Reverse Speech Discussion

[ark]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Thanks for feedback, Ark
touched base with a psychologist friend on this issue & he voiced the opposite opinion regarding reverse speech.
But, i was wanting feedback here on it.
At the risk of angst, it does likely have more science behind it then... say... a ouji board.

You probably are not reading what we are writing. Please, read first, comment later. Ouiji board does not provide any reliable information.

See: http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=172

It can, in certain cases, provide an inspiration for research. Music can do it, meditation can do it (but not always does), etc. etc.

We repeat it again and again, and people simply do not read. Why? Blind spots in their minds?

As for your "psychologist friend" I have a "physicist friend" who claims that gravity is a "push", not a "pull" - go figure. Sometimes scientists can be as incompetent as ever.

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Don't disagree with a thing in your reply, ark. Yup, we must choose our scources carefully, and always filter. And I am well aware that i have blind spots, as we all do.

 

[ark]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

And I am well aware that i have blind spots, as we all do.

Yes, we all do, that's for sure. Yet some have more than others. The devil, as always, is in the details. It is always good to be critical and believe nothing. To have a "working hypothesis", subjected to a continuous verification, is my choice.

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

"To have a "working hypothesis", subjected to a continuous verification, is my choice."

So do I, in a way. I've developed an odd sort of process, which I call my Q-computer. Tacky, I know. But I just try to absorb information, not analize it, just absorb it without judgement. Then I toss it away... down the bin, I call it. I think of it as feeding the Q-computer. Then, in life, when a question comes up, I do the same thing, but with a difference. I carefully phrase the question lignuistically into as straight foreward a question as I can. Then I toss that question "down the bin". And drop it from my mind. Oh, if i see some data that might relate, I'll toss it down the bin.

What is really odd is that my subconcious (my Q-computer, i guess) never forgets that question. At some point, all of a sudden it presents the question back to me... with an answer. What is really odd, is that the answer is usually very structured & organized. If I have a keyboard in front of me, I can just close my eyes and turn my fingers loose... and a well structured, well thought out, answer will appear on the screen.

It's real strange, I know. And I'm sorry for diverting from the topic. But your comment keyed me.

(This is whay I am doing with the reverse speech thing. Feeding data into the bin.)

Thanks much, Ark

 

[Ben]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

"To have a "working hypothesis", subjected to a continuous verification, is my choice."

So do I, in a way. I've developed an odd sort of process, which I call my Q-computer. Tacky, I know. But I just try to absorb information, not analize it, just absorb it without judgement. Then I toss it away... down the bin, I call it. I think of it as feeding the Q-computer. Then, in life, when a question comes up, I do the same thing, but with a difference. I carefully phrase the question lignuistically into as straight foreward a question as I can. Then I toss that question "down the bin". And drop it from my mind. Oh, if i see some data that might relate, I'll toss it down the bin.

What is really odd is that my subconcious (my Q-computer, i guess) never forgets that question. At some point, all of a sudden it presents the question back to me... with an answer. What is really odd, is that the answer is usually very structured & organized. If I have a keyboard in front of me, I can just close my eyes and turn my fingers loose... and a well structured, well thought out, answer will appear on the screen.

It's real strange, I know. And I'm sorry for diverting from the topic. But your comment keyed me.

(This is whay I am doing with the reverse speech thing. Feeding data into the bin.)

Thanks much, Ark

But how can you be sure that what 'comes out' is not disinformation or nonsense? You would have to apply discernment to it, preferably within the context of a network of people. Seems to me that it might make more sense to do that in the first place.

 

[Yossarian]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Flinny

You might want to check out this link on the SOTT forum re: Ken Welch: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=821 Though reverse speech may have some validity (though Ark doesn't think so based upon his testing, which is good enough for me) it appears that Ken Welch may not be properly trained to use it, and it really appears that he drew an erroneous conclusion re: the predicted nuclear attack.

 

[OPINMYND81]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

The fact that Ken Welch went all 'Ego Jones' and declared he stopped the attack all by himself basically kills whatever credibility he managed to scrounge together. Heck, even the guy behind RS specifically debunked him and said that his methods were totally not in synch with proper RS procedure. I'm not an expert but with what Welch put on his website I'm inclined to agree. You literally do hear WHAT YOU WANT to hear. Think Bush has an illegitimate child? Just use RS and you'll find a dozen clips proving that thesis.

Don't get me wrong, I am not dismissing RS, I believe that if properly used it could be very useful. The key term is properly used. There definitely should be procedures, guidelines and all the rest otherwise every crackpot will play Bush backwards and cherrypick clips to support their own prejudices.

RS appears to be a lot like Remote Viewing in that the own person will heavily prejudice the outcome. I've seen many RV'ers pitch the "Al-Qaeda did 9/11" line by claiming that while RV'ing they found out that Al-Qaeda 'knew' that the jet fuel would melt the steel support structures. I have several other examples but I think that one speaks for itself.

 

[Mark]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

I had a reversed audio clip where the properly proceduralized reverse speech said there was no such thing as reverse speech.

In keeping with the findings I made up the word 'proceduralized' to use in this post.

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Ben: "But how can you be sure that what 'comes out' is not disinformation or nonsense?"

Like any other source, discernment (as you say) must be applied.
And like any other source, experience/history is important. What has been the result?
I didn't give a very good description of this process, since I feel it is very personal(ized). Some of the more interesting things I have learned is that:

1. It volunteers information... in other words, when it answers a question, it does so with new information (at times). I often used to shake my head and ask "where did that piece come from?".

2. Also, it will ask questions at times. For instance, the question came "into my mind" from Ark's comment: "I have a "physicist friend" who claims that gravity is a "push", not a "pull" ... "what's the difference?"

3. I don't always grasp the answer... sometimes for years. What I thought was nonsese, I ultimately come to realize was accurate.

In other words, sometimes it makes me think. Not unlike some of the coversations with the C's that I have read.

In any event, this will sound real subjective to anyone (outside myself). Which I realize. The story of when I first realized the "existence" is an interesting one. But this happened over 25 years ago. Since then the process has evolved & I use it as part of a system. I think the whole topic of the creative process... is not well understood.

Best,
Flinny

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

OPINMYND81: "The fact that Ken Welch went all 'Ego Jones' and declared he stopped the attack all by himself basically kills whatever credibility he managed to scrounge together."

This is the kind of judgement consciously try not to make. It may prove to be "correct", it may not. But by avoiding judgement, I open myself up to learning from it... one way or another.

I try never to close my mind.

Best,
Flinny

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Ben,

Oh, and the process also filters information for me, which I find very valuable.

 

[Laura]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

I want to add some details. When we first became aware of the so-called "reverse speech phenomenon" some time ago, it intrigued us - naturally. And so, as we did in the case of the Bible Code nonsense, we researched it, installed some useful software to test it out, and actually DID do some "applied checking out." This was even intensive activity for awhile until finally, we had to conclude that anybody who gets a word or two, or a phrase now and then, is more than likely, having a subjective experience. There were many clips we listened to where this or that person said that something or other was definitely there to be heard, and we just couldn't hear it without really stretching the terms of audition in an unseemly way.

Our conclusion: there are much better things to do with our time, more effective ways to "see the unseen."

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Yossarian: "though Ark doesn't think so based upon his testing, which is good enough for me"

My "Psychologist Friend", who unlike most in his area has an open mind; made a comment along the lines of....

I wouldn't be surprised if there was something to it. I use something similar in my practice, in reviewing the results of a meeting. Language use can tell you a lot. We've hardly scratched the surface of the human mind; conscious, subconscious or otherwise.

Thanks for the help & feedback, Y,
Flinny

 

[Flinny]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

Thanks, Laura. This feedback is most valuable & appreciated. Just the kind of thing I am looking for. I guess I need to learn how do better use the search function.

Best,
Flinny

 

[ark]

Reverse Speech vs Psychopath

My "Psychologist Friend", who unlike most in his area has an open mind; made a comment along the lines of....

I wouldn't be surprised if there was something to it. I use something similar in my practice, in reviewing the results of a meeting. Language use can tell you a lot. We've hardly scratched the surface of the human mind; conscious, subconscious or otherwise.

So, your psychologist friend sounds quite reasonable. "I wouldn't be surprised if there was something to it " I consider a reasonable stand. The point is that, after some research, we found that there is nothing to it. Language can tell a lot - I completely agree. But reversed language is not a language, it is a sound read track backward. You can, as well, take any text file, read it backwards, and allow for some fuzziness using appropriate software. Looking for "information" in such a way is not much different than looking for information in a text written on a typeriwriter by a monkey.