What beats the crap out of me is when guys see some of what he did and lambaste him for it and decry the "con" of it all - like the talking to plants stuff he did at St Hill, hooking tomato plants up to an e-meter and seeing their responses to verbal statements, Life magazine panned the guy for it. So did many other people and writers. But then during the early 70's some other guys came up with the same stuff and now suddenly Oh Wow, what a breakthrough in science, wow.
Listen to this interview which George Noori has with a guy on Coast to Coast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h_EMRBS8E_U
I mean that's just plain old Dianetics packaged up in a different form. And he asserts the reality of the past lives because - get this - fantasy would never result in conditions disappearing from the guys case. Only reality would bring that about.
I haven't yet heard all of it but Christ, I have heard plenty.
Listen to this interview which George Noori has with a guy on Coast to Coast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h_EMRBS8E_U
I mean that's just plain old Dianetics packaged up in a different form. And he asserts the reality of the past lives because - get this - fantasy would never result in conditions disappearing from the guys case. Only reality would bring that about.
I haven't yet heard all of it but Christ, I have heard plenty.