William Tiller?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Healer
  • Start date Start date
H

Healer

Guest
What is the opinion of this forum on William Tiller's water pH experiment? He did a double blind test with several sites where 4 meditators imprinted an electronic device with the concept of raising the pH (and also reducing the pH) by a full point. Half the devices had no such imprint. These devices were then sent across the country where it was reported as raising (reducing) the pH of water that was placed near only the imprinted devices.

http://www.tiller.org

There sure seems to be a lot of data and unlike many others that make claims, he seems to have his act together. Am I missing something?
 
This has been mentioned in Secret History, p.5:

Secret History said:
The question is: What did they accomplish? Based on the descriptions, it sounds pretty earth shaking, right? Well, as noted, after almost 400 pages we find that the most significant result seems to have been changing the pH of a small sample of water.

Yup. That’s it.

Nevertheless, this is important for the simple reason that they managed to scientifically demonstrate a principle, even if the overall result was that it was most often -an iffy proposition and there didn’t seem to be a lot of control. Most results were “statisticalᾠ and this has always been a problem with the “create your own realityᾠ idea. When all the data is examined, what we generally find is that it is six of one, half dozen of the other. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. What the real rules are, nobody seems to know.
 
Are you saying that chaging pH by 1 full point is insignificant??

Keep in mind that the only thing that was done was to put a device next to the water. No chemicals added. Turning water to vinegar is about changing pH isn't it? Most people would consider that quite significant.

In science, it is not about the mass involved, but the principles. For example, the ability to create a switch out of a tiny sliver of silicon could be trivialized as "it's only a single switch that's really small and useless". I would claim that the silicon switch has had quite a large impact as it spawned the digital revolution.

Don't you think that being able to remotely cause physical changes via thought is at least as significant as a silicon switch?
 
You may like to read:

http://opensys.blogspot.com/search?q=tiller
 
Thanks for the link, but it does not address the main issue at all. It seems to want to belittle Tiller's work, but it doesn't say that his results are invalid. So, if the result is valid, then regardless of the accuracy of his 9 dimensional biosuit whatevers, the fact remains that there is a very interesting result.

I don't really care about his theories at this point as necessarily it has to be pretty much all speculative. It is the data point that is of tremendous importance.

For example, if we found a single dog that could actually talk intelligently, that would sure be significant, even though it might only be the only known talking dog and we had no idea how it was able to talk.

Did human intention actually change the pH of water? +1 pH with one device and -1 pH with the other, no way that is random fluctuation of pH. Let's ignore his theoretical stuff as there is no data to support or dispute it. The data about changing pH is either fraudulent made up data or real. Nobody is accusing him of faking it, so I am presuming it is real. If it is real, then why aren't people a LOT more interested in it??
 
<< If it is real, then why aren't people a LOT more interested in it?? >>

Hi Healer, I'll risk answering based on what I think your query is about, though I could be wrong, of course. I think the reason people here might not be so interested is because the forum's focus tends to be about spiritual growth, of which manifesting psi powers or creating interesting devices is not a goal. Such things are certainly interesting avenues of study and extremely useful to get the attention of (awaken) people to a universe much more open to possibilities. However, once one becomes awakened to infinite possibilities, such things are potentially only distractions from work on the self. Ra, for exampled, explained that such phenomena are presented to people as a way to enlighten to them to infinite possibility, to spur their truth-seeking.

Ra also put it, "Some are more able to use intelligent infinity than others." It is not necessarily an indicator of spiritual growth. Ra:
The healing ability, like all other, what this instrument would call, paranormal abilities, is affected by the opening of a pathway or shuttle into intelligent infinity. There are many upon your plane who have a random hole or gateway in their spirit energy energy field, sometimes created by the ingestion of chemicals such as, what this instrument would call LSD, who are able, randomly and without control, to tap into energy sources... To others there may appear to be miracles. To the one who has carefully opened the door to intelligent gent infinity this is ordinary; this is commonplace; this is as it should be.
So, not special, spiritual growth-wise. Post again if you were looking for a response to a different query.

As to why the general public might not be so interested, well, for me, my awakening to infinite possibility was a close UFO sighting. Now, the story of UFOs and the story of changing pH by thought might be closely related in that if there is some military or other PTB-serving application for such things, then it gets laughed out to the fringes of acceptability even to mention it while at the same time being studied intensely with grave seriousness behind secret closed doors -- interest is hidden.
 
Healer said:
Thanks for the link, but it does not address the main issue at all. It seems to want to belittle Tiller's work, but it doesn't say that his results are invalid.
You did not read with attention. Tiller's results are invalid, because what he writes is a total nonsense. Therefore also the methodology is questionable, when it comes from such a man. On the other hand the results with changing pH are not Tiller's results, but "four experienced meditators". If Tiller's methodology is similar to that used in other such experiments (like with decreasing the crime rate in NYC), then we can only laugh (or cry).

Next time you post, please, think more rationally and pay more attention to what you are reading.
 
Ark, no offense, but I read the Tiller papers themselves and they did not strike me as "total nonsense". What in particular about his experiment do you find laughable?

I prefer to go to the source of the matter at hand, rather than read somebody else interpretation or a paraphrasing of somebody else's interpretation of the actual thing. Tiller has what appears to me a description of a traditional double blind scientific study. Could you be so kind as to point out what part of his experimental methodology is nonsense or laughable? Have you read the original Tiller papers on the pH experiment?

Towards General Experimentation and Discovery in Conditioned Laboratory Spaces: Part II. pH-Change Experience at Four Remote Sites, 1 Year Later on his tiller.org site
 
Adpop, thanks for the explanation!

So for people who are already aware that the official version of reality is unreal, these things would appear to be silly. I guess my emotion on this is that there seem to be two camps of people:

1. They know it is real
2. They have concluded it is not real

So, for people who know it is real it is beating a dead horse. What's the point. For people that assume it can't be real, then they would only respond to it if they can "prove" it isn't real. Logically, it is impossible to prove a negative though so people in the second camp have made a logical error...

Personally, I have a bit more complicated position as I know there is a lot that is considered paranormal that happens all the time, but at the same time, there are a lot of claimed paranormal stuff that is totally junk. There are also an incredible amount of possibilities that we can't even imagine. While science isn't exactly the best way to achieve spiritual growth, it does have the ability to build on results and if we can bridge the gap between normal and paranormal with the scientific method, then I feel that we can get to where we can make gizmos that will dramatically accelerate spiritual growth, not to mention healing.
 
Perhaps it will give additional context to have the full quote about the Tiller experiments from Secret History:

Secret History said:
The questions about how our beliefs may shape our reality are among the most significant in all of consciousness research. And so it is that many seekers step outside of the “standard religionsᾠ and begin to seek the “truthᾠ of the ways and means of Ascension.

As noted, “Ascensionᾠ is discussed widely in books, articles, on the Internet, in classes and workshops, and other media. The general trend of ideas expressed includes the search for the “one thing that will transform your life.ᾠ

Various “techniquesᾠ are advertised which promise to provide stress relief and even the “key to the highest levels of human consciousness.ᾠ The shopper in the market of ascension “toolsᾠ is told that they can now make a choice to “swiftly and easily free the nervous system from stress, enjoy maximum creativity, clarity and health, experience inner peace, fulfillment and joy,ᾠ and of course, change one’s self-limiting beliefs.

Another perspective on “ascensionᾠ tells us that ascension is “the way to integrate all portions of your self in a conscious way.ᾠ The seeker is told that he or she is a “multi-dimensional being who seeded portions of itself into the physical realityᾠ and that fully “remembering who you areᾠ is the act of integration and the “removal of the veil of time, identities and separateness in yourself.ᾠ What, precisely, the result will be—other than being “healthy, wealthy and wiseᾠ—is not clear.

As we read further in the available literature, we discover other ideas. One “expertᾠ on the subject tells us that this thing called “ascensionsᾠ was only achieved in the past upon dying, and that now people can do it and take their physical body with them. He suggests that spirituality is so advanced in the present age that souls can graduate more quickly. It is as though he is suggesting a “grading curveᾠ has been instituted so that the requirements are lessened. Either that, or he hasn’t been paying much attention to what is going on “out there.ᾠ

The evidence of “advanced spirituality“ in our world is severely lacking in spite of the New Age claims that “light workers“ can “help bring forth the ascension for the masses before physical death, before totally wearing out the physical body in resistance to evolution. Much more energy can be expended on the positive and much less wasted on the negative.ᾠ

Again, we note that objective reality does not support such a claim. If anything, since the inception of the New Age “movement,ᾠ if it can be so called, things have gotten a lot worse.

This leads to another point: it seems that we must accept the objective fact that attempts to change the world spiritually, or to regulate large scale events, simply do not work. Yes, there does seem to be evidence that individuals or small groups of individuals can make small changes or produce effects with a limited range of influence. But for some reason, the world as it is, seems to operate based on rules or laws that we do not understand. The fundamental nature of the physical world seems to be antithetical to this “spiritualization.ᾠ

One recent work that attempts to provide a scientific explanation for this ability to influence the world, Conscious Acts of Creation, tells us:

This book marks a sharp dividing line between old ways of scientific thought and old experimental protocols, wherein human qualities of consciousness, intention, emotion, mind and spirit cannot significantly affect physical reality, and a new paradigm wherein they can robustly do so!
The book, written by three mainstream scientists, goes on to tell us that:

…utilizing a unique experimental protocol on both inanimate and animate systems, that the human quality of focused intention can be made to act as a true thermodynamic potential and strongly influence experimental measurements for a variety of specific target experiments.
After almost 400 pages of math and speculation and descriptions of experiments we are told:

Under some conditions, it is indeed possible to attach an aspect of human consciousness, a specific intention, to a simple electrical device and have that device, when activated, robustly influence an experiment conducted in its vicinity in complete accord with the attached intention. Thus, if they do it right, humans can influence their environment via specific, sustained intentions. […]

Some new field appears to be involved in the information passage that occurs between conditioned locales that are widely separated from each other in physical space. Even with transmitters and receivers located inside electrically grounded Faraday cages, highly correlated patterns of information appeared in the remotely located locales.[…] Although we don’t fully understand them, we now have some new tools with which to probe the deeper structures of the universe and a new adventure is underway for humanity.
It is important to note that the “intendersᾠ of the experiments were long-time practitioners of Siddha Yoga and could thus be considered metaphysically “in tuneᾠ to some considerable extent. The question is: What did they accomplish? Based on the descriptions, it sounds pretty earth shaking, right? Well, as noted, after almost 400 pages we find that the most significant result seems to have been changing the pH of a small sample of water.

Yup. That’s it.

Nevertheless, this is important for the simple reason that they managed to scientifically demonstrate a principle, even if the overall result was that it was - most often - an iffy proposition and there didn’t seem to be a lot of control. Most results were “statistical“ and this has always been a problem with the “create your own reality“ idea. When all the data is examined, what we generally find is that it is six of one, half dozen of the other.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. What the real rules are, nobody seems to know.

While we all might like to think we can transform our world by praying and/or thinking positively, we must remember that there is a great deal of evidence that real transformations of the planet have repeatedly been cataclysmic. A philosophy, which ignores this fact, is courting disaster.
Healer said:
I read the Tiller papers themselves and they did not strike me as "total nonsense".
What is your line of work and/or educational background that qualifies you to make an assessment?
 
I have a bachelor's degree in math, heavy computer science background, over a dozen patents in various fields. I also believe I have a relatively high level of common sense.

You might think the biosuit theory is nonsense, but Tiller is only trying to explain the observed data. If you don't like his theory, then how would you explain the observed data? biconformal spaces cannot be proven to be invalid, can it? Why debate what somebody else's interpretation of Tiller's work is when we have his paper on tiller.org "Towards a Quantitative Science and Technology that Includes Human Consciousness"

What in this paper do you find to be nonsensical? I am not saying that I fully understand it, nor that it is 100% correct, but it doesn't fall in the same category as Bearden stuff, does it?

When we test the effectiveness of medicines, we use a statistical process and if there is a statistically significant effect, we accept it. I am not sure why the same does not apply to Tiller's work. In any case, from what I read, there was a 100% correlation of changing the pH of water. If that really did happen and the data wasn't fabricated, it sure doesn't seem like nonsense to me.

His theories about biosuits, biconformal spaces with additional dimensions, etc. is NOT what I am talking about. If you want to ascribe the word "nonsense" to that, then I won't stop you but keep in mind it is the best (only) theory to explain the observed data so far. My only point is that if the pH of water can be reliably changed via human intent stored in an electronic device, that is akin to the discovery of radioactive particles. I don't think many people would say that radioactivity is "nonsense".

We have a phenomenon that previously was only observed in an ad hoc manner that is now reproducible under controlled conditions. So, has anybody claimed that Tiller faked the data? I am only talking about the actual experimental data and make no comment on his biosuit theories.

The logic being used to marginalize Tiller appears to be that he has said some things that don't make sense, so therefore everything he says must be nonsense. I don't know about you, but if we held everybody to that standard, my guess is that anything everybody says is nonsense. My point is that logically, even if a person is totally wrong about one thing, that in no way should prejudice you from keeping an open mind about other things. If a person is simply a lunatic, then it won't be hard to find fault with everything they say. Tiller does not appear to be a lunatic, even if he is saying some things that are quite speculative.

Back in the day, people who said the Earth revolved around the sun were called lunatics, so just because somebody says something that "everybody" knows is wrong, doeesn't mean they are. Each independent statement by each person should ideally be evaluated on the basis of each independent statement. The theory to explain observed data is definitely independent of the data itself, so let us please separate the two issues. Do we trust Tiller's data? If not, why not? If we trust it, what better explanation is there than biosuits?
 
I just ran into this Tiller guy's work in my search for more information about my uncle. The last I heard from my uncle, he was starting a "homeopathic business" back in California in 1999, so I found his new site today, and on it in the "for further reading" section I found the site for Tiller. Weird stuff...so I searched for him here and found a couple of references, with this being the main thread, and I was wondering if there was anything more current on him.

ark said:
You may like to read:

http://opensys.blogspot.com/search?q=tiller

Sorry, Ark, this blog has been removed...wish I could have read it :(
 
Back
Top Bottom