As I practice Psychosomatic Healing and have a 90% success rate, money back garantee on what I do,
indicates I have some insight and more than most on the subject of psychosomatic healing.
Tony Andrews, having no training or ability in that field and not even knowing the difference
between psychosomatic healing and psychosomatic medicine, pretends he knows something about it.
I’ve suggested on other websites that if anyone [psychiatrists, psychologists, doctors, nuerologists, criminologists, or any other physical healer] knows more about psychosomatic healing than I do, let them put their money [$1000] where their mouth is.

Psychosomatic Healing
http://www.psychosomatic-healing.co.nz

Tony Andrews Wrote
Thanks for your feedback.

A psychosomatic illness or disorder has physiological symptoms that are
caused by mental processes of the “sufferer” and not by actual physiological
causes. Mental is a combination of intellect and emotion and has nothing to
do with spiritual. To associate spiritual beliefs with psychosomatic
disorders is a mere ruse in an attempt to gain credibility for the existence
of spirituality.

Placebo medicines have been used as a “quick-fix cure” for psychosomatic
disorders in the past. It has been realised however that this method is
merely replacing one belief with another which actually cures nothing. Two
wrongs don’t make a right. Spiritual beliefs are placebos realities and do
nothing to actually cure psychosomatic disorders. You are not practicing
psychosomatic healing you are merely replacing one belief with another and
wrongly claming that the results are a cure. In the process you are sucking
gullible people in to a ludicrous religious belief system that was created
by a science fiction writer.

Have a nice afterlife

Tony

feedback..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

The age of enlightenment? – i think not!

phil(whoar.co.nz)

No, the method that I used is independent of me or other scientists whether I am here or not. It is independent of human existence. The method I used is the universal laws of the universe, it was here way before humans existed and they will still be here when we humans all long gone. The universal laws of the universe is built on conservation principles, for it to be falsified, then we accept that everything around us is not real, ie, your last post was just an illusion, you didn’t use a computer to post that message since the computer was just a figment of imagination, what you see if front of you is not real, just illusion, etc… See, if psychic claims is to be hold true then conservation laws is out the window because it contradicts those. These opposing views/concepts can’t be both true. Either conservation laws of the universe is bullshit where you can accept that everything around you is illusion or otherwise that psychic claims is bullshit. Which is your pick? Everything is illusion or psychic claims who can’t even spell the names of the dead people they claim to talk to? Something like this. I am talking to a spirit of person with a name starting with J… or perhaps Jim, John, Jane, blah, blah, … bullshit.

Ok, haha, time for disclaimers! Spill the beans falafulu fisi -why do you need to know that psychic ability is not possible? Are you an atheist? You can’t suggest the existence of spirit in one post, and know all the implications of that, and then deny that spirit exists because it cannot be found by physics. You suggested spirit – yes you. It’s a concept humans have struggled with since they first stood up. Explore for chrissake. I’m not interested in what you personally believe, nor do I want to tear your belief system down for fun on a rainy morning, but you can’t claim certainty using the method you are.

Whatever term that psychics choose to use, it is irrelevant, since the universe is made up of either mass or energy and these 2 entities are interchangeable via the Einstein equation: E = m*c^2 , ie, heat/radiation can be condensed and become mass, as well as mass can vaporize & become radiation (nuclear reaction). Anything that psychic claims to be outside these 2 entities (mass/energy) is hokum. This is the typical excuse that is used by psychics and its followers, saying that science can’t prove everything. Science can prove that psychics is bullshit, end of story, no ifs no buts.

From an objectivist point of view in philosophy the concept of infinity can’t materially exist. It is a useful tool in mathematical abstraction, but it cannot be applied to the physical world. A thing must have an identity, ie, A is A. You can’t have an entity that is both A and B simultaneously.

Now to psychic. Here is a simple thought experiment to be tested. Assemble a group/team of say 3 psychics per team of 5 teams from the general population. Disperse those 5 teams to different locations on the planet to do readings on the same supposedly dead person. Each team don’t know that there are other teams out there in different locations trying to talk to the same dead spirit. The coordinator of these different teams, must time that these groups start their reading at the same time, even they might be in different time zones but it is vital that they are being done simultaneously. It is easily demonstrable that these group will claim to talk to this same spirit simultaneously.

What does that implies? Well it implies that the spirit is everywhere at once, ie, not localized, but smeared itself out globally so that different parts of it appear to different teams at different locations simultaneously. Philosophically, the existence of such infinite everywhere at once, must be dismissed because the thing (A, B, C or whatever) or entity doesn’t possess an identity anymore. Anything that doesn’t have identity must be an imaginary object, ie, it doesn’t exist in the physical world that we observe. If those imaginary objects are being promoted as real, (in the sense of the physical universe and its known laws that we witnessed around us) by its proponents, ie, psychics and believers, then those individuals must be categorized as delusional.

We should be laughing these guys off the screens – and the TVNZ execs who endorse them.

Exposing Graham Capill’s crime – and his hypocrisy – was not an attack on Christianity. Proving his crime did not disprove his religion – just how he was practicing it!!

The real question: if the Sensing Murder psychics were plumbers/car dealers/builders – what would Target/Consumer/Fair Go/Commerce Commision be saying/doing?

I think we should be subjecting these individuals to the ordinary tests of credibility and performance. That is far simpler (and more important) than the broader issues of spirituality and the “other world”.

You say the psychics get their info from an “energy” source. The error is that you take them at their word that what they’re dealing with is “energy.” You have proven that what they claim to use is not energy governed by the laws of physics, but you have not proven that they are not using something else to get their info. Your scientific model is being used to disprove, not explore – which is bad science. Later you imply it is “spirit”, but you do not go looking for evidence of spirit. The argument is then one of technical terms. If they call it “paloomanga-doodoo” instead of energy, then what? Just because they don’t know the correct term for what they claim to use, it does no mean it doesn’t exist. Before man had a name for heat, did he deny it’s existence? Anyway, I’m not doing this to prove psychics are right, but to encourage a better argument that they are frauds, or to discover exactly what it is that they experience.

So if we use your implication that it is “spirit”, how do we prove it is spirit? What test is there for spiritual experience? Does spirit have a form that cannot be measured by physics? That would be the obvious suggestion, but it does not mean it can’t or won’t ever be measured. I have no idea how you go about measuring the occurance of spirit. It sounds like something theology is concerned with.

Making my own leap of logic, I may be asking you prove the existence of god by using science, which I doubt you can. Congratulations for proving what psychics claim to use is not energy as we know it.

My head is becoming cluttered with p’s, h’s, and y’s and s’.

But Falufalu Fisu, how can you reject psychics on philosophical grounds alone? That’s saying, “I don’t believe because I don’t want to believe”. That’s Reid’s point. The paranormal obviously threatens your worldview and you don’t want a bar of it.

Similarly, socialists don’t believe the likes of ACT, not because it doesn’t make sense, but because it threatens their emotional belief in the power of the state.

And conservatives don’t believe in psychics because they’re brought up to believe in another brand of paranormality called God.

As for the laws of physics, have they not been updated at various times as new information comes along?

I think the only certainty in the world is that we cannot possibly exist.

(Well, how can we? Whatever created us must first have been created by something else, and so on, making it impossible for the first thing to have been created.)

I rather like the theory that God is a CD-ROM, with everything that’s ever going to happen having already happened. But who or what burned it?

How can we be sure of anything (except that Winston Peters is toast)?

He is a 20th level Mage. Of course he can cast spells.

There are millions of psychic followers around the world, not because it works but because there are suckers everywhere.

Psychics who are genuinely believe their abilities are delusional, simple as that.

It’s unfortunate since it closes your mind to alternatives. The roots of the ’safe position’ lie in those emotions that create resistance to consider alternatives and unless you understand those emotions in yourself you’ll be forever bound to pick at the edges and never penetrate to the root.

It leads to irrational thinking such as seen, for example, in those lefties that profess Hulun’s position on Winston is reasonable.

Sometimes conservatives label such people as ‘useful idiots.’ Ever thought about looking in the mirror?

Personally, I try never to reach a conclusion, since once you do that, subconsciously you reject the evidence that doesn’t support it and hold fast to that which does. I have positions, but they are always open to change. I have found that the more I strive to keep those channels open, the better I become at predicting and understanding.