Empty Force And Sifu Richard Mooney

[Wanderer]

About 4 years ago Sifu Richard Mooney posted clips of empty force demonstrations that looked very impressive. In one of these he literally stops a man in his tracks who charges him with a knife - without touching him! As a result he was roundly criticized by a lot of people as being a charlatan when he was unable to duplicate his success under 'clinical' conditions, and consequently pulled the clips off his site after a barrage of criticism. Personally I think the guy is for real and really DOES have this ability and that, like Uri Geller who failed dismally when put to the test by The Amazing Randi on Dick Cavett (or was it Johnny Carson?) many years ago, doesn't necessarily prove that a person has no ability.

 

BTW another person who seems to have this ability is Kozo Nishino (sweet Jesus they're charging 68 to 150 dollars for his book on Amazon!)

 

Mooney gives a nice little talk on Empty Force, aka Lin Kong Jing here which I find very interesting...

 

http://www.fightingarts.com/content01/use_of_qi_1.shtml

[ToP-fan]

I read awhile back that the reason certain experiments fail under "controlled" conditions has to do with the observer effect a la quantum physics..........If you have a lot of folks in the room who are open to spiritual phenomena,...........the group consciousness field will actually help the experiment and vice versa.

[freeform]

The reason the 'controlled' experiments fail - especially involving Randi-type characters is simply because the experiments are designed to fail.

 

For example you write to randi saying you can do X - he then decides how can he test you, to be able to prove that you can't do X - so the main intention of the whole experiment is to see you fail. He designs the experiment - he decides how the experiment will be judged (and rather than getting third-party scientists involved) - it is he that decides whether you pass or fail.

 

This makes it hard to test these kinds of things - because the bias is always there - whether it is to prove that it's 'true' or to prove that it's false - there is always an underlying intention that directs the way the experiment is going.

 

It's actually quite ridiculous - I find this Randi guy the most abismal representative of science... he's the most unscientific person (when it suits him). It's like if you tried to prove that you can ride a bicycle at 20mph he would set up a test track in the snow going up a hill and only 30 metres long - his excuse is usually - well we cant afford a long flat track to test on... he has the final say on how the experiement is carried out - on how it's decided - and he's the only one who decides it... is he likely gonna make it easy for someone to get his million?

 

I remember reading a letter by him as a reply to some guy who claimed he can live without eating for several months at a time... the letter was full of expletives and pure rage...

[thelerner]

Bottom line as I see it is-If you can't teach it (a wild skill) to anyone else it may as well not be possible. For example Daniel Reid and others have pointed to a chinese wandering herbalist toaist who lived to be 256 and died in the 40's or 50's.

 

BUT, they say he had wives and kids. Where are they? Where's 200 year old Junior, his 3rd divorcee who is only 150? If he couldn't teach the skill to those he truly loved, then what are the odds he really knew the 'secret'? It leaves us with he was a fraud or benevolently mutated.

 

 

Disclosure- I read the Sceptical Inquirer. From what I've read of him, I'd be really surprised to see Randi swearing. Heavy sacasm and condescension, sure. There are a number of people who bad mouth him because he is a debunker and symbolic sceptic.

 

Yes, his tests raise the bar, but its there to keep people honest, not to rip off the truly gifted. I think he does way more good then harm. When someone can truly prove they have extraordinary powers, then he will be there best friend. Ofcourse as the saying goes, for extraordinary claims you need extraordinary evidence.

 

Michael

[Wanderer]

I like the amazing Randi but only when he turns his attention to REAL phonies, like Peter Popov. However, I've always felt his view of the world was a bit too rational/cerebral, with no acknowldgement of the spiritual. It's ok to be skeptical, maybe even necessary - up to a point, but the amazing Randi carries it to the extreme IMO by saying that the paranormal doesn't exist AT ALL. Oh well, what can you expect of an uber skeptic?

Edited September 24, 2006 by Wanderer

[Pero]

I read awhile back that the reason certain experiments fail under "controlled" conditions has to do with the observer effect a la quantum physics..........If you have a lot of folks in the room who are open to spiritual phenomena,...........the group consciousness field will actually help the experiment and vice versa.

 

I remember someone saying that if someone for example is a master of levitation and can do it at will, if he`s put in a place with a hundred people who think that it isn`t possible at all, even such a person would have problems levitating or wouldn`t be able to at all. I don`t really remember who said it, is it possible it was Osho?

[thelerner]

Well if Osho said it.. See Osho discussion thread.

 

Come on quantum physics takes place in a submolecular environment. I can lift this carrot I'm eating. if 100, even 200 people around me think I can't, I can prove them wrong. Same thing for my other skills. Besides why not just have a room full of believers and a video camera.

 

Just about every school has past masters who could do ultra stunts. Very impressive, too bad that there followers are either deficient or rubes. The worst is when good saintly men are turned into samadhi superman because there followers couldn't let there teachings and compassion stand on there own.

 

Michael

[Pero]

Well if Osho said it.. See Osho discussion thread.

 

True enough, though I do think some things he said had some value.

 

Come on quantum physics takes place in a submolecular environment. I can lift this carrot I'm eating. if 100, even 200 people around me think I can't, I can prove them wrong. Same thing for my other skills. Besides why not just have a room full of believers and a video camera.

 

Maybe. But what if all those people have one thought in their mind, like "Michael can`t lift the carrot". Are you certain you would be able to do it? And don`t forget the pshychological effects when people around you expect and maybe even want you to fail. Not very encouraging.

Also, I`m not sure how good a comparison is lifting a carrot and levitating? The degree of diffuculty and skill required aren`t quite the same. Though I do think if someone really mastered something he should be able to do most of the time. So, I guess it indeed shouldn`t be any different than lifting a carrot.

If there were a room full of believers, people would probably later say it was done under unscientific conditions.

 

Just about every school has past masters who could do ultra stunts. Very impressive, too bad that there followers are either deficient or rubes. The worst is when good saintly men are turned into samadhi superman because there followers couldn't let there teachings and compassion stand on there own.

 

Michael

 

I agree. What do you think is the reason that the followers aren`t as good?

[thelerner]

I think I'd still be able to lift the carrot

 

Still, my Aikido sensei said a dirty trick used at one of his dojos was this. After pairing up the first person would execute a good throw. The thrown person would say, 'Very good throw, except this (example your left foot) is out of whack. After that, the person would inevitably blow the next few throws, there attention being on left foot.

 

I don't think its a problem of the followers not being that good. I think its a problem or exagerating a founders abilitites, great though they may be.

 

On the other hand.

In the case of an Ueshiba(founder of Aikido), his touchless throws were at a pure energy transmittal level. I don't think he taught that. Matter of fact he was mostly a traditional see what I do then copy. Almost no talk or explanation. His longer speeches tended to be more mystical.

 

The touchless throws we did were mostly psychological. A combination of good timing, psychological connection, and the reality of if you don't fall you'll be hit by a very solid hand.

 

Michael

[Smile]

Besides why not just have a room full of believers and a video camera.

hey, why not?