Colin Ross to take the Randi Challenge

Moderators: DrVolin, Elvis, Jeff

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:36 pm

Thanks for the Radin bio, a lot of nuggets in there I was unaware of, but nothing that sets off alarms for me. (Not that I know shit about shit, really...but I gotta pretend.)

I'm tempted to make a thread asking Hugh directly.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10363
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Excerpt from Diary of an Intern by Ross...

Postby sw » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:45 pm

Excerpt, Diary of an Intern by Colin A. Ross.

I just read this in the introduction of this particular book and wondered if it might shed a bit of light on the Randi experiments.
Last edited by sw on Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
sw
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:39 am

Lost the link for this:

The Men Who Stare at Goats
Buy the book: USA / UK

In 1979 a secret unit was established by the most gifted minds within the US Army. Defying all known accepted military practice - and indeed, the laws of physics - they believed that a soldier could adopt the cloak of invisibility, pass cleanly through walls and, perhaps most chillingly, kill goats just by staring at them. Entrusted with defending America from all known adversaries, they were the First Earth Battalion. And they really weren't joking. What's more, they're back and fighting the War on Terror. 'The men who stare at goats' reveals extraordinary - and very nutty - national secrets at the core of George W Bush's War on Terror.

With first-hand access to the leading players in the story, Ronson traces the evolution of these bizarre activities over the past three decades, and sees how it is alive today within US Homeland Security and post-war Iraq. Why are they blasting Iraqi prisoners-of-war with the theme tune to Barney the Purple Dinosaur? Why have 100 de-bleated goats been secretly placed inside the Special Forces command centre at Fort Bragg, North Carolina? How was the US Military associated with the mysterious mass-suicide of a strange cult from San Diego? 'The men who stare at goats' answers these, and many more, questions.

------------------------------------------------------------


The Men Who Stare at Goats

Buy the book: USA / UK

The New York Times

True Tales Odd Enough to Stop a Farm Animal's Heart
By JANET MASLIN

Published: April 7, 2005

THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS
By Jon Ronson
259 pages. Simon & Schuster. $24.

At the start of the twisted treasure hunt that is "The Men Who Stare at Goats," the journalist Jon Ronson appears to be looking for furtive, paranoid quacks who play mind games. He seems to have hit the mother lode.

Take the goats of the title: Mr. Ronson cites a hundred of them. He says that they have been hidden at a Goat Lab at Fort Bragg in North Carolina and de-bleated for security reasons.

They have been used in top-secret experiments by psychic spies whose existence is not officially acknowledged by the United States Army. Military psychics are so well hidden that they aren't covered by the Army's coffee budget. It makes them cranky to have to bring their own coffee to work.

"The damn psychic spies should be keeping their damn mouths shut, instead of chitchatting all over town about what they did." So says retired Maj. Gen. Albert N. Stubblebine III, the first of the many characters redolent of "Dr. Strangelove" who are found in this jaw-dropper of a - hard to believe, but, yes - nonfiction story.

Some of these experts contend that a goat's heart can be stopped by the intense gaze of a certain kind of supersoldier. "Goat didn't have a chance," one of these tough guys tells Mr. Ronson. Such fighters sometimes refer to themselves as Jedi Warriors, because the thinking about their occult superpowers dates back to early "Star Wars" days. It was then that the post-Vietnam military, demoralized and fiscally hamstrung, was ready to try anything in the way of intangible new weaponry.

Mr. Ronson sets his book up beautifully. It moves with wry, precise agility from crackpot to crackpot in its search for the essence of this early New Age creativity. Much of it can be traced to the 1977 fact-finding mission of Lt. Col. Jim Channon, now also retired but given credit for an influential legacy.

It was Colonel Channon's 125-page "First Earth Battalion Operations Manual" that suggested a whole new approach to combat and a whole new type of military uniform. According to Colonel Channon's plan, soldiers' uniforms should include pouches for ginseng regulators, divining tools and loudspeakers that would emit "indigenous music and words of peace." The author's explorations also take him to one soldier of fortune who died after "acting too big for his boots regarding his superhuman powers," and to a New Age company alleged to be dealing in both healing bars (costing $7,600 and resembling blocks of soap) and group sex ("Don't tell your husband because he wouldn't understand the energy work").

Then there are the double agents supposedly operating within the flying saucer set. "The U.F.O. community?" the author asks one source. "Why would government spies want to infiltrate that?"

"Oh, Jon," the source tells him, delivering the kind of swift punch line that makes this book so entertaining. "Don't be naive."

At this point, "The Men Who Stare at Goats" still concentrates on quirks, making it a smarter, nuttier version of "The Tipping Point" or "Blink." But then it moves into a different realm. While Colonel Channon was asserting that the military should be "unafraid to appear harebrained and half-baked in their pursuit of a new kind of weapon," a parallel and less theoretical set of experiments was unfolding. And Mr. Ronson addresses the more sinister aspect of out-of-the-box military thinking.

"The Men Who Stare at Goats" turns into a book that connects dots. It sees a common thread in the use of screamingly bad music to assault Gen. Manuel Antonio Noriega in Panama and the use of similar tactics in the destruction of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Tex. In these accounts, Mr. Ronson writes as much about schemes that were only contemplated as about the ones that actually made the cut.

For instance, he describes the effort to deploy a Moscow scientist who had previously sent subliminal messages to Red Army troops ("Do not get drunk before battle") in the Branch Davidian standoff. This scientist didn't work out because he was unwilling to transmit words spoken by Charlton Heston as a bogus voice of God.

Mr. Ronson, a filmmaker and journalist whose earlier book, "Them: Adventures With Extremists," was also outstandingly artful and chilling, eventually follows his trail of bread crumbs to the realms that really matter. He finds a prologue in MK-ULTRA, the real C.I.A. "Manchurian Candidate" research of the 1950's, which involved the disastrous use of LSD as a potential truth serum. He follows this line of thinking through and beyond the fruitcake innovations of the 1970's, concluding that Colonel Channon's theories "could be used to shatter people rather than heal them."

"Those are the ideas that live on in the War on Terror," he adds.

Inevitably, this account extends to the tactics of American guards at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. And somehow Mr. Ronson is able to keep his book both light and nightmarish. (Asked if there was a single good thing to be said about the prison, one former guard says it was an address to which Amazon.com delivered.)

Absurdity is never far away. Discussing the weird tricks played on prisoners in both Iraq and Cuba, he finds the English journalist Martin Bashir interviewing one former captive. Mr. Bashir asks whether the prisoner saw his now-notorious Michael Jackson documentary. "Jamal replied, 'I've, uh, been in Guantánamo Bay for two years.' "

Mr. Ronson, who lives in London and exclaims the occasional "bloody hell" at these discoveries, remains terrifically adept at capturing the horror of these developments without losing track of their lunacy. About propaganda dropped from airplanes: "The Americans have always been better than the Iraqis at the leaflets." Early in the 1991 Persian Gulf war, he says, Iraqi psychological warfare meant telling American soldiers: "Your wives are back at home having sex with Bart Simpson and Burt Reynolds."

------------------------------------------------------------


Acting the giddy goat


Jon Ronson's The Men Who Stare at Goats is an inspired study of America's war on terror, says Tim Adams

Sunday November 21, 2004
The Observer


Buy The Men Who Stare At Goats at the Guardian bookshop


The Men Who Stare at Goats
by Jon Ronson
Picador £16.99, pp240
Jon Ronson is forced to begin his book with an extraordinary disclaimer: 'This,' he writes, with some authentic shock and awe, 'is a true story.'

As you read on, it is hard to shift the impact of those five small words from your mind. It would be far, far better for all of us, you can't help thinking, if it turned out that Jon Ronson had actually made up his entire, wonderful investigation into 'psychological warfare' techniques used by America's elite Special Forces.




------------------------------------------------------



If he had not, for example, discovered that there was a Major General Albert Stubblebine III directing operations from Arlington, Virginia, who firmly believes he can walk through walls. Or if the existence of a secret unit in which psyops personnel stared at goats for hours on end with the aim of killing them was actually a figment of a warped author's imagination. Or that the Pentagon's playlist of torture music for use at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib was, in reality, a juvenile attempt at satire. Terrifyingly, however, all this - and much more - is shown, as he says, to be true.
Ronson started out on his surrealist quest with a hunch. There was, he believed, some deep-seated irrationality at the heart of America's war on terror. Once he had this simple thought in mind, one thing led to another. It began with Uri Geller, who Ronson interviewed three years ago about his claims that he was a 'psychic spy' working for US intelligence. Geller led him to Stubblebine and Stubblebine put him in touch with Lieutenant Colonel (retd) Jim Channon, who first started the madness.

Channon had witnessed horrors as a young officer in Vietnam and he believed that the army required a new approach to combat. Having imbibed some of the more extreme Californian philosophies, Channon approached military top brass with the notion of a 'First Earth Battalion' of 'warrior monks' - soldiers who would carry with them into hostile countries 'symbolic animals' such as baby lambs, learn to greet people with 'sparkly eyes' and give the enemy 'an automatic hug'.

Their only weapons would be 'discordant sounds' and 'psycho-electric' guns that could direct positive energy into crowds. Channon's ideas, unbelievably, became current in certain branches of the US army and, in bizarre, mutant form, have been employed in the current war on terror.

Ronson is happy to present himself as slow on the uptake in his quest, not least because it often seems so incredible. He affects an air of very British vagueness that wins over his uniformed interviewees, but he has a genius for detail. Once he gets a fact, he clings to it, interrogates it, makes it relate to other facts.

There is a sort of gonzo spirit in his approach which sometimes lends an air of farce to his findings, but few more earnest investigative journalists would have had the brilliant bloody-mindedness to get what he has got and hardly any would have the wit to present it with as much clarity.

He slips, too, very skilfully between registers in tone. Ronson knows exactly what is funny - what other response is there to torturers with Fleetwood Mac CDs in their arsenal? - but he also knows when that laughter begins to look grotesque. His account of the use of the theme from the children's TV show Barney - 'I Love You', which, played on a loop, has been used to disorient prisoners - is one of the most chilling things I have read about the war.

At one point, Ronson describes seven photographs of a man who underwent such an 'I Love You' torture regime in a shipping container at a disused railway station in al-Qa'im, Iraq. 'His face is deeply lined, like an old man's, but his wispy moustache reveals that he is probably 17... there's an open wound on one of his skinny arms and above it someone has written a number with a black marker pen. He might have done terrible things. I know nothing about him other than these seven fragments of his life. But I can say this. In the last photograph, he is screaming so hard it looks as if he is laughing.'

If Joseph Heller lurks in the margins of Ronson's book - who else could have pulled off the goat-staring GIs? - so, too, does Hannah Arendt. At least, Ronson, for all his coyness, makes you feel at times the full force of her assertion that 'most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be either good or evil'.

It is his acute grip on the nuance of this idea that makes his book not only a narcotic road trip through the wackier reaches of Bush's war effort, but also an unmissable account of some of the insanity that has lately been done in our names.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:56 am

In 2008, Dr. Ross applied for the James Randi Educational Foundation's One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge with the claim that he can shoot beams of energy out of his eyeballs and cause a speaker, receiving no other input, to sound a tone. [9] During later correspondence with Dr. Steven Novella of The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe, he conceded that the equipment he was using was, in fact, a biofeedback machine attached to his laptop, and that the laptop was responding in a well-understood way to an eyeblink. However, he claimed that he could still send energy beams out of his eyes, and was working on modifying the software to ignore an eyeblink.[10] His claim has not currently been tested by the JREF.


From: wwwen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_A._Ross
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

sad

Postby hava1 » Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:19 pm

I just feel very sad, reading all this news about him. Somehow, all the people who write professionally about MK, go berserk at some point. Its not that 'energy' and PSI does not exist, but the way they deal with it, allows the deniers to feast. I've had a brief exchange with Ross 2 yrs ago, he was enthusiastic to explore the possibility of publishing CIA dos/BLuebird in Israel (in hebrew), but I felt its too risky to "push" the book here, and he didn;t want to get too close to the fire himself.

I also had some brief email exchange with a verious serious psychologist who wrote a very good book about RA and MK, and a few long and good emails down the road he starts talking about aliens, along the lines of "there are external entities" involved in those matters. Now, I am open minded, but I think the way it is communicated, same here w Ross, reminds me of ...dissociative reaction, namely, fear that translates into self discrediting bevior. I would guess that people who mess with those masters of manipulation start at some point to feel enough fear, that leads them, unwittingly, to "play nuts" in order to get the heat off their backs.

Becuase, no doubt that professionally, its a big no no to invoke 'aliens' or 'energy beams', when dealing with DID patients. and these people know that.
hava1
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:07 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lucky » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:52 am

Gearge Clooney has bought the rights to the book and already has ewen mcgregor, Jeff bridges and other lined up to star. The documentry Jon did was great as was the book now to be turned in to a pantomime....
There's holes in the sky where rain gets in
the holes are small
that's why rain is thin.
User avatar
lucky
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby jingofever » Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:21 pm

Patent Application for Human Eyebeam Detection System Now Available on U.S. Patent Office Web Page:

DALLAS, TX - Noted psychiatrist and author Colin A. Ross, M.D., today announced his patent application for a system to detect the electromagnetic energy emitted by the human eye. Dr. Ross has been researching a new science and medicine focused on the human body's electromagnetic field, which will be detailed in an upcoming book, "Human Energy Fields."

In his research, Dr. Ross has discovered proof that the eye emits electromagnetic energy that he calls an "eyebeam." He calls his invention an Electromagnetic Beam Detection System for which he has filed an application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

"The experimental proof of the reality of the human eyebeam is crucial in developing the science of human energy fields," said Dr. Ross. "The existence of the human eyebeam has been dismissed by psychologists, physiologists, physicists and virtually all modern scientists. This represents a big step forward."

Dr. Ross' patent application for the EBDS can be viewed at:

http://patft.uspto.gov/
Click on: Publication Number Search
Enter: 20090046246

Dr. Ross has also filed an international Patent Cooperation Treaty application. This is a step toward getting a patent in countries outside the United States.

In a written opinion, the International Searching Authority concluded that all aspects of Dr. Ross' invention are novel, are inventive steps and have industrial applications: "The industrial applicability of claims 1-25 is self-evident in the sense of PCT Article 33(4) because the subject matter claimed can be made or used in industry."

According to Dr. Ross' application, the electromagnetic beam detection system can be used as a switch and can turn on or off any electrical device. It functions like a clapper light, but uses the electromagnetic energy emitted through the eyes instead of the sound of a hand clapping.

Dr. Ross has sent the link for the U.S. Patent Office application to James Randi (www.randi.org) and is waiting to hear from him about the status of his $1 Million Paranormal Challenge, in which he claims that he can make a tone sound out of a computer using a beam of energy he sends out through his eyes. Dr. Ross' proposed Challenge protocol is available on his web site (www.rossinst.com).


And the patent:

United States Patent Application 20090046246
Kind Code A1
Ross; Colin A. February 19, 2009
ELECTROMAGNETIC BEAM DETECTION SYSTEM

Abstract

The present invention provides for a Line of Sight (LOS) electromagnetic beam (EM) detection system configured with an enclosure, a detection device, a processing device, a storage device, and a communication device. The enclosure may or may not be electromagnetically shielded from the surrounding environment. The enclosure may contain one or more detection devices and one or more portals configured for a user to look through. The detection devices may be a non-contacting, active-dry electroencephalogram (EEG) electrode or a high input impedance EEG electrode. The processing device may be a specifically programmed general purpose computer. The communication device may be auditory and/or visual. The storage device may store signals from the detection device for later analysis and statistical manipulation. In some embodiments, the LOS detection system may be used as a switch responding to interaction with a LOS beam emanating from an ocular cavity.
Inventors: Ross; Colin A.; (McKinney, TX)
Correspondence Name and Address:

CARR LLP
670 FOUNDERS SQUARE, 900 JACKSON STREET
DALLAS
TX
75202
US

Serial No.: 839594
Series Code: 11
Filed: August 16, 2007

U.S. Current Class: 351/200
U.S. Class at Publication: 351/200
Intern'l Class: A61B 3/00 20060101 A61B003/00
Claims


1. A system for detecting an electromagnetic beam comprising:an enclosure configured to facilitate visual access for an eye and containing a detecting device comprising at least one electrode configured to produce an output corresponding to an electromagnetic field emanating through the eye;a processing device configured to receive the output from the detecting device; anda communication device configured to provide feedback communication corresponding to the output from the detecting device.

2. The system of claim 1 further comprising electromagnetic shielding for the enclosure.

3. The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one electrode is a high input impedance electrode with an input impedance in the range of 10.sup.7.OMEGA. to 10.sup.15.OMEGA..

4. The system of claim 1 further comprising at least one speaker for the communication device.

5. The system of claim 4 wherein the at least one speaker comprises a pair of headphones.

6. The system of claim 1 further comprising a visual display device for the communication device.

7. The system of claim 6 wherein the visual display device comprises an illuminated bar graph.

8. The system of claim 1 wherein the enclosure comprises substantially a bottomed cylinder adapted to conform to an area surrounding the eye.

9. The system of claim 1 wherein the enclosure comprises a container adapted to conform to an area surrounding the eye.

10. The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one electrode comprises a plurality of electrodes.

11. The system of claim 10 wherein the plurality of electrodes are provided substantially equidistant from the eye.

12. The system of claim 1 further comprising a storage device configured to store the feedback communication.

13. The system of claim 1 further comprising a storage device configured to store the output from the detection device.

14. The system of claim 1 wherein the visual access for the eye comprises at least one portal contained in a wall of the enclosure.

15. The system of claim 1 wherein the enclosure is at least partially transparent.

16. A method of detecting an electromagnetic field emanating via an ocular cavity of a skull comprising the steps of:positioning an eye of a subject in visual communication with a detection device comprising at least one electrode configured to produce an output corresponding to an electromagnetic field and contained within an enclosure of a beam detection system; andalternating between observing the at least one electrode and looking away from the at least one electrode.

17. The method of claim 16 further comprising transmitting a feedback communication corresponding to the output of the at least one electrode.

18. The method of claim 17 further comprising storing at least one of the feedback communication and the output of the at least one electrode.

19. An apparatus for detecting an electromagnetic field emanating via an eye, wherein the apparatus comprises:an enclosure containing a detection device comprising at least one electrode configured to produce an output corresponding to an electromagnetic field; andan opening configured to establish a communication pathway between the eye and the detection device.

20. The apparatus of claim 19, further comprising:another electrode configured to produce an output corresponding to an electromagnetic field and removed from a line of sight of the at least one electrode; anda reflective member configured to establish a communication pathway between the eye and the other electrode via the reflective member.

21. The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the at least one electrode further comprises a plurality of electrodes configured to produce a plurality of output corresponding to an electromagnetic field and provided substantially equidistant from the eye when the eye is proximate to the opening.

22. The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the enclosure further contains an illuminating device.

23. The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the at least one electrode is a high input impedance electrode with an input impedance in the range of 10.sup.7.OMEGA. to 10.sup.15.OMEGA..

24. The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the enclosure is electromagnetically shielded.

25. A system for detecting an electromagnetic field comprising:an enclosure containing at least one portal configured to facilitate visual access for an eye;at least one high input impedance electrode configured to produce an output corresponding to an electromagnetic field with an input impedance in the range of 10.sup.7.OMEGA. to 10.sup.15.OMEGA. contained within the enclosure;a processing device configured to receive the output from the electrode; anda communication device configured to provide feedback communication corresponding to the output from the electrode.
Description


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0001]1. Field of the Invention

[0002]The present invention relates to an electromagnetic detection system for the non-contacting detection of electromagnetic fields emanating from a living organism and, more particularly, to the detection of electromagnetic fields emanating from an ocular cavity.

[0003]2. Description of the Related Art

[0004]All biological systems generate electromagnetic fields (EMF) and these fields interact with and are affected by the magnetic field surrounding the earth as well as other sources of EMF such as solar flares. The human body in particular generates a relatively complex electromagnetic field. Measuring, sensing, and detecting the electromagnetic field may provide important information for understanding the inner workings and the treatment of the human body. There currently exist known methods of measuring the electromagnetic field of a body. The electromagnetic field generated by the brain, for example, can be measured with a highly sensitive instrument such as a Superconducting Quantum Interference Device (SQUID) magnetometer. However, since the magnetic field generated by the brain is on the order of roughly one billion times weaker than the main magnetic field of the earth, most SQUID magnetometers are typically housed in magnetically insulated rooms in order to eliminate the background noise that would otherwise overwhelm the signal from the brain. Such full-size rooms can cost approximately $250,000 to construct and a SQUID magnetometer capable of taking a full brain map costs about $2 million.

[0005]A less costly way to measure the electrical field generated by the brain is through the use of a contacting electroencephalogram (EEG) system. A simple EEG software program and the necessary leads and electrodes can be purchased for about $1,200 and run on a laptop computer. A system such as this is commonly used during biofeedback treatment by psychologists. Biofeedback is the process of monitoring a physiological signal, and amplifying, conditioning, and displaying the signal to the monitored subject so that he or she can observe small changes in the signal. Gradually, through trial and error, the monitored subject may learn to affect certain biological or physiological processes by associating certain actions with the subsequent changes in the monitored signal.

[0006]Additionally, in some situations the measurement of electric fields produced by the body may be useful in identifying certain medical conditions or in the development of medical treatments. For example, a typical application involves the measurement of the electrical field of the heart through the use of a contacting electrocardiogram (ECG or EKG). The printout of the measurement may be used in making a number of different diagnoses, including the likelihood of a heart attack, and the identification of abnormal electrical conduction within the heart, among others. Another application involves the measurement of an electromagnetic beam emanating from the ocular region of a human head. This electromagnetic beam is essentially a line of sight (LOS) beam able to focus an electromagnetic field on whatever the person is looking at. However, traditional methods of attaching an electrode to contact the surface of the skin in order to measure the electromagnetic field are difficult due to the sensitive nature of the eyes. Therefore, there exists a need for a low cost, non-contacting measurement device configured to detect and respond to the LOS beam.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0007]The present invention provides a system for detecting an electromagnetic beam. The system may comprise an enclosure configured to facilitate visual access for an eye and containing a detecting device comprising at least one electrode. The system may further comprise a processing device configured to receive an output from the detecting device. Additionally, the system may comprise a communication device configured to provide feedback communication corresponding to the output from the detecting device.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0008]For a more complete understanding of the present invention and the advantages thereof, reference is now made to the following Detailed Description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:

[0009]FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of an electromagnetic LOS beam detection system configured according to the present invention;

[0010]FIG. 2 illustrates an application of the electromagnetic LOS beam detection system of FIG. 1;

[0011]FIG. 3 illustrates another embodiment of an electromagnetic LOS beam detection system configured according to the present invention;

[0012]FIG. 4 illustrates another embodiment of an electromagnetic LOS beam detection system configured according to the present invention;

[0013]FIG. 5A illustrates a side view of another embodiment of an electromagnetic LOS beam detection system configured according to the present invention; and

[0014]FIG. 5B illustrates a top view of the embodiment of FIG. 5A.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0015]In the following discussion, numerous specific details are set forth to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the present invention may be practiced without such specific details. In other instances, well-known elements have been illustrated in schematic or block diagram form in order not to obscure the present invention in unnecessary detail. Additionally, for the most part, details concerning network communications, electromagnetic signaling techniques, and the like, have been omitted inasmuch as such details are not considered necessary to obtain a complete understanding of the present invention, and are considered to be within the understanding of persons of ordinary skill in the relevant art.

[0016]Turning now to FIG. 1, the reference numeral 100 generally indicates an illustrative example of an embodiment of an electromagnetic line of sight (LOS) beam detection system 100 configured according to at least some aspects of the current invention. The LOS beam detection system 100 may comprise an enclosure 1, detection device 3, processing device 4, and a feedback device 5. The components of the LOS beam detection system 100 will be described in more detail in the following.

[0017]The enclosure 1 may completely surround a detection device 3 and may be electromagnetically (EM) shielded. An EM shielded enclosure 1 may facilitate the filtering out or elimination of background electromagnetic interference or noise typically present in the environment. The enclosure 1 may be configured in a variety of shapes and sizes, not limited to the illustrative example shown. In some embodiments, the enclosure 1 may be in the form of a hand-held device approximately the size and shape of a pair of binoculars, among others. As shown in FIG. 1, a relatively simple enclosure approximately in the shape of a sealed cylinder, among others, may be used for the enclosure 1.

[0018]An EM shielded enclosure 1 may comprise a central core structure 12 overlaid with an electromagnetic shielding material 11 or in some cases, may be directly formed from the shielding material 11. The central core structure 12 may be formed from any of a wide variety of lightweight and/or low cost materials, such as polypropylene, aluminum, cardboard or other compressed fiber material, and wood, among others. Some examples of shielding material 11 include mu-metal, a nickel-iron alloy comprising approximately 75% nickel, 15% iron, plus copper and molybdenum, among others. Mu-metal has a very high magnetic permeability and may be very effective at screening static or low-frequency magnetic fields. Other materials that may exhibit similar properties include supermalloy, supermumetal, nilomag, sanbold, and Mo-permalloy, among others. The examples listed are not intended to form an exhaustive list but are instead intended to illustrate a representative selection from a wide variety of appropriate materials.

[0019]The enclosure 1 may comprise one or more portals 2 (i.e., openings) configured to provide visual access for a corresponding number of eyes. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 1, a single portal 1 may be provided for a single eye of a monitored subject. In other embodiments, two portals may be provided for both eyes of a single monitored subject. With larger devices, 2 or more portals may be provided for two or more monitored subjects simultaneously undergoing monitoring. The portal 2 may be covered with a transparent member such as glass, plastic, acrylic, or other non-electromagnetic shielding material, among others, so as to completely enclose the interior of the enclosure 1. In some cases, the portal 2 may be open, eliminating any obstruction between the LOS beam and the detection device 3. The exterior surface surrounding the portal 2 may be configured to comfortably accommodate the surrounding structure of an eye, including but not limited to, a resilient interface 13 (FIG. 2) such as a foam surround or camera type of rubber eyepiece for example, among others. The resilient interface 13 may also comprise EM shielding material to reduce or further inhibit the passage of electromagnetic background noise or interference into the interior chamber of the enclosure 1.

[0020]The detection device 3 may be a non-contacting, active-dry electroencephalogram (EEG) electrode configured to measure electrical signals from the brain. Conventional EEG electrodes may have input impedances up to an order of about 10.sup.6.OMEGA. to 10.sup.7.OMEGA.. A detection device 3 comprising conventional EEG electrodes may require EM shielding surrounding the enclosure 1 to reduce interference from surrounding electromagnetic and other noise. The length of the enclosure 1 may be designed to correspond with the ability of the EEG electrode to remotely sense the LOS beam. The non-contacting, active-dry EEG electrode may comprise tin, gold, silver, or other appropriate materials, in addition to combinations of these materials, configured as discs.

[0021]Alternatively, the detection device 3 may be a high (or ultra-high) impedance EEG electrode. A high impedance EEG electrode may have an input impedance from about 10.sup.7.OMEGA. up to approximately 10.sup.15.OMEGA.. The noise floors of high impedance EEG electrodes may be on the order of approximately 70 .eta.V Hz.sup.-1/2 at 1 Hz. Due at least in part to the low noise levels achievable with high impedance EEG electrodes, a LOS beam detection system 100 may require only modest, if any at all, electromagnetic shielding for the enclosure 1, even at the highest levels of sensitivity, when the detection device 3 comprises one or more high impedance EEG electrodes. An optimization between the cost of the high impedance EEG electrodes and the cost of the electromagnetic shielding may drive the overall configuration of the LOS beam detection system 100. As with the other EEG electrodes comprising the detection device 3, the length of the enclosure 1 may be designed to correspond with the ability of the high impedance EEG electrode (or other embodiment of the detection device 3) to remotely sense the LOS beam.

[0022]The detection device 3 may be coupled with a processing device 4. The processing device 4 may comprise a specifically programmed general purpose micro-processor, a purpose built device with application specific instruction code, or a combination of various components working together as a system, among other embodiments. For example, a commercially available multi-channel, multi-modality encoder may be connected through a USB port to a general purpose computer running appropriate software. The computer may receive the signal and amplify or otherwise convert the signal into a communicative feedback. The communicative feedback may comprise a visual display such as illuminating various amounts and/or colors of lights, graphs, and shapes, among others. Alternatively, or in addition to the visual display, the communicative feedback may comprise an audio component, such as various frequencies of tone, various frequencies or intervals of tonal bursts (e.g., such as in a traditional Geiger counter, etc.), and/or synthesized speech reacting to the detected LOS beam, among others. The communicative feedback may be via the processing device 4 (e.g., through the display or speakers typically integrated with a general processing computer), or via external devices (such as a stand alone communication device 5) driven by or coupled to the processing device 4. In all communications between various components, the connections may either be hardwired, wireless (e.g., Bluetooth.RTM., Wi-Fi.TM.), or a combination of various transmission methods and systems, among others.

[0023]A communication device 5 may be coupled to the processing device 4. The communication device 5 is shown as a speaker only for the purposes of illustration. Many forms and methods of communicating the strength of the feedback signal from the detection device 3 may be used in place of the speaker shown as a communication device 5. One or more speakers or a more ergonomic form of speaker such as headphones, ear plugs, etc., may be used as an embodiment of the communication device 5. The communication method described in this illustrative embodiment may involve some form of auditory communication so that a monitored subject may not have to avert their eyes from the detection device 3 in order to receive the communicative feedback.

[0024]Turning now to FIG. 2, a method for using the LOS beam detection system 100 may be as follows. A LOS beam detection system 100 may be configured as described above, comprising an enclosure 1, a detection device 3, a processing device 4, and a communication device 5. In certain illustrative embodiments, the interior of the enclosure 1 may contain an illuminating device 7 configured to facilitate the visual detection of detection device 3 during use of the LOS beam detection system 100. Alternatively, or in addition to the illuminating device 7, at least a portion of the enclosure 1 may comprise a transparent or semi-transparent section enabling visual communication with the detection device 3 contained within the enclosure 1.

[0025]The subject may place their eye proximate to the portal 2 such that there may be a substantially direct line of sight communication between the detection device 3 and their eye (shown by a broken line). For example, the subject may place at least a portion of the area surrounding their eye directly against the resilient interface 13. The processing device 4 may process the signal from the detection device 3 and may provide a processed signal to the communication device 5. The subject may then alter physiological and/or mental aspects of their body and concentration in an attempt to manipulate the signal to a maximum level. Such alterations may include increasing or decreasing focus on the detection device 3, varying concentration efforts and levels, and relaxing or tensing the musculature surrounding the eye, among other techniques.

[0026]Another form of use may involve the monitored subject alternating between directly looking at the detection device 3 and not looking at the detection device 3. Not looking at the detection device 3 may involve altering the line of sight to one side or another of the detection device 3 and/or closing the eye proximate to the portal. In some cases, both looking to one side and closing the eye may be used. The subject may try to alter the communicative feedback from the communication device 5 through a range of on (e.g., some auditory feedback) when looking at the detection device 3, to off when not looking at the detection device 3. The LOS beam detection system 100 may also be used as a passive monitoring system for acquiring data regarding the electromagnetic waves traveling through an ocular region of the head.

ANOTHER EMBODIMENT

[0027]Referring now to FIG. 3, the reference numeral 300 generally indicates another illustrative embodiment of the LOS beam detection system 300 configured according to at least some aspects of the present invention. In this figure, similar components may be given the same reference numbers and a detailed description of these components may not be repeated. The LOS beam detection system 300 may comprise an enclosure 30, a first and second portal 2A and 2B, a first and second detection device 3A and 3B, a reflector member 34, a processing device 4, and a communication device 5 shown a speaker 5A, illuminated bar graph 5B, and a meter 5C. The various components of the LOS beam detection system 300 will be described in greater detail below.

[0028]The enclosure 30 of the LOS beam detection system 300 may be configured to accommodate a first and second portal 2A and 2B, for each eye of a single monitored subject for example. In some applications, two monitored subjects may each use one of the first and second portals 2A and 2B. However, although two portals 2A and 2B are shown in this illustrative embodiment, the current invention may not be limited to this configuration. One portal or three or more portals may be used with the enclosure 30. As with the previously described portal 2, the first and second portals 2A and 2B may be configured to comfortably accommodate two eyes of a single subject. In some embodiments, the first and second portals 2A and 2B may be adjustable (e.g., towards and away from one another, an adjustment system is not shown in this figure) in order to adapt the LOS beam detection system 300 to a wide variety of ages and body types of individual subjects.

[0029]As seen in FIG. 3, the enclosure 30 may also be configured to accommodate two detection devices, such as a first detection device 3A and a second detection device 3B. In this illustrative embodiment, the first detection device 3A may be along a line of sight for the first and second portals 2A and 2B. However, the second detection device 3B may be obstructed from a direct line of sight via the first and second portals 2A and 2B. The obstruction for the second detection device 3B may be due to a configuration of the enclosure 30 (e.g., locating the second detection device 3B within a bottomed cylindrical cavity or around a bend in a wall for example, among others), or the obstruction may be due to secondary feature such as an internal wall 32 or some other form of electromagnetic shielding for example. As shown, the second detection device 3B may be at an angle to the first detection device 3A.

[0030]In order to facilitate a line of sight communication between the first and second portals 2A and 2B and the second detection device 3B, the enclosure 30 may contain a reflective member 34 positioned at an angle to the portals and the second detection device 3B. The reflective member 34 may comprise a optical and/or electromagnetic reflective material, among others, enabling the portals 2A and 2B to have a visual and/or electromagnetic beam direct line of sight communication with the second detection device 3B. For example, some polished metals may provide both forms of reflection for the reflective member 34. In some embodiments, a secondary internal wall 36 or more may be provided within the enclosure 30 in order to prevent cross contamination of the first and second detection devices 3A and 3B (i.e., to ensure primary detection by the first detection device 3A substantially when looking at the first detection device 3A, and primary detection by the second detection device 3B substantially when looking at the second detection device 3B).

[0031]As with the previous enclosure 1, the enclosure 30 of the LOS beam detection system 300 may be electromagnetically shielded depending at least in part upon the amount of surrounding environmental electrical noise and/or the input impedance level of the electrodes comprising the first and second detection devices 3A and 3B. The other details and materials appropriate for the enclosure 1 may be applied for the enclosure 30.

[0032]The first and second detection devices 3A and 3B may be communicatively coupled with a processing device 4 that is in turn communicatively coupled with one or more communication devices 5. As shown in this illustrative embodiment, examples of the communication devices 5 may include one or more speakers 5A, one or more illuminated bar graphs 5B, and one or more meters 5C, among others. The bar graphs 5B and the meters 5C may be stand alone components coupled to the processing device 4, or they may be virtual components visually displayed on a monitor. There may be a single communicative device 5 for each of the detection devices 3A and 3B (e.g., using separate frequency tones with a variable volume level for indicating the strength and identity of a signal from the detection devices 3A and 3B). However, a separate set of communication devices 5 may be provided for each of the detection devices 3A and 3B. In this case, each of the detection devices 3A and 3B may be individually monitored by a subject and/or a technician.

[0033]The LOS beam detection system 300 may be used to detect the strength and application of a reflected LOS beam. A subject may initially focus on the first detection device 3A and then alternate by focusing on the second detection device 3B via the reflective member 34. By receiving the communication feedback from the communication devices 5, a monitored subject may identify which detection device is receiving the LOS beam and attempt to alter the strength of the LOS beam. After a number of monitoring sessions with the first detection device 3A are recorded, such as in an electronic file or database of the processing device 4, the subject may perform and record a number of monitoring sessions with the second detection device 3B. Subsequently, statistical analysis may indicate the relative strength of a reflected LOS beam as compared to a direct LOS beam, among others.

ANOTHER EMBODIMENT

[0034]Turning now to FIG. 4, the reference numeral 400 generally indicates another illustrative embodiment of the LOS beam detection system 400 configured according to at least some aspects of the present invention. In this figure, similar components may be given the same reference numbers and a detailed description of these components may not be repeated. The LOS beam detection system 400 may comprise an enclosure 40, a first and second portal 2A and 2B, a plurality of detection devices 43, a processing device 4, a communication device 5, and a storage device 6. The various components of the LOS beam detection system 400 will be described in greater detail below.

[0035]In this illustrative embodiment of the present invention, a plurality of detection devices 43 is contained within an enclosure 40. The plurality of detection devices 43 may preferably be located substantially equidistantly from the first and second portals 2A and 2B, for example, such as along a substantially constant radius from a center point between the first and second portals 2A and 2B (as shown by the radius R). The plurality of detection devices 43 are shown along a single row for the purposes of illustration only. The arrangement of the plurality of detection devices 43 may be regular or irregular, in one, two, or three dimensions.

[0036]The plurality of detection devices may be coupled to a processing device 4 integrated with a communication device 5, for example. The communicative feedback for the plurality of detection devices 43 may comprise a one or two dimensional image composed of variable colors of light showing the intensity of an individual signal at a location on a monitor corresponding to the location within the enclosure 40 of the particular detection device of the plurality of detection devices 43. Video communication may be the preferred way to communicate the plurality of signal streams to the subject and/or an operator/technician. However, auditory communication may still provide information including the average intensity of the LOS beam (e.g., a volume level corresponding to the highest signal strength) or the focus of the LOS beam (e.g., a variable frequency corresponding to a ratio of the average number of detection devices indicating the presence of a signal versus the total number of the plurality of detection devices). Alternatively, the communicative feedback of the plurality of detection devices 43 may track the LOS beam as a subject looks over the plurality of detection devices 43. For example, the communicative signal may track as the subject looks from side to side within the enclosure 40 or as the subject attempts to vary the focus of the LOS beam.

[0037]The processing device 4 may be coupled to an internal and/or external storage device 6, such as an electromagnetic, optical, flash, or virtual storage device (i.e., storage across various sites on the Internet), among others. The signals from the plurality of detection devices 43 may be stored for later retrieval and statistical processing and analysis, as well as assisting medical professionals in the monitoring and diagnosis of various illnesses and treatments.

ANOTHER EMBODIMENT

[0038]Referring now to FIGS. 5A and 5B, the reference numeral 500 generally indicates another illustrative embodiment of the LOS beam detection system 500 configured according to at least some aspects of the present invention. In this figure, similar components may be given the same reference numbers and a detailed description of these components may not be repeated. The LOS beam detection system 500 may comprise an enclosure 50 comprising first and second enclosures 50A and 50B (only 50A can be seen in FIG. 5A), an attachment member 52, detection devices 3 comprising first and second detection devices 3A and 3B (only 3A can be seen in FIG. 5A), a processing device 4, a communicative device 5, and a storage device 6. The various components of the LOS beam detection system 500 will be described in greater detail below.

[0039]The LOS beam detection system 500 shown in the figures may be substantially configured in the form of a pair of glasses or goggles. Since both sides of a pair of glasses are substantially symmetrical, only one side needs to be described in detail. The first enclosure 50A may fit around an eye in a manner similar to the way one side of a pair of waterproof goggles fits around an eye (e.g., forming a sealed environment within the goggles). There may not be a dedicated portal in this configuration because the first enclosure 50A may be open on one side. The eye and surrounding tissue may form the final wall of the first enclosure 50A. As with the previous illustrative embodiments, the first enclosure 50A may be electromagnetically shielded to prevent electrical noise and interference from disrupting or altering the detection signal from the first detection device 3A. In some embodiments, the first enclosure 50A may be transparent to allow the subject to visibly interact with their surroundings during the monitoring processes. In this case, a first detection device 3A with a high input impedance may be used.

[0040]The first detection device 3A may be located at any location on or within the first enclosure 50A. Preferably, the first detection device 3A may be located directly in the line of sight of a subject when the subject is looking straight ahead (e.g., indicated by the solid lines in FIG. 5A). However, in some embodiments the first detection device 3A may be located to one side or another of the first enclosure 50A (e.g., a position not normally in the line of sight, indicated by the broken lines in FIG. 5A). The LOS beam detection system 500 may function in this configuration as a switch, in which the subject may signal a change in state by looking off to the side, directly at the first detection device 3A. Whereas, during normal interaction, the subject may be able to substantially look around without triggering the first detection device 3A.

[0041]The first detection device 3A may be coupled to a processing device 4. The processing device may be internally or externally integrated with a communication device 5 and/or a storage device 6. Communicative feedback interaction and data processing and storage may be the same or similar to the previously discussed embodiments. The LOS beam detection system 500 may offer an advantage in that the detection devices 3 may be placed relatively close to the surface of the ocular area, potentially increasing the strength of the LOS beam received by each of the detection devices 3. In addition, the LOS beam detection system 500 may be worn relatively unobtrusively and conveniently, thereby permitting the monitoring and/or signaling via the detection devices 3 in a wide variety of environments and situations.

[0042]Having thus described the present invention by reference to certain of its preferred embodiments, it is noted that the embodiments disclosed are illustrative rather than limiting in nature and that a wide range of variations, modifications, changes, and substitutions are contemplated in the foregoing disclosure. In some instances, some features of the present invention may be employed without a corresponding use of the other features. Many such variations and modifications may be considered desirable by those skilled in the art based upon a review of the foregoing description of preferred embodiments. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the appended claims be construed broadly and in a manner consistent with the scope of the invention.
User avatar
jingofever
 
Posts: 2810
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:02 am

Woottt!!!
Eyes emit EM?
Sheeeeiiitt dude!
Has this been confirmed by any other source? Any scientific articles available on this?

That would certainly be in line with my theories on the role of eyes in focusing intent...And that would sure explain the phenomenon of feeling when someone is lookin at you...

Staring intently at another persons eyes for long periods is very freaky too. Done that a few times with a curious friend.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby lucky » Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:07 am

Penguin wrote

'Staring intently at another persons eyes for long periods is very freaky too. Done that a few times with a curious friend.

...and staring in a mirror Bbrrrrrr creeepy
There's holes in the sky where rain gets in
the holes are small
that's why rain is thin.
User avatar
lucky
 
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:39 am
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:54 pm

Id really like to see a peer reviewed article on this EM radiation :?
Anyone got any kind of other references than Ross?
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MinM » Sun May 03, 2009 11:29 pm

An interesting segment on "CBS Sunday Morning" this morning, featuring Dr. Colin Ross:

Scientists Try To Unlock The Mysteries Of How Memories Are Stored ... And Lost
Image
(CBS) We all forget things sometimes. It can even be funny, up to a point. But memory loss is often serious, and in the case of one rare form of memory loss - amnesia - sudden. Our Cover Story this morning is reported by Susan Spencer of 48 Hours:

One September day in 2001, a 33-year-old Texas woman got in her car to go to work. As she tells it, the next thing she knew, "There's a freeway here in Dallas and I began driving up the freeway, and I got up to Denton … and that's the last thing I remember."

This woman, who asked us to conceal her identity - and who we'll call Emily - says she had no idea why she was where she was.

"It was about 3:30 in the morning when I realized I was just outside Santa Fe, New Mexico," she said.

The drive from Dallas to Santa Fe is about 600 miles and takes 10 hours. Emily had no memory of it.

Exhausted, in an unknown city, without friends or family, she checked into a motel, and things got worse …

"When I woke up the next morning, I sat up and I didn't recognize the room," she said. "I didn't recognize the bag that was sitting on the chair, or the clothes that were lying over the chair. I didn't recognize myself in the mirror. I didn't know my name."

"And what went through your mind?" asked Spencer.

"Fear. A lot of fear."

She searched in vain for any identification.

"What was the last thing you did remember?" Spencer asked.

"Nothing," Emily replied.

"Nothing at all? So you had no past when you woke up in that hotel?"

"Unh-uh, unh-uh."

"The definition of amnesia is really just what it says: You're unable to recall important personal information," said psychiatrist Colin Ross, who diagnosed Emily with amnesia. He says that although her form of amnesia is very rare, he's seen a few similar cases.

"It's not just, 'I can't remember where I put my pen last week,'" said Dr. Ross. "It's got to be something major like, 'I don't remember my address,' or 'I don't remember my name,' or 'I don't remember my spouse.'"

The amnesiac hero has long been a Hollywood staple. Alfred Hitchcock put Gregory Peck through agony in the 1945 thriller, "Spellbound" ("I have no memory…it's like looking into the mirror and seeing only a mirror"). In the 1996 film "Memento," Guy Pearce's character who has no short-term memory tries to solve a murder. And as Jason Bourne, Matt Damon has spent three movies trying to figure out who he is ("I can't remember anything that happened before two weeks ago … I don't know who I am, I don't know where I'm going, none of it").

But in real life, the loss of memory is not an entertaining experience.

"Everybody describes it as very strange, scary, anxiety-provoking, disturbing, just hard to put your finger on, you know, exactly what it feels like," Dr. Ross said...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/ ... 7604.shtml
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby justdrew » Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:49 pm

In 2008, Dr. Ross applied for the James Randi Educational Foundation's One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge with the claim that he can shoot beams of energy out of his eyeballs and cause a speaker, receiving no other input, to sound a tone. [5] During later correspondence with Dr. Steven Novella of The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe, he conceded that the equipment he was using was, in fact, a biofeedback machine attached to his laptop, and that the laptop was responding in a well-understood way to an eyeblink. However, he claimed that he could still send energy beams out of his eyes, and was working on modifying the software to ignore an eyeblink.[6] His claim has not currently been tested by the JREF.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_A._Ross


this is the only update I've found on this. Didn't see anything about it as his institute website.

also, I don't really want to start a thread about it, but the Martha Hurt case may be worth talking about, but maybe that's not a good thing to bring up. Seems like highly inflammable material and hasn't been brought up here as far as I know.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/content/printVersion/275177
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Postby American Dream » Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:41 pm

The Martha Hurt case is something from more than a decade ago. And she definitely was hooked up with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, for whatever that is worth.

Unraveling the mystery that is Colin Ross encompasses much more than this one case, interesting though it may be.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby LilyPatToo » Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:03 pm

I'd not heard of Martha Hunt's case before, but it clearly shows how easy it is for the FMFS creeps to get publicity that appears to discredit the memories of all traumatic abuse victims :? :(

The Texas woman who ended up in New Mexico had a dissociative fugue experience. I've had those too and they're extremely disorienting--much more so than the more common small (hour or so) chunks of "missing time." When in my early 20's, I set out for the supermarket one day in western PA and came to in West Virginia hours later, with no memory of having driven there or of the route I'd taken.

It's upsetting as hell when the event is a random spontaneous dissociative episode. But when there are indications that it was deliberately induced by a handler who has taken advantage of it (in order to access a particular part of a multiple's alter system), it becomes a nightmare. My ex-husband was a scientist working at a national lab back then and his reaction to the incident was very uncharacteristic for him--there was no retaliatory abuse (mental or physical) and he seemed to be amused by it. So I suspect that it was part of an experiment, but will probably never know for certain.

In any event, notice how Dr. Ross's new hobby has automatically caused any discussion of him to now be associated with all sorts of paranormal phenomena. Some of it is undoubtably genuine, but in the minds of most folks, it will cause a knee-jerk dismissal of ALL of his work, including his meticulous investigation of MKULTRA history. Even though in his book he let the CIA off the hook almost entirely, he at least called to account all the psychologists and spychiatrists who collaborated with the spooks. Now he's neatly discredited himself (IMHO) and can't be cited without risking ridicule from MC skeptics. Which sucks.

LilyPat
User avatar
LilyPatToo
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 3:08 pm
Location: Oakland, CA USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests