scientific training, although there aren't any participants in the 'Hall of Fame' yet. link:s://thepremonitioncode.com/tester/hof.php (you might have to register at the site before you see that page).

See, I'm not as closed-minded as you think. 

I'll give it a few months and report back. Anyone read her book?
link:s://:.amazon.co.uk/Premonition-Code-Science-Precognition-Sensing/dp/1786781611/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_img_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=5T9WJS4JA512PH5SWB43

[precogmiles]

It doesn't matter whether you're being tested on even chance or higher odds; standard deviation is 'standardized', meaning it has the same meaning whatever the odds.
But I'll grant you that 4.77 is very good, the corresponding probability is over 1 in a million. Of course that doesn't mean that you would have to take the test 1 million times before you got a score like that, just as the probability of 1/37 doesn't mean your number won't hit until the 37th spin. Due to variance, your number could hit on the very first spin, or 500 spins later.

However, the fact that Tim K has achieved those scores multiple times has definitely piqued my interest, and perhaps I should take winforus' advice and find out for myself whether there really is anything to this precog stuff. I'm still sceptical, but I'll give it another try. I did try it for a couple of weeks and got no significant results, but I guess I should give it longer this time.

I found this site : link:s://thepremonitioncode.com/tester/

It has a training regime and you can take tests, and the owner does have some scientific training, although there aren't any participants in the 'Hall of Fame' yet. link:s://thepremonitioncode.com/tester/hof.php (you might have to register at the site before you see that page).

See, I'm not as closed-minded as you think. 

I'll give it a few months and report back. Anyone read her book?
link:s://:.amazon.co.uk/Premonition-Code-Science-Precognition-Sensing/dp/1786781611/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_img_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=5T9WJS4JA512PH5SWB43

Yes, she is an interesting researcher, she also has a youtube channel. link:s://:.youtube.com/user/choosejoy69/videos

I found this talk by her very interesting;

Good luck with it!

[precogmiles]

It seems taotie has debunked me. According to taotie I cant do precognition so everything in this guide is nonsense.

Taotie 3
Precogmiles 0

[precogmiles]

A true precog pro can win and lose on demand.

[Kairomancer]

Those who look hungry are never get feed.

You have to be open and receptive state, but if your mind fixated on a conscious demand to be prove something, then it is unlikely to lead to a winning guessing.
You have to set your intention, then become reasonably deteached from it in order to attract a winning opportunity. When you attracted the winning opportunity you just know it inside with  a certainty.

[precogmiles]

Those who look hungry are never get feed.

You have to be open and receptive state, but if your mind fixated on a conscious demand to be prove something, then it is unlikely to lead to a winning guessing.
You have to set your intention, then become reasonably deteached from it in order to attract a winning opportunity. When you attracted the winning opportunity you just know it inside with  a certainty.

Do you feel you are getting better?

[Kairomancer]

I don't feel the incentive to play these days, so there is no point in forcing it to lose.
I cannot win on external demand as I am not a professional per your definition.
Having said that I think I am reasonably good at this without a constant need to practice.
What you need is experience to know for yourself what works.
When I get the feeling to play I know I can and will win.

My latest interest is in experimenting with dowsing Gizmo's Reading Random patterns to establish if they are in a working state or not.

[Kairomancer]

I have a dowsing rod somewhere. I need to play with it. 
Do you have any suggestions on how to use it or ideas?
I am total newbie with it.

[Joe]

Do you have any suggestions on how to use it or ideas?

How about this : write out the roulette numbers, by wheel order (ie 0, 28, 9, 26, 30, 11...) on a strip of paper using a large font so they are in a straight horizontal line and facing you. Then get your dowsing rod to point to the number which will come up next. Whatever number it points to you can bet it and 2 or 3 numbers either side. You could also use a pendulum the same way.

[Kairomancer]

That could work for some. Actually it is a decent idea.
I remember my parents used to measure blood pressure with a ruler and a pendulum when I was a child.
When they double checked with a proper device they got the same results.

[precogmiles]

I have a dowsing rod somewhere. I need to play with it. 
Do you have any suggestions on how to use it or ideas?
I am total newbie with it.

From my understanding the core of dowsing is just energy work. This means you do not NEED to use tools for it to work. I would suggest using a form of finger dowsing or deviceless dowsing.

I have personally been practising mental dowsing similar to this.

When at the casino you can't really use pendulums or dowsing rods. So it is definitely worth trying alternatives.

Good Luck.