Has NASA found (potentially) extraterrestrial life? (1 Viewer)

[Adam Caramon]

Adam,

I am not showing people who are believers so as to convince you. Only doing it to illustrate what can, at least in part, make me think about things in different directions.

Okay. I get that. But how a discussion/debate works is you say why you think something, and then someone says why they think that is not right.

So you say that these certain incredibly exceptional people happen to see something, and that is, in part, what makes you think that there might be something out there. In other words, you are influenced by these people.

So, then I come in, and ask why you're influenced by this small group of people. Is it because they're intelligent? If so, I show you studies indicating that intelligent people, as a group, are less religious than other groups.

Is it for a different reason? Then we can analyze that and look for evidence to support or detract from your stance.

I'm trying to get you to give me the criteria by which you're making your decisions. But maybe that's where I have been failing. Maybe you don't really have any criteria, or you do, but are not conscious of it.

As a very general thing, that is, plenty of exceptions, atheists will often be employees and their income will be lower than they think it should be.

That is so general as not to mean anything. I'd be willing to wager that on a whole, 80+% of people will have incomes lower than what they think they should be.

They are not often found in the sales areas, especially the self employed sales areas.

But you have no facts, research, or anything to back this up. Just your personal insight.

The reason these debates will never resolve is because each side approaches things from a different direction. In addition our personalities and experiences pre dispose us to one view or the other.

Now there is something I can 100% agree with you on.

Having said that, my intention was never to change your mind. I was trying to learn something about your method of thinking (which was why I kept asking for specifics).

At the end of the day, I can only conclude that your outlook is based almost entirely on personal experience.

Glaxiom,

The editor in me has to point out that you have spelled Galaxiom's name wrong numerous times.

 

[Mike375]

So you say that these certain incredibly exceptional people happen to see something, and that is, in part, what makes you think that there might be something out there. In other words, you are influenced by these people.

Those sort of people make think about the Bible part of the debate and too look in a way to see if I can see what they are seeing. I guess I approach this stuff a little hit like business in the sense that if the mind is right then you see opportunities that are otherwise missed.

The Bible is like anything else, that is, it can be approached with a view to disprove it or it can be approached with a view to prove it. I have done both and will continue that way. However, I am the first to admit that I am more influenced by those with lost of academic qualifications who have also acheived great heights. Lots to be learnt when climbing the mountain, and it is a mountain that is usually against the person.

So, then I come in, and ask why you're influenced by this small group of people. Is it because they're intelligent? If so, I show you studies indicating that intelligent people, as a group, are less religious than other groups.

I am well aware that the "something must be there" is a minority view with people who have high academic qualifications but as you and others have often said, popularity of opinion does not necessarily make the opinion correct.

I'm trying to get you to give me the criteria by which you're making your decisions. But maybe that's where I have been failing. Maybe you don't really have any criteria, or you do, but are not conscious of it.

My criteria is probably no different to others who share similar views and is a combination of things. Firstly my general life experiences strongly suggest that there is some "force" at play. Secondly the science part of it seems to be forever changing. Certainly the people like Eugene Cernan and others prove without doubt that those with high academic and very high achievement see something. I suspect if people like that did not exist then my views would change.

However, I do think the Eugen Cernans of the world, the big income medical specialists and others may also be influenced by the telepathy type of thing or the outside force. There is absolutely no question that those who try and climb the mountain are the ones who most experience this type of thing. I don't believe these people arrive at their position because of some analytical process.

That is so general as not to mean anything. I'd be willing to wager that on a whole, 80+% of people will have incomes lower than what they think they should be.

With lower income I meant in relation to other people. They tend to see too much income going to the "sales" side. A small example. I have an aquaintance who is an Access developed and working for a company. He knows far more about Access than I do but he does not make the money. I can tell talking to him at times that it just does not seem right to him. Of course I make more money than him because I can sell, round up the business from a cold start. And I don't need to know everything because I can pay him $100 for a solution. Actually he gets a bit of a rev up when he gets a $100 for what might have taken 10 minutes. But it does not last, he goes back to his desk and takes his weekly salary and then complains about the income of the manager while forgetting the manager gets the contracts in the door for him to work on.

But you have no facts, research, or anything to back this up. Just your personal insight.

That is bascally correct and as I posted above I think the people with high academic qualifications that are on this side of the table are the same.

But what facts do you have that covers pre Big Bang

At the end of the day, I can only conclude that your outlook is based almost entirely on personal experience.

Personal experience tends to form the starting position and you continue until proven wrong. Use an example with Access and how we might be different. When I decided to do Access for a living the last thing on my mind at that stage was learning more about it. My first thing was the prospecting, what had to be done to present to X people per week. I already knew enough to know what could be done with Access and that was all I needed to conduct a first interview. Now that approach was formed because of my personal experience of the insurance business.

However, if you launched out tomorrow to be a self employed Access person you might approach things very differently because of your personal experiences.

The editor in me has to point out that you have spelled Galaxiom's name wrong numerous times.

My apologies. The a is obvious when youthink about it

 

[Mike375]

Adam,

There is a book called Think and Grow Rich. The "Rich" bit does not necessarily mean money. I was writtem in the 1930s by a bloke called Napoleon Hill. It is the mother and father of any and all things to do with motivation. Even though written a long time ago it is still a current big seller. It is also done chapter by chapter on Youtube and from original film.

Best to have the actual book but I have linked it below for online. You will in the book see where much of the thinking of people like myself comes from. You will find that blokes who got to great heights, could be Neil Armstrong getting to be the first man or Werner von Braun driving the Saturn V and probably Stephen Hawking and all used the principles in the book, although often with out knowing it.

But if someone is not pre disposed to this sort of thing then they won't get past the first couple of pages.

http://www.utopianwebstrategy.com.au/uws/wp-content/uploads/think-and-grow-rich-napoleon-hill.pdf

It is very hard to put the stuff into practice although there might be some aspects of your life where you have put the principles into action but wtithout knowing it. But if Galaxion adopted the principles he could cease fiddling with Access and we would read about him in the same light as Hawking and Co. He would find a way to get there, might take a year or so. If Glaxiom had the burning desire plus a few other things and made the journey I would guarantee he would post differently in a couple of years time

 

[Galaxiom]

So how do can you get the answer when there are different physics in place elsewhere.

Because the physics the other universes will be a special case of a larger physics of which our's is also a special case. Physicists look for the deeper order in the phenomena we experience. The world looks flat on the small scale but is actually spherical. Relatively speaking. even at the extent of the Universe we still have the "flat" perspective.

Natural laws to me mean those that operate here and obviously extend beyond earth.

But you have repeatedly placed limits on the jurisdiction of Natural Law. You see nature as limited to our Universe. I, and other cosmologists see nature as encompasing all that there can be.

That is true, I don't think we can ever know. But the "god" could be a form of "physics" that is beyond your wildest imagination.

Perhaps beyond YOUR wildest imagination but not mine.

A thousand years ago nobody could make sense of how the water could go on "finding its own level" forever because they didn't understand what level meant in terms of a spherical Earth and the nature of Gravity.

Later we struggled with the conundrum of an infinite universe versus what would be beyond its bounds. Many still do but those who understand the deeper nature of SpaceTime manage quite well as we persue the greater structural secrets of the Omniverse.

Obviously I don't have your knowledge of physics. However, I don't have a preferred option for the solution and the reason is simple. The "solution" already exists. It is not like we are lobbying to get a "solution" across the line.

You don't have a preferred solution because you don't have the knowledge to make a judgement. I have always had a passion to understand what is going on in a coherent context and I have made the effort to learn about what we do know.

It bewilders me that you would accept "something out there" as a solution.

 

[Mike375]

But you have repeatedly placed limits on the jurisdiction of Natural Law. You see nature as limited to our Universe. I, and other cosmologists see nature as encompasing all that there can be.

But I am referring to "what you can get to"

You don't have a preferred solution because you don't have the knowledge to make a judgement.

How many people do?

It bewilders me that you would accept "something out there" as a solution.

I am sorry to have bewildered you

 

[Mike375]

It bewilders me that you would accept "something out there" as a solution.

Forgot to ask, what is the solution?

 

[Galaxiom]

The Bible is like anything else, that is, it can be approached with a view to disprove it or it can be approached with a view to prove it. I have done both and will continue that way.

No wonder you have never made much progress. Starting with a position on the outcome always introduces a bias.

Firstly my general life experiences strongly suggest that there is some "force" at play.

A "force" that you seem to think is a manifestation of a primordial "something out there" (SOT) consciousness.

You should also contemplate that despite the apparent reality, Einstein showed that Gravitation IS NOT really a force but a consequence of the geometry of SpaceTime. The presence of mass changes the meaning of straight. When we know why this happens we will make a grand leap.

Secondly the science part of it seems to be forever changing.

That is the strngth of science. Faith is weak because it is rigid and inward focussed.

The details of science change but the big stuff is steady. As we improved our observations we discovered. The extent of the detail is so great that the need for change is inevitable.

In terms of cosmology the big step was in 1924 when Edwin Hubble used a new big telescope to show the Universe extended beyond the Milky Way. By 1929 he has demonstrated everything was moving apart, laying the foundations for the Big Bang. Evertyhing since has been detail. Likewise Quntum Mechanic and Relativity. These are old science now.

There is absolutely no question that those who try and climb the mountain are the ones who most experience this type of thing. I don't believe these people arrive at their position because of some analytical process.

Those that use the analytical processes come up with the enduring answers. Those who did it by esoteric contemplation without bothering with reality checks are those who wrote the religious texts.

But what facts do you have that covers pre Big Bang

By and large cosmologist don't accept that the Big Bang came from nothing. Although the "outside" can't be directly observed we look for evidence that remains on the "inside". The anisotropy of the Universe is the big clue that is currently the subject of intense investigation.

But like Einstein. the big breakthough will come when someone philosophically steps outside of the square and proposes a structure that suggests new observations. Gone are the days when we could sail off to faraway lands to gain perspective. We have to use "thought experiements" in the tradition of Einstein.

Personal experience tends to form the starting position and you continue until proven wrong.

But we must we willing to embrace those things which contradict our starting position or we remain forever stuck in fantasy.

 

[Mike375]

No wonder you have never made much progress. Starting with a position on the outcome always introduces a bias.

Not really. You can approch to prove wrong or can approach to prove correct. Different information rises to the surface.

A "force" that you seem to think is a manifestation of a primordial "something out there" (SOT) consciousness.

I have said several times that I don't regard this force as being related to the start of the universe. I am inclined to thisnk as do many others that it is telepathy related.

You should also contemplate that despite the apparent reality, Einstein showed that Gravitation IS NOT really a force but a consequence of the geometry of SpaceTime. The presence of mass changes the meaning of straight. When we know why this happens we will make a grand leap.

Yes I was aware of that. But for practical purposes gravity is a force.

That is the strngth of science. Faith is weak because it is rigid and inward focussed.

The details of science change but the big stuff is steady. As we improved our observations we discovered. The extent of the detail is so great that the need for change is inevitable.

Covered this before with Adam. But it is the changing the science and the unkown science that strengtens the religious, spiritual or whatever you want to call it.

In terms of cosmology the big step was in 1924 when Edwin Hubble used a new big telescope to show the Universe extended beyond the Milky Way. By 1929 he has demonstrated everything was moving apart, laying the foundations for the Big Bang. Evertyhing since has been detail. Likewise Quntum Mechanic and Relativity. These are old science now.

I was just reading about that on Stephen Hawking's website.

Those that use the analytical processes come up with the enduring answers. Those who did it by esoteric contemplation without bothering with reality checks are those who wrote the religious texts.

That is yet to be determined. However I agree 100% in general principle. And if you know the principle of how something works you can then expand and predict what will happen in a different environment. Those who rely completely on empirical evidence are limited. In this context empirical meaning experience.

For example, my "outside force" is not just based on a whim. I keep via my data base extremely detailed records of cold calling and I can tell you the only answer is something else is at play. If I did not have the hard numbers then I would write things off to selective memory. I believe it is some form of telepathy and because I can come up with nothing else.

By and large cosmologist don't accept that the Big Bang came from nothing. Although the "outside" can't be directly observed we look for evidence that remains on the "inside". The anisotropy of the Universe is the big clue that is currently the subject of intense investigation.

I was just reading that an initial resistance to Big Bang form the science perspective was introducing a beginning and hence a lead into religion.

As a side note, some people might say it is "very strange" that I was just reading this stuff as you came back onto the forum. My "outside force" is not based on something like that. Easy to explain.

But like Einstein. the big breakthough will come when someone philosophically steps outside of the square and proposes a structure that suggests new observations. Gone are the days when we could sail off to faraway lands to gain perspective. We have to use "thought experiements" in the tradition of Einstein.

As I have said before I don't think you will have the physics available to you to get the answer and it will stay as "something out there"

But we must we willing to embrace those things which contradict our starting position or we remain forever stuck in fantasy.

As I said, personal experience will determine the starting point and then until proven wrong. You do this all the time in business and you have to not only know when to change direction but then change the direction. In fact a common mistake in business is for someone whose desire is to prove their method correct as opposed to the desired end result being the goal.

 

[Adam Caramon]

Mike,

This is starting to remind me of a conversation I had with my grandmother a couple of years ago. She was terrified of flying on account of a recent terrorist attempt in our area. I tried to explain to her that there are thousands of flights, what would be the chances that the flight she was on would be targeted by a terrorist. And if that were to occur, what would be the chances that the terrorist would succeed?

If you look at all the statistics involving transportation methods, flying is always rated as being safer than driving, many times over. But she had it stuck in her head that she was going to drive instead of fly.

Now, I knew it was irrational. Her other family members also knew it was irrational and tried to explain it to her. But it didn't matter. The facts didn't matter. In her heart she believed that she was in serious danger if she flew, and no one could convince her otherwise.

I think that's the way it is with believers, older folks in general, and you specifically. You think something, you've convinced yourself that it is accurate, and no matter how much evidence could be shown to you, you can not change your mind. I don't think it is even a conscious decision for you.

However, I am the first to admit that I am more influenced by those with lost of academic qualifications who have also acheived great heights.

I am well aware that the "something must be there" is a minority view with people who have high academic qualifications...

Certainly the people like Eugene Cernan and others prove without doubt that those with high academic and very high achievement see something. I suspect if people like that did not exist then my views would change.

So let's follow your logic.

1. You're influenced by people with academic qualifications who also achieved great heights.
2. Only a small percent of the people that influence you see things the way you do (they're in the minority).
3. If they didn't, you suspect your view would be different.

Sounds to me like you came in with a set mind, found a few people that also agreed with you, and that "proved" it you. You can't find the answers you don't look for.

A small example. I have an aquaintance who is an Access developed and working for a company. He knows far more about Access than I do but he does not make the money.

I know this guy who's a mechanic and he wears a blue shirt. In fact, everyone at the shop that he works at wears a blue shirt.

Mechanics tend to wear blue shirts.

My apologies. The a is obvious when youthink about it

Quite so, but then you went and spelled it wrong twice, with different spellings each time. Usually a sign of hasty typing or a disorganized mind .

 

[Galaxiom]

Yes I was aware of that. But for practical purposes gravity is a force.

Just as you see your "force". No doubt someone in the past postulated that God has invisible strings attached to each object and pulled them.

But in fact it is a simple consequence of the geomety of SpaceTime as described in General Relativity.

Had you lived in 1900 you would have claimed that the true nature of gravity would never be known and SOT was responsible.

 

[Mike375]

Mike,
I think that's the way it is with believers, older folks in general, and you specifically. You think something, you've convinced yourself that it is accurate, and no matter how much evidence could be shown to you, you can not change your mind. I don't think it is even a conscious decision for you.

I think you are more that way. I am the one who does not have a definite position, except with the telepathy as I think see hard evidence for that all of the time but most especially where cold calling is involved because that is backed by hard numbers.

You're influenced by people with academic qualifications who also achieved great heights.

Not quite, outside this discussion just achieving great heights and especially relative to their potential. For this topic I factor in big academic stuff.

The siimple fact is there are plenty of people who are so far in front of you with science that gap is almost infinity yet some of these same people go all the way, that is, all the way to "born again"

Only a small percent of the people that influence you see things the way you do (they're in the minority).

I don't really know that is true or not. In my own direct world that is not the case. However, I am happy to go along with you on the point.

[/quote]

If they didn't, you suspect your view would be different.

[/quote]

I think so in terms of the universe etc but not with telepathy. With the telepathy I am dealing with that as a reality and direct knowledge.

Sounds to me like you came in with a set mind, found a few people that also agreed with you, and that "proved" it you. You can't find the answers you don't look for.

Actually quite the opposite. At about at age 15 I bought with my pocket moneyy Darwin's book. By the time I left school I regarded the Catholic and other organised churches as purely man made. In my 20s through to about 32 or 33 I was atheist. About that time I had my first success in insurance with the big medical blokes and that is when change started to occur with me. The change occurred of course because these blokes were very far removed from being atheist.

There was a very strong correlation between very high income (for the speciality) and high academic for the specialty and a spiritual/religious situation.

As a side not I signed up a cardiothoracic surgeon who was and still is an atheist. I got to know him very well in a short time and he arrange for me to see a day of open heart surgery and I took my father along as he was very interested. I won't bore you with the details but on that day the cardiothoracic said "what has just happened now brings me on board with the telepathy as there is no other explanation". That same surgeon was a low income for a cardiothoracic and remained that way through his working life.

Quite so, but then you went and spelled it wrong twice, with different spellings each time. Usually a sign of hasty typing or a disorganized mind .

Fast typing

 

[Mike375]

Just as you see your "force". No doubt someone in the past postulated that God has invisible strings attached to each object and pulled them.

But in fact it is a simple consequence of the geomety of SpaceTime as described in General Relativity.

Had you lived in 1900 you would have claimed that the true nature of gravity would never be known and SOT was responsible.

Possibly, I don't know. As you know I have grown up in a time where we have Big Bang for beginnings and other universes.

But probably not because in general I have the view that the "something out there" is a kick starter as opposed to an interferer. Although I might well of had the opinion that no solution to gravity would be found.

I think you have the incorrect picture of me. I am just the opposite to the person singing down at the church with the attitude "we would not read stuff like that". I do Access for a living. 99% of my keen interests are science based such as the space program, dinosaurs, reptiles, internal ballistics for firearms, steam engines (the engine, not the train)

 

[Adam Caramon]

Mike,

How do you reconcile these statements:

However, I am the first to admit that I am more influenced by those with lost of academic qualifications who have also acheived great heights.

You're influenced by people with academic qualifications who also achieved great heights.

Not quite

I'm assuming in your first quote, "lost" was a typo and was supposed to be "lots". If that's correct, you said something, I repeated what you said nearly verbatim, and you disagree.

I'm pretty convinced that not even you are sure what you mean.

 

[Galaxiom]

Telepathy doen't seem too far fetched to me. Those who automatically jump to the conclusion that anyone who experiences what appears to be telepathy are not really being fair since science has not actually ruled it out. We just don't know of a process that would facilitate it.

Serious particle physicists have already been working on getting effect to precede cause after finding ways to arbitrarily delay effects. Such is the nature of Quantum. There are actually no known laws that insist time cannot progress backwards.

Moreover, a highly respected researcher is about to be published in a highly regarded peer reviewed journal for an experiement where the outcome of an action has been shown to have an effect before the action is undertaken.

The classic experiment is to randomly select a list of words and ask the participants to type a random selection of those words. Then ask them to recall as many words as they can. Unsurprisingly they recall the words they typed more easily.

Now the twist. This experimenter reversed the process. They were first asked to recall as many of the words as possible THEN to type a some of them selected by the researcher at random.

Remarkably the participants had statistically significantly better memory for the words they subsequently typed. The work has been peer reviewed and nobody can fault the methodology as yet.

Unbelievable? Well the researcher thought so too and worked for eight years before he was convinced that the results were not a statistical glitch.

If it is replicated then it will be an important insight into reality.

Is it "something out there"? All natural as far as I am concerned.

 

[Mike375]

Adam,

The first statement is in relation to this topic.

If you read my post you would see the second statement was qualified for when this topic is not the issue. For example I have always been very impressed by Harland Sanders (Co Sanders KFC) but I could not care if he goy 5 from 2 + 1 In fact I would be even more impressed if that was the case.

For this topic you could say I am borrowing from the academic as I don't have anywhere near the knowledge required.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think blokes like Wener von Braun and the Eugene Cernans were illiterate fools and also suffering from a very low IQ.

Do you think a medical specialist who could also qualify as a civil engineer is some sort of low IQ dill. Of course some people would say the medical specialist is the top man at passing courses but that hardly makes him a dill.

 

[Mike375]

Telepathy doen't seem too far fetched to me. Those who automatically jump to the conclusion that anyone who experiences what appears to be telepathy are not really being fair since science has not actually ruled it out. We just don't know of a process that would facilitate it.

I can tell you it is a fact and the degree to which exist varies from person to person.

But there is no doubt some people who experience it translate it to evidence for religion. I am just the opposite because I have never seen anything occur "that is strange and unexplainable" where a physical object moved on its own.

Serious particle physicists have already been working on getting effect to precede cause after finding ways to arbitrarily delay effects. Such is the nature of Quantum. There are actually no known laws that insist time cannot progress backwards.

I had been under the impression to go backwards would need the speed of light to be exceeded. As to future travel I don't see the bit about leaving earth at 75% light speed and returning etc as true time travel. More like a form of suspended animation. In fact if suspended animation could be done the result would be identical.

Moreover, a highly respected researcher is about to be published in a highly regarded peer reviewed journal for an experiement where the outcome of an action has been shown to have an effect before the action is undertaken.

Very interesting this sort of stuff.

The classic experiment is to randomly select a list of words and ask the participants to type a random selection of those words. Then ask them to recall as many words as they can. Unsurprisingly they recall the words they typed more easily.

Now the twist. This experimenter reversed the process. They were first asked to recall as many of the words as possible THEN to type a some of them selected by the researcher at random.

Remarkably the participants had statistically significantly better memory for the words they subsequently typed. The work has been peer reviewed and nobody can fault the methodology as yet.

Unbelievable? Well the researcher thought so too and worked for eight years before he was convinced that the results were not a statistical glitch.

If it is replicated then it will be an important insight into reality.

Is it "something out there"? All natural as far as I am concerned.

I don't disagree with that at all.

 

[Rabbie]

Mike, I am not sure why you are making a link between a belief in Telepathy and a belief in a deity. While I don't believe in a deity I have an open mind on telepathy subject to properly controlled tests. We have all seen faked demonstrations of telepathy where the information is confirmed by code words or other signals. I can sometimes tell exactly what my wife is thinking but that is due to knowing how she will react in certain circumstances. The same goes for other people I know well. Indeed I can predict quite often how certain people will respond on this forum. I expect other people can also predict my responses

Many extremely good sales people are easy to sell to or so I have been told by a very succesful sales manager so perhaps it is not so surprising they have bought into the idea of God.

 

[Adam Caramon]

The first statement is in relation to this topic.

And the second is not? Maybe you could tell me when you go off on tangents so I can try to follow with you. To me, its pretty clear that you're confusing yourself.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think blokes like Wener von Braun and the Eugene Cernans were illiterate fools and also suffering from a very low IQ.

You have a very difficult time following the conversation. As you'll see if you look through previous posts, I've been calling these people "exceptional people". Would you assume that means I think they're illiterate fools with low IQs?

There's obviously a hurdle in your mind with these individuals. You think that because they are exceptional (<- look, I did it again), and think "something is out there" that in fact that means there is something out there. To you, this information is a smoking gun. Its as clear as day, to you.

In fact, it is so clear and obvious to you that this proves your point, that you can't seem to get that it doesn't prove the point to other people.

Can we move on? Your circular arguments are getting me dizzy.

 

[Mike375]

Mike, I am not sure why you are making a link between a belief in Telepathy and a belief in a deity. While I don't believe in a deity I have an open mind on telepathy subject to properly controlled tests. We have all seen faked demonstrations of telepathy where the information is confirmed by code words or other signals. I can sometimes tell exactly what my wife is thinking but that is due to knowing how she will react in certain circumstances. The same goes for other people I know well. Indeed I can predict quite often how certain people will respond on this forum. I expect other people can also predict my responses

I think the telepathy thing just sort of expanded with posting with Adam.

Many extremely good sales people are easy to sell to or so I have been told by a very succesful sales manager so perhaps it is not so surprising they have bought into the idea of God.

The selling where you most commonly find the religious or whatever you like to call it is where the salesman is usually self employed and he canvasses for business. In other words he has a direct control on outcomes.

If he really goes hard at it then you see all sorts of strange things happen. Give you a simple example. Let's say the salesmen generates 2 new cold appointments per week. As a rough rule that will mean with second interviews and sometimes third interviews he will end up having 4 appointments per week. In short he is taking it easy. He will of course have a certain closing ratio.

Now let's take the same salesmen and he really goes all out and generates 12 new appointments a week which ultimately wll develop in to 25 or so appointments. I can tell you that to do that in Sydney with the traffic you won't have time to sit down and eat. You eat in the car, I know because I have done it

A strange thing happens and that is the bloke going all out for it and no time to sit down and eat gets a significantly higher closing rate. Yet he has far less time to follow up leads and prepare stuff or get things done for them. It is almost as if he radiates something off himself.

There is also another strange thing happens. Even though he has zero time left for anything else the rest of his life just seems to fall into place. It is almost like there is some force that clears everything out of the way for him. What will bring most to a stop is the big bundle of dollars coming in. The person who has what it takes whether it be the selling, a Werner von Braun etc can and does still carry on until the ultimate goal is reached and that journey brings out the stuff that causes the religion, especially those who go all the way to "born again" or if they are Catholic then Mass every morning.

As to selling to salesman I think we buy concepts and then move on. And remember the big earning doctor or the Werner von Brauns are or have been in von Braun's case, are salesman.

Strange as it may seem the situation I outlined above also applies to the surgeon. Anaethetists will tell you that the real big income surgeon who is moving at a million miles an hour, both with cases and his practice issues, is often not as good techically as the low end bloke but his score or success rate is much better. The anaethetist will tell you along the lines of.....they just seem to get the timing right for when to operate, almost as if by magic etc.....

 

[Mike375]

And the second is not? Maybe you could tell me when you go off on tangents so I can try to follow with you. To me, its pretty clear that you're confusing yourself.

Adam,

I thought I was clear. If I am interested in motivation then Harland Sanders would be impressive. But I need no science from him to lend weight to his opinion. But for stuff like 'how did we get here" the Eugene Cernans of the world add the missing the bit which is needed to lend weight their opinion.

Read the psot again. For the "how did we get here deal" I want extremely high achievement in combination with with academic qualifications. But for other stuff I only need the person to have been very high in achievement..

Thus my answer to you in the other post was..... not quite etc.

There's obviously a hurdle in your mind with these individuals. You think that because they are exceptional (<- look, I did it again), and think "something is out there" that in fact that means there is something out there. To you, this information is a smoking gun. Its as clear as day, to you.

No it does not prove it but it lends weight. Their general or gut feeling views are the same as mine. Adding all the science did not alter that. Thus in my opinion if suddenly tomorrow I had those sort of qualifications and associated knowledge then my views would not change.