Is Penis/Breast Growth Really Possible?

[GrimIronMan]

[Post was removed manually by GrimIronMan due to double post. Sorry guys!]

[GrimIronMan]

[quote="abazabam"]That sounds very ridiculous. I was also looking at some of the things that people are voting for and I can't believe that something that is supposed to give you "psychic abilities" is second on the list. There's no such thing.[/quote]

Some have reported success with the files that increase growth of the aformentioned areas. There are, as my knowledge, no success stories with psychic files on this website. However, I take offense to your statement of "There's no such thing." Do you have cold hard proof that psychic powers do not exist? Let me answer that. No, you do not. Psychic powers have not been disproven nor proven. That may be your position on this issue, but please, try to state that you THINK that psychic powers do not exist instead of flatly stating that what you say is right. This is how I took your message. If I am wrong, please correct me.

~_-Grim-_~

[Rakeela]

Personally, I enjoy "chasing ghosts" - doing things that might greatly increase my control over life if successful, but that have lottery odds. I typically don't invest any money into these projects and only invest a little time.
The hypnosis files on this site fit that category pretty well. I can spend a half hour a day and no money at all, trying to ingrain a specific file into my subconscious. If it fails, I haven't really lost anything that I wasn't willing to sacrifice in the first place. And if it succeeds, then I've gained a lot.

There's nothing wrong with hypnosis files attempting to improve psychic abilities. Personally, I don't think they're likely to work. However, they remind me too strongly of my own hobby for me to criticize them. Leave people to chase their ghosts. More of them than you think are fully aware of the unlikeliness of their success and are really just doing it for fun, like I do.

[makidas]

[quote="abazabam"]That sounds very ridiculous. I was also looking at some of the things that people are voting for and I can't believe that something that is supposed to give you "psychic abilities" is second on the list. There's no such thing.[/quote]
Allow me to answer your question with a question. Do you believe breast/penis growth and/or psychic abilities are possible through hypnosis? You'll find your response to be the answer to your question.

[MikeWulf]

You can't just make something up and give it a name. There isn't any evidence of Psychic bullshit so why do you believe in it? Some fantastic notion is discovered and suddenly you yell it's real because no-one can prove it is not? Did you read someones mind at some point? Bah!

[GrimIronMan]

[quote="MikeWulf"]You can't just make something up and give it a name. There isn't any evidence of Psychic bullshit so why do you believe in it? Some fantastic notion is discovered and suddenly you yell it's real because no-one can prove it is not? Did you read someones mind at some point? Bah![/quote] Calm yourself. I was just stating my opinion, and also saying that I think that he should make it clearer for some in the future to avoid getting flamed. I even asked the guy to correct me if I was wrong. Anyway, back on topic. I think the growth of body parts is solid. Ifc you think, hypnosis is telling your subconcious what to do. Basically, it can produce more testosterone or produce less. But please, Mike, try to refrain from outbursts like that, or risk getting flamed. I personally believe in psychic abilities. That's my stand and I'm sticking to it.

[chymos]

[quote="MikeWulf"]You can't just make something up and give it a name. There isn't any evidence of Psychic bullshit so why do you believe in it? Some fantastic notion is discovered and suddenly you yell it's real because no-one can prove it is not? Did you read someones mind at some point? Bah![/quote]

Not trying to turn this into a flame war or anything, but, umm.......I seriously hope you're not religious, MikeWulf, because if you are, you just declared yourself a hypocritical atheist. Just thought I'd point that out. If you really *are* an atheist, and not in any way religious, well, in one ear and out the other, eh?

Please be a bit less hostile and attacking in stating your opinions in the future. Just because you're not standing face to face with the person you're addressing is no call to throw manners and courtesy out the window.

[MikeWulf]

Har har har. Why am I a hypocrite though?

[BobbyS]

I think he means that you are a hypocrite because if you apply your stance about psychic abilities to religion, it's impossible for you to be religious - you don't believe in psychic abilities because there's no evidence but you still feel the lack of contradictory evidence means nothing. Therefore, if you apply it God, who you have no solid evidence of existing, then if you still believe in him due to a lack of contradictory evidence you are a hypocrite. And if you still follow your logic about psychic abilities, you must be atheist too. Therefore, you are a hypocritical atheist.

Unless you were an atheist before you posted of course.

[MikeWulf]

Oh, I get it now. Yeah, tis' all faff.

[OMGWTFBBQ]

Haha, good.

Anyway, have these files ever cause physical changes percievable by others?

Any that don't influence the phyisical body, but rather the psyche, I can be sure work. Paul McKenna and others have proven that hypnosis for psychological purposes works.

But can hypnosis actually affect the corporeal world?

[Jack]

In the early 1900s up until about 30 years ago there were hypnotists who made efforts to cause physiological changes.

There are reports of hypnotists causing and removing skin lesions. There are also reports of people with multiple personalities where one personality was diagnosed with having asthma or type 1 diabetes and yet when they switched to another personality there was no trace of either ailment.

I'm sure there are hypnotists out there that are making efforts to advance and popularize these findings; I just haven't been reading their reports or have found them to be too lacking in the scientific area to be considered valid.

[MikeWulf]

You can't change the perception of one person by hypnotising another. I don't know how that could even work.

[sandy82]

[quote="BobbyS"]I think he means that you are a hypocrite because if you apply your stance about psychic abilities to religion, it's impossible for you to be religious - you don't believe in psychic abilities because there's no evidence but you still feel the lack of contradictory evidence means nothing. Therefore, if you apply it God, who you have no solid evidence of existing, then if you still believe in him due to a lack of contradictory evidence you are a hypocrite. And if you still follow your logic about psychic abilities, you must be atheist too. Therefore, you are a hypocritical atheist.

Unless you were an atheist before you posted of course.[/quote]

BobbyS, very well phrased and a good argument. I'm not taking sides in this one, but I would add here the "Leroy Brown factor." I believe in Leroy Brown because the song says he has a razor in his shoe. :wink:

IOW, there is the fear factor. For many, that's what makes the world go around. They don't believe in psychic stuff because it doesn't scare them sufficiently. But the prospect of Someone with all the Power--that's different.

If John Doe is scared shitless, hypocrisy is probably the least of his troubles.

Also, technically, is MikeWulf really a hypocrite? I think of hypocrisy as a person's claim to be virtuous (because of the benefits from being seen as virtuous) when, underneath, the person is really vice-ridden. The hypocrisy is even worse when the claim to virtue empowers the person to be even more vicious under the surface or away from keen eyes. The real problem with successful hypocrisy is the increased power to hurt others.

I don't think MikeWulf is pretending to be virtuous. Nobody would believe that anyway. :wink: He would be inconsistent, of course, in the situation you describe. In my view, FWIW, hypocrisy requires a false claim (and a wrongful seeking) of a respectable, honest, or hgh reputation, most often to the intentional detriment of an innocent person or group.

Hester Prynne was a victim of hypocrisy. The clearest or most often used example of hypocrisy is the preacher, with a hangover, who rails against drinking in order to increase the size of the collection--which he himself will count. Or--on a high level of culture-- "Harper Valley PTA."

[Jack]

Just one doctors report in book form:

Hypnotic Brain by Peter Brown

[loony28]

[quote="MikeWulf"]You can't change the perception of one person by hypnotising another. I don't know how that could even work.[/quote]

:twisted: Well Mike it could work. Our brainwaves do not stay in our bodies but they radiate out and other people pick up on them subconsciously. Then the information can be sent to the conscious in some form, this would explain why some people feel uneasy about some people and later on it turns out that the person was a mass murderer or something. A file to change the perception of other people through hypnosis of one person would have to include language that your subconscious radiate suggestions to other people's subconscious minds. If the person was highly suggestable, they might perceive the change within a short time. The less suggestable you are, the longer it would take you to perceive what the hypnotee was hypnotised to see. I don't know how far the brainwaves could travel and be effective or if it it could go from person to person like a virus. Well that's how I think it could happen. If any one wants to refine this go right ahead. :twisted:

[Kalendaine]

Personally, i believe in all of it - psychic, corporeal changes, and mental changes. I have also seen, firsthand, evidence for bodily change in one of my subjects, whom i've hypno'd -- naming no names. Psychic powers, ESP, astral projection, PK, etc --- i have looked around and around, but can find no solid proof that they DO NOT exist. Instead, it seems to be the other way - for instance, the non-existence of telepathy would violate at least three major laws of physics. I try to do a LOT of research before stating my opinion, and, naming no names, i think many others could benefeit from this stance.

--Kalendaine

[MikeWulf]

Actually, I once hypnotised someone to be three foot taller, and within an hour, they truly WERE taller.

Please note my post count of _one_

Can we stick to dicussions based on things we can prove, ever?

[makidas]

[quote="MikeWulf"]Actually, I once hypnotised someone to be three foot taller, and within an hour, they truly WERE taller.

Please note my post count of _one_

Can we stick to dicussions based on things we can prove, ever?[/quote]
Preach on reverend!

[OMGWTFBBQ]

[quote="Kalendaine"]the non-existence of telepathy would violate at least three major laws of physics.[/quote]

How in the ?

[sandy82]

[quote="Kalendaine":/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/if851f83]Personally, i believe in all of it - psychic, corporeal changes, and mental changes. I have also seen, firsthand, evidence for bodily change in one of my subjects, whom i've hypno'd -- naming no names. Psychic powers, ESP, astral projection, PK, etc --- i have looked around and around, but can find no solid proof that they DO NOT exist. Instead, it seems to be the other way - for instance, the non-existence of telepathy would violate at least three major laws of physics. I try to do a LOT of research before stating my opinion, and, naming no names, i think many others could benefeit from this stance.

--Kalendaine[/quote:/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/if851f83]

Kalendaine, I find your post fascinating. Interesting observations. Interesting proofs. I am impressed that you do a lot of research before you state an opinion. In the areas where you specialize, you have done much more research than I ever have...or ever will.

Could you do a favor for me, and for us all? It would be great if you would set up a post that separates the sentences of your preceding post into subject headings. Then you could provide as much detail as you wish on each subject.

For instance the first sentence could be set up this way:

"I. Personally, i believe in all of it - psychic, corporeal changes, and mental changes.

"A. I believe in all of [what would you call it?] Specifically, I believe in psychic [do you want a noun here? changes?] I divide this heading into the following seven sub-parts. These are my specific beliefs and reasons.

B. I believe in corporeal changes. Sub-parts with descriptions, beliefs, and reasons.

C. I believe in mental changes. Sub-parts with descriptions, beliefs, and reasons.

D. Since "all of it" may refer to more than "psychic, corporeal changes, and mental changes," it is also useful to stress [your choices here; one per capital letter], with the following specifics and for the following reasons.

A format, such as the one for which I provide only a bare outline, would be instructive and educational for those of us who don't do the deep research that you have done.

For instance, the last time I opened a physics book was in high school. Frankly, I can't remember all the laws of physics. I have some vague recollection of actions and equal, opposite reactions, but not much more. Besides, I think that was Newton, and it seems I remember that many of his ideas have been superseded. Obviously, I have many questions. In a non-telepathic world, for instance, what three major laws of physics would be violated and why?

If anybody claims that you are taking up too much space with your answer, send me a PM. Take as much space as you want. It might be better if you provided your answer in bite-sized installments. That would serve two purposes. It would show that you are willing to explain your very interesting propositions and it would allow those with short attention spans to focus on what you are saying.

I hope you will do us the favor of enlightening us all. Many thanks in advance!

In all fairness, I do not want to leave you with the impression that I will automatically agree with 1/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i/\[url=(https?:\/\/[^\s\[]+):$uid\](.*?)\[\/url:$uid\]/i percent of what you say. On the other hand, it is fair to say that the more persuasive and authoritative your presentation, the more likely that you will win adherents. I see your detailed outline not as an end, but as a beginning. Of discussion, sharing, and questioning.

Since you have done so much research, you will have the advantage over the rest of us anyway!
.