Spiritual Forum

Replies

• • • • • • 

            Dreamsicle > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 11:27pm

            Mythbusters covered this. They used an EEG machine instead of a vintage polygraph so you'd think it would be more accurate? Maybe the polygraph machine used in the original experiment had some sort of magical enchant on it so only that one will work? XD

             

            From the link:Do Plants have feelings?

            Finding: BUSTED

            Explanation: In the 1960s, Cleve Backster, founder of the FBI's polygraph unit, took a detour from crime fighting to develop his pet theory of primary perception. Using polygraph (lie detector) tests, Backster concluded that everything — and we mean everything in the universe is interconnected and capable of producing emotional responses.

            For instance, according to Backster's far-out research, a polygraph machine hooked up to a plant leaf can detect the vegetation's inner energy.

            MythBusters Kari Byron, Grant Imahara and Tory Belleci replicated a series of Backster's polygraph experiments with dracaena plants (the same kind Backster tested), yogurt, saliva and eggs to find out whether the inanimate objects really can empathize with the stuff around them. After a series of tests — and after all possible human and environmental stimuli were removed that could sway the trial outcomes — the myth's prognosis came down to whether a plant would react to "seeing" eggs being catapulted into boiling water.

            Because all living organisms emit a slight electric pulse, the MythBusters connected the plant to a pulse-reading EEG machine, which is more sensitive than Backster's vintage polygraph. Then Grant set the timer on a machine in the plant's sight line that would catapult the eggs into boiling water at random intervals and left the room.

            Although the eggs faced a fate worse than Humpty Dumpty's, the plant showed no regard whatsoever. The EEG results revealed no spikes in dracaena electrical activity, leaving the myth — and a whole lot of eggs — totally cracked.

            -----

            A guy named "Ben" from this forum (he's the last commenter on the bottom of the page) says other scientists are failing at repeating the experiment because they're not following the procedures correctly. He says he's going to do his own experiments. Looking forward to it!

            -----

            Too bad it's not true. I would've loved to see what vegetarians who choose not to eat meat for (specifically) humane reasons would've said if they found out plants suffer just as much as animals when you kill it.
            • 

              pat pharr > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 11:34pm

              David Wilcock duplicated Baxter's experiment with same results as Baxter's.
          • 

            Dreamsicle > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 10:41pm

            So if this is true and not a hoax... plants do scream. Just because it doesn't have a cute cuddly face, doesn't mean you're not hurting it! :O
          • 

            Dreamsicle > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 10:39pm

            Lol. The Japanese lady trying to teach her beloved cactus the alphabet cracked me up.

            Okay. I have not read the book, obviously. But I did get plenty of info from the video. They attached a polygraph to the plant. And then the people thought certain things to test it's responses.

            Here's the thing... it's not that hard to fake it. And a polygraph machine in the 70s... maybe not the most reliable thing, ya know? IF the hypothesis that plants do react to our thoughts is true... then these experiments should be able to be repeated, and with more advanced equipment... yeah? And IF it is true... wouldn't more people be like, "woah no way?!" and pursue the truth and repeat the experiment? Know what I mean?

            When I see stuff like this.. I imagine getting the people responsible for this into a room and having one guy whisper to me, "ya know, what most people don't know is that...." and then they tell me their secret to fooling people about it much like a magician sharing their tricks.

            Then again people might see it as a waste of time in regards to using resources wisely (like cancer cures, etc).
            • 

              faith > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 10:56pm

              Yeah . . . You would think. You would also think that when Neuro scientist Jill Bolte- Taylor had a stroke and was able to track exactly what was happening and than gave a talk explaining how she experienced being connected with The All of everything . . .by being aware exclusively of the right brain circuitry . . And then implores humanity to grasp the importance of choosing right brain perception . . .
              "People would "be like woah no way", also . . . But that just goes to show what does and does not impress People nowadays! Too much fake reality t-v I guess.
          • 

            faith > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 10:36pm

            Look . . .if you are actually interested, I have given you enough info for you to do your own research. As I stated, it was done under scientific guidelines. The
            Subjects of remote viewing were located hundreds of miles a part and more than one subject received identical imagery.
            From your last comment, it feels more like you are trying to prove that it was a hoax . . . So maybe your time would be better spent not trying so hard to prove others wrong and find out what you would like to conclude based on what DOES appeal to you . . . You know . . . heart connections!
            Be Peace
            • 

              Dreamsicle > faith May 29, 2013 at 10:53pm

              Maybe it's not about proving things wrong but hoping things are right.

              Since we're sharing what we feel. It feels like you're more interested in defending your belief in this experiment than you are with engaging in healthy conversation about it.

              I'll be around if you're interested in talking about this experiment instead of me.
        • 

          faith > faith May 29, 2013 at 10:12pm

          Here is a helpful link. : )
          
          http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&redir_esc=&client=ms-and...

          the secret life of plants book - Google Search
    • 

      faith > Dreamsicle May 29, 2013 at 8:22pm

      "I don't think anything is completely accurate."
      
      A compelling case was made by scientific minds, using double blind tests, which demonstrated a higher intelligence connecting both the mind of humans and the awareness/sentience of plants and everything else.
      DS . . .Are you aware of the study, to which I refer, or are you just nit picking?
• 

  Light Being May 29, 2013 at 6:56pm

  As early as 1976, Damanhurian researchers had created equipment capable of capturing electromagnetic changes on the surface of leaves and roots and transforming them into sounds.

  The original electrical signal from the plant is a kind of variation in the electric activity of the plant itself and it occurs when they respond to external events, the device can translate electrical signal into MIDI signal. MIDI is a standard signal used by Keyboards, Synthesisers and Computers fro music.

  The desire for a profound contact with nature is also the inspiration for the ‘Plant Concerts’, where the musicians perform to the accompaniment of melodies created by the trees. The trees learn to control their electrical responses, as if they are aware of the music they are creating. Research continues on creating a model of this device easily available to the public so that this profound experience of communication with the plant world can be shared with whoever desires it.

  I have an old rather battered tape recording of the 'music of plants' ...Its quite compelling and profound, blows the senses away. I see the geometrical shapes and colours and it surely talks to me, a deeper understanding for the world of plants and their right to life.

  http://youtu.be/4ZX5B_p79V4

  Music of the plants- Anthurium improvisation 432Hz

  This music of sound is truly beautiful.