Re: [ET2] ET and Tachyon

On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 10:57:05 +0000
Nicola <nicola_at_1CJnegcjpfeuzKFNwlXqr9JplOaXgv2qbdgC_oonfkxuKzJYbzLYiTHHF_PE0-t7QKKdNxuMhWFsQA.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> Thanks for that. Another one for the collection which includes some very
> distinguished proof that homoepathy is a load of tripe as is also the
> possibility of an energy body and indeed even God.

Now don't be cross, Nicola! The Cerenkov radiation prediction from
Feinberg's theory has never been found, which was a critical proof (and
testable) of his Tachyon theory.

> I am not a scientist (and not a particularly eloquent writer I'm afraid)
> but I am an explorer and have spent the last 25 years checking stuff out
> and using what works and tachyon works, whether the particles are actually
> what Feinberg first theorised or not.

Yes, the "power" of your marketed crystals could be something else, who
knows? Maybe the power of suggestion or Intent.

> It's bloody powerful stuff which scares the hell out of some people but
> then there's a homeopathic remedy, which in a particular potency, if
> dropped into the mouth of a coma victim would snuff out their life force
> quicker than you could say tachyon.

Actually, it was too bad you lumped God and homeopathy into your
generalization (above). I happen to know quite a bit about homeopathy ......
I've published twice in the past year in two medical journals on new
chemical research that shows how homeopathy may actually work.
Aconite might be one remedy that could resuscitate
your coma victim. Please tell me what could turn his lights out?

> I've seen tachyon relieve pain and misery over the last 7 years (it works
> particularly well for arthritis) in people who really don't know or even
> care about quantum physics and it's certainly not placebo because for the
> first year while I was investigating I only used it on animals.

With animals, it could be just the Intent of your energy field
interacting with theirs.

> As with most things new, the proof of the pudding blah blah, as Nicholas
> and many others are now finding out about ET.

Quite so, but it doesn't need to be grounded in pop science for
authenticity. Standalone empiricism is perfectly good science.

Again, no muddy waters for me!

Brian :)

Brian R. Connelly, LMHC < brc17_at_LexdtQ07v-TjzFV9m7SHSiqk__0l5YLs5J7C0O64XBt7aiDlPHnfWpG0z46oZK7DPFnhT_pwdKJ6.yahoo.invalid >
Licensed Counselor & Therapist, Topsfield, MA
Emotional Freedom & Healing at:
< http://home.attbi.com/~brc17/ >

           
Received on Wed Feb 12 2003 - 19:54:03 GMT