Pyrokinesis - Qigong Master Boils Water With His Hands

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by brocklanders, Jul 10, 2009.

  1. Western science and medicine still has a lot to learn from the East. Skeptics will say, this is impossible according to our "advanced" knowledge of the human body and physics and must be some form of trickery right?

    Maybe we are just beginning to learn that impossible is only an illusion until someone shows us it is possible. He also walks across framed pieces of paper at the end of the video by altering his weight using energy. Pretty cool stuff.

    <embed src="" width="400" height="345" wmode="transparent" pluginspage="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" name="Metacafe_2174763"> </embed><br><font size = 1><a href="">Qigong Master Boils Water With His Hands Pyrokinesis</a> - <a href="">Watch more amazing videos here</a></font>
  2. Yes, without a doubt. I call bullshit.

    The piece refers to acupuncture as though it were legitimate. Here you go:

    Puncturing the Acupuncture Myth
    by Harriet Hall, M.D.

    By definition, “alternative” medicine consists of treatments that have not been scientifically proven and that have not been accepted into mainstream medicine. The question I keep hearing is, “But what about acupuncture? It’s been proven to work, it’s supported by lots of good research, more and more doctors are using it, and insurance companies even pay for it.” It’s time the acupuncture myth was punctured — preferably with an acupuncture needle. Almost everything you’ve heard about acupuncture is wrong.

    To start with, this ancient Chinese treatment is not so ancient and may not even be Chinese! From studying the earliest documents, Chinese scholar Paul Unschuld suspects the idea may have originated with the Greek Hippocrates of Cos and later spread to China. It’s definitely not 3000 years old. The earliest Chinese medical texts, from the 3rd century BCE, do not mention it. The earliest reference to “needling” is from 90 BCE, but it refers to bloodletting and lancing abscesses with large needles or lancets. There is nothing in those documents to suggest anything like today’s acupuncture. We have the archaeological evidence of needles from that era — they are large; the technology for manufacturing thin steel needles appropriate for acupuncture didn’t exist until about 400 years ago.

    The earliest accounts of Chinese medicine reached the West in the 13th century: they didn’t mention acupuncture at all. The first Westerner to write about acupuncture, Wilhelm ten Rhijn, in 1680, didn’t describe acupuncture as we know it today: he didn’t mention specific points or “qi;” he spoke of large gold needles that were implanted deep into the skull or “womb” and left in place for 30 respirations.

    Acupuncture was tried off and on in Europe after that. It was first tried in America in 1826 as a possible means of resuscitating drowning victims. They couldn’t get it to work and “gave up in disgust.” I imagine sticking needles in soggy dead bodies was pretty disgusting.

    Through the early 20th century, no Western account of acupuncture referred to acupuncture points: needles were simply inserted near the point of pain. Qi was originally vapor arising from food, and meridians were channels or vessels. A Frenchman, Georges Soulie de Morant, was the first to use the term “meridian” and to equate qi with energy — in 1939. Auricular (ear) acupuncture was invented by a Frenchman in 1957.

    To be continued...
  3. ...continued

    The Chinese government tried to ban acupuncture several times, between 1822 and World War II during the time of the Chinese Nationalist government. Mao revived it in the “barefoot doctor” campaign in the 1960s as a cheap way of providing care to the masses; he did not use it himself because he did not believe it worked. It was Mao’s government that coined the term “traditional Chinese medicine” or TCM.

    In 1972 James Reston accompanied Nixon to China and returned to tell about his appendectomy. It was widely believed that his appendix was removed under acupuncture anesthesia. In reality, acupuncture was used only as an adjunct for pain relief the day after surgery, and the relief was probably coincident with the expected return of normal bowel motility. A widely circulated picture of a patient allegedly undergoing open heart surgery with acupuncture anesthesia was shown to be bogus. If acupuncture is used in surgery today, it is used along with conventional anesthesia and/or pre-operative medication, and it is selected only for patients who believe in it and are likely to have a placebo response.

    As acupuncture increased in popularity in the West, it declined in the East. In 1995, visiting American physicians were told only 15–20% of Chinese chose TCM, and it was usually used along with Western treatments after diagnosis by a Western-trained physician. Apparently some patients choose TCM because it is all they can afford: despite being a Communist country, China does not have universal health coverage.

    There were originally 360 acupuncture points (loosely based on the number of days in a year rather than on anatomy). Currently more than 2000 acupuncture points have been “discovered”, leading one wag to comment that there was no skin left that was not an acupuncture point. There were either 9, 10, or 11 meridians — take your pick. Any number is as good as another, because no research has ever been able to document the existence of acupuncture points or meridians or qi.

    Does acupuncture work? Which type of acupuncture? And what do you mean by “work”? There are various different Chinese systems, plus Japanese, Thai, Korean and Indian modalities, most of which have been invented over the last few decades: whole body or limited to the scalp, hand, ear, foot, or cheek and chin; deep or superficial; with electrified needles; with dermal pad electrodes and no skin penetration.

    Acupuncture works in the same manner that placebos work. It has been shown to “work” to relieve pain, nausea, and other subjective symptoms, but it has never been shown to alter the natural history or course of any disease. Today it’s mostly used for pain, but early Chinese acupuncturists maintained that it was not for the treatment of manifest disease, that it was so subtle that it should only be employed at the very beginning of a disease process, and that it was only likely to work if the patient believed it would work. Now there’s a bit of ancient wisdom!

    Studies have shown that acupuncture releases natural opioid pain relievers in the brain: endorphins. Veterinarians have pointed out that loading a horse into a trailer or throwing a stick for a dog also releases endorphins. Probably hitting yourself on the thumb with a hammer would release endorphins too, and it would take your mind off your headache.

    Psychologists can list plenty of other things that could explain the apparent response to acupuncture. Diverting attention from original symptoms to the sensation of needling, expectation, suggestion, mutual consensus and compliance demand, causality error, classic conditioning, reciprocal conditioning, operant conditioning, operator conditioning, reinforcement, group consensus, economic and emotional investment, social and political disaffection, social rewards for believing, variable course of disease, regression to the mean — there are many ways human psychology can fool us into thinking ineffective treatments are effective. Then there’s the fact that all placebos are not equal — an elaborate system involving lying down, relaxing, and spending time with a caring authority can be expected to produce a much greater placebo effect than simply taking a sugar pill.

    There are plenty of studies showing that acupuncture works for subjective symptoms like pain and nausea. But there are several things that throw serious doubt on their findings. The results are inconsistent, with some studies finding an effect and others not. The higher quality studies are less likely to find an effect. Most of the studies are done by believers in acupuncture. Many subjects would not volunteer for an acupuncture trial unless they had a bias towards believing it might work. The acupuncture studies coming from China and other oriental countries are all positive — but then nearly everything coming out of China is positive. It’s not culturally acceptable to publish negative results because researchers would lose face and their jobs.

    The biggest problem with acupuncture studies is finding an adequate placebo control. You’re sticking needles in people. People notice that. Double blinding is impossible: you might be able to fool patients into thinking you’ve used a needle when you haven’t, but there’s no way to blind the person doing the needling. Two kinds of controls have been used: comparing acupuncture points to non-points, and using an ingenious needle in a sheath that appears to have penetrated the skin when it hasn’t.

    In George Ulett’s research, he found that applying an electrical current to the skin of the wrist — a kind of TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) treatment — worked just as well as inserting needles, and one point on the wrist worked for symptoms anywhere in the body.

    Guess what? It doesn’t matter where you put the needle. It doesn’t matter whether you use a needle at all. In the best controlled studies, only one thing mattered: whether the patients believed they were getting acupuncture. If they believed they got the real thing, they got better pain relief — whether they actually got acupuncture or not! If they got acupuncture but believed they didn’t, it didn’t work. If they didn’t get it but believed they did, it did work.

    Acupuncturists have used ingenious rationalizations to try to salvage failed studies. In a recent study using sham acupuncture as a control, both the sham placebo acupuncture and the true acupuncture worked equally well; both were better than no treatment. The obvious conclusion was that acupuncture was no better than a placebo. Instead, the researchers insisted that real acupuncture worked and that placebo acupuncture worked too! Another acupuncture researcher recently decided not to use a placebo control in his research because any stimulation of the skin might be effective — which seems to me to pretty much destroy the whole rationale for acupuncture, but he didn’t seem to notice that. If that were true, we could just caress or massage our patients instead of inserting needles and postulating imaginary qi and meridians.

    Considering the inconsistent research results, the implausibility of qi and meridians, and the many questions that remain, it’s reasonable to conclude that acupuncture is nothing more than a recipe for an elaborate placebo seasoned with a soupçon of counter-irritant. You can play human pincushion if you want, and you might get a good placebo response, but there’s no evidence you’ll get anything more.
  4. Ok, I'm still waiting for you to explain how he did it then. What about the paper walking technique? Posting an article critical about acupuncture (and written by a Western MD who by the way is a retired USAF doctor to boot) hardly makes your case it is all bullshit.
  5. Guilt by association. Acupuncture was mentioned in association with this thing. I can't "prove" anything on the basis of a video, but let me share another story with you briefly.

    Dr. Joe Schwarcz is Director of McGill University’s Office for Science and Society which is dedicated to demystifying science for the public, the media and students. He once told a story about a guy who claimed to be able to heal with some kind of electromagnetic forces or some such which emanated from his own body. This fellow made something of a name for himself, was interviewed by media and had a clientele that he "treated" regularly.

    Dr. Schwarcz was intrigued, if perhaps skeptical, so he made an appointment with this "healer." During the session, Dr. Schwarcz did indeed feel a force emanate from the hands of this fellow. Dr. Schwarcz then identified his vocation and pointed out that a certain electrical device (the details escape me) attached to the person can give off such "vibes," and if the electroguy would kindly just lift his shirt a few inches to prove that he was not wearing such a device. Not surprisingly, the fellow declined. Of course, the possibility exists that this is a uniquely special person who has harnessed the power of the universe and all that. But I doubt it. For some reason, your thread reminded me of that story.

    As an aside, Dr. Schwarcz pointed out that such "vibes" had no real healing powers, that it was simply a natural phenomenon, and that the effect was likely placebo, since the guy's subjects were in awe of the "vibes."

    And so it goes.
  6. Every person has this potential power so I don't agree that this person in the video is special really. He has just trained himself to use energy in ways that most in the world, especially the West, don't yet understand.
  7. Uh-huh, sure. Just like psychics and fortune tellers, no doubt. Remember when Uri Geller was a media darling, able to bend spoons by mere will alone? :p

    Perhaps this fire guy should undertake Randi's million dollar challenge:

    Hey, and what about Chris Angel and all the cool stuff that he does?

    At least he admits that he's an entertainer. But if he didn't, I bet he would have a following of "spiritual" devotees ready to commit their lives to "harnessing the power."
  8. Eight


    I have not seen the video yet but I had some martial arts experiences that were unreal. In this one very unusual school where the two trainers had 50 years experience between them.. we warmed up with Tai Chi fairly briefly, then in the sparring I would find that I would forget everything I learned, ever, and just do the Tai Chi without even a thought.. it was too cool, a hostile guy coming at me and I just did this non-hostile Tai Chi thing and turned him around and then pushed him to the wall... it surprised me more than anybody.. they also taught us how "drop our weight" by getting a low stance with just the perfect alignment of the joints and I stood there and a construction worker could not budge me.. I was surprised by that one too..

    The instructors had gone on a research project to find out what Martial Arts was in it's oldest forms.. it was really simple..

    And to all the people in the Western World that swear that's impossible... Yawn... there is a lot of fakery and trickery and it proves nothing at all..

    I had a friend from Thailand that really blew out his knee and then regrew all the soft tissue by mind over matter... a couple of years after the injury he was squatting massive weight and his knee didn't ever pop or anything... I've tried the mind over matter thing on my knee with no success at all... the mindset has to be right way down to your core or you just fight yourself on such things...
  9. Most of Criss Angel's stunts have been explained and are easily recreated. He employs members of the "audience" at the places he does his tricks and makes you think they are just regular people on the street.

    He also has total control over setting up his environment and can employ whatever props he needs to pull the illusion off (example getting under a moving a steamroller and walking across water at the Paris pool).

    His stunts do not play well live and without camera editing. His live show at Luxor has been receiving abysmal reviews which is no shock if you know his shtick.
  10. Eight, you have already lost all credibility with several of your previous posts in other threads. No need for overkill.
    #10     Jul 10, 2009