Radionics for agriculture

kaviraj
Posts: 15
Joined: 15 Oct 2006, 18:13

Radionics for agriculture

Post by kaviraj »

Radionic remedies work well, but are not good enough to keep, since they lose power after 2 to 6 weeks, in my experience.
This is probably due to the fact there is nothing but a vibration pattern there and no 'imprint' from any substance.
My experience has taught me that they work, but not as long and as strong as a real remedy. They have to be repeated oftener and do not achieve such deep healing as with the real thing.
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Radionic remedies

Post by Mark »

Do you mean
i - the homeopathic remedies which are made by putting the information onto the water or sac lac using a radionic potentiser and then administered - or
ii - the homoeopathic 'information' broadcast directly to the subject?

Mark
kaviraj
Posts: 15
Joined: 15 Oct 2006, 18:13

Radionics for agriculture

Post by kaviraj »

I mean the first.
the second i have never attempted.
on the other hand, I have broadcast 'real' remedies by means of the hair and the photograph over distances from London to Hawaii, or Amsterdam to Los Angeles and Australia to Switzerland with good results.
See also B. Sahni. 'Transmission of Homoeo-energy over a distance' B.Jain Publishers, New Delhi India.
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Radionics

Post by Mark »

There has been a lot of work with using radionically broadcast 'patterns' directly to plants. There are a few people who are working with this on the BdNow list. Some use Bruce Copen equipment, Hugh Lovel is using his field broadcasters, one of the folk is using a Rhubenkorft Potentiser for broadcasting peppers. M-Tec are in touch too.

It seems doable .. and it cuts the gordion knot of all the Considera work of painstaking diagnosis, and remedy choice, and burning at the right time etc. Just clarify your intent, pop in the numbers and broadcast to the witness. It seems to be a no brainer. But ...

But what are we dealing with here? Potentised materials are already heretical. (As Johnathon Miller says - 'If homoeopathy is right everything we think we know is wrong.' I happen to think he is wrong about 'eveything' but he is good and clear about the prevalent attitude.) But at least homoeopathy has a tenuous anchor to the world with which all are familiar. Beaming potency around the planet with nothing but our mind is even further beyond the boggle threshhold. So that first barrier is the credibility for the average farmer and gardener.

The second is the unknown nature of the - wrong word but - mechanism of transmission. Of this I retain some caution. Whilst groping my way out of my culture's comfort zone I want to find a close foot hold before putting my weight onto that and then groping around again for the next one. To make a massive leap to this broadcasting of immaterial power is not yet something that I am comforatable doing. I am willing to listen to tales of those brave travellers - that is the point for me of this particular forum. And I want to make this discipline transparent and to be familiar with it.

Yours with my comfort blanket ...

Mark
kaviraj
Posts: 15
Joined: 15 Oct 2006, 18:13

Radionics for agriculture

Post by kaviraj »

I also like to keep my feet on the ground. At the same time, I also want to keep an open mind. From homoeopathy I know the use of the so-called ''imponderables', which are made from sun- and moon-light, electricity, magnetism - both the entire magnet as well as the separate poles. we know that with light photons enter the water. Magnetic energy we can measure; so can electric energy be quantified. But we cannot say truly what enters the water. The cellophane remedy I mentioned is another such instance.

If radiowaves can travel all over the planet and cosmic rays can travel all over the universe, what difficulty is there to understand that energy patterns other than those we can measure directly should not be able to do the same?
The best way to see if something works is to try it out. Hence I attempted to treat people via their own hair as antenna and I discovered it works! From Amsterdam to Hawaii and from Australia to the USA, from India to France.

Later I heard of broadcasting per photograph. I tried in with plants. I was sent a photo of the problem and I printed this, cutting off one corner as control. Then I inserted the photo in the remedy and left it for an hour.
then I took out the photo and waited for the reply from the sender of the picture. Invariably i was told that all was okay, except one corner of the field, where the entire problem seemd to focus.

In my view, the energy pattern of the remedy, regardless whether it is a 'real' remedy or one generated by a radionics machine, sends the energy pattern of this remedy to the corresponding field, whereby the photo or hair is nothing more, nor less, than the antenna.

In this regard it is interesting to note the fear the Amerindians had of their photo being taken. They considered one took a piece of their soul. My thoughts on this is that in a sense, they were and are correct - a photo is nothing more than a snapshot of your mentality, which can be read off the face by a skilled homoeopath and anyone else who knows human nature very well. It is, literally, like a hair, a piece of oneself, so that the notion it can function as an antenna to yourself, is no longer such a strange notion.

Naturally, we shy away from the 'supernatural' as an explanation, since it appears to be a perfectly natural phenomenon - so many people are engaged in it and claim good results, we can hardly take it otherwise.
While I agree that much of modern science is not all it is cracked up to be, much is also useful to explain phenomena we encounter in the life sciences as practised by BD farmers and researchers, homoeopaths and other so-called alternatives.

Modern science is gradually discovering the super-small and one day can come to terms with these phenomena, provided the coloured glasses of their evidence-base are tinted differently or removed. Till that time, we shall have to provide the framework and terminology that describes the phenomena. I feel we must not shy away from using scientific terms and concepts, since this will alienate us further from general, let alone universal acceptance.
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Re: Radionics for agriculture

Post by Mark »

kaviraj wrote:The best way to see if something works is to try it out. Hence I attempted to treat people via their own hair as antenna and I discovered it works!
Absolutely, and I admire that you and others have done this and respect that the results are impressive. But if we are to be really scientific we need to define what we mean by 'it works'. That it brings about desired changes I am willing to take as valid experience. And it is tempting to claim that the 'mechanism' is something like 'universal mind' or some 'quantum non-locality' but for me these are black-box phrases which do not help me understand if there are other things going on which might not be for the general good. That is my sole reservation, and it is all head stuff - but it is there and I respect that part of myself.
kaviraj wrote:Naturally, we shy away from the 'supernatural' as an explanation, since it appears to be a perfectly natural phenomenon - so many people are engaged in it and claim good results, we can hardly take it otherwise. .... I feel we must not shy away from using scientific terms and concepts, since this will alienate us further from general, let alone universal acceptance.
I would agree if I felt certain that those scientific terms were appropriate. Little derails clear-thinking more than shoddy use of terminology. For instance talk of 'vibrations' 'energy' and 'resonance' imply some greater understanding than is really there and I would prefer that they were not used unless they are closely defined. In this instance if we are talking of 'nano-phase' or some similar term it is already adopting a set of assumptions. I tend to envisage and grasp for these phenomenon with the spiritual scientific lexicon (or jargon or terminology) of 'counter space'. This is not an 'emergent property' of the ever smaller billiard balls of matter but language forged on an altogether different anvil. It breaks with some of the unseen assumptions which go together with materialism and therefore it rubs to use the language of materialism.

However, language and terminology will remain an issue which will linger until we have a clearer grasp of what really happens in such transmissions of therapeutic interventions. And I am hugely grateful to anyone who - like yourself - is trying these things out with enthusiasm and reporting back to us. Keep it up.
Vincent
Posts: 4
Joined: 31 Jan 2008, 06:19
Location: KRAWARREE NSW

Post by Vincent »

Why are you so suspicious of radionics, Mark? In a world where water availability is very likely to be severely restricted in the not too distant future surely waterless nutrient application systems like radionics should be welcomed, not repulsed.

vincent
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Post by Mark »

If you think I am repulsing radionics then I may need to tone down my postings. I am fascinated by radionics but it is not (yet) my favoured technique because of my interest in what is going on to enable these things - homeopathics and various healing techniques with light etc. As a child of my culture there is part of me which needs to frisk these techniques for their mechanism - for want of a better word. When one billiard ball hits another you can calculate angles and velocities and frictions and have a pretty good guess what the outcome of the impact will be. With this water - which is what the same set of analyses will say we are administering here - we are saying we can do many things which that water will not do. Although I may reject the appropriateness of the analysis technique for evaluation of both waters the same inquisitiveness remains - 'How did this cause that?' So although I am often told not to get too caught up in 'head stuff' and just go with it etc, I am not happy to do so. That is why I have spent a lot of time trying to find a robust model of what potencies really are and how they can effect plants and other things - and also collecting data showing what they do and don't do. This is important for me, but maybe also for the rest of my culture who find all of these techniques to be a sure sign of a feeble mind. I feel comfortable with potentised substances now but I am not (yet) so comfortable with dowsing and radionics. I do not have the same confidence that I know all the steps in the process. Therefore, I am messing with forces I think I understand less with radionics. I will be very happy to find out I am wrong or if the gaps in my model can be filled to my satisfaction. Call it suspicion if you like. I think I'd prefer 'caution'.

How have you got on with nutrient application with radionics? Let us know and put it in the materia medica etc. I have put the digital wherewithal in place for radionic applications. Feedback is welcome if it is not in the right form.
Vincent
Posts: 4
Joined: 31 Jan 2008, 06:19
Location: KRAWARREE NSW

Post by Vincent »

Perhaps 'suspicion" is too strong a word. Nevertheless reading your responses on this and in other topics on this forum you seem at times to be saying 'This seems a good idea, worthwhile and all that' and in the next sentence shooting it down with an implied 'But I don't really understand how or why it works so if you give me the results of whatever you are doing I'll be able to make my mind up'. A basic philosophy of science is that if something cannot be disproved then neither can it be dismissed and so it is up to the questioning scientist or researcher to try whatever it is for himself before intimating rejection.

I recall a friend living some distance away who had serious infestations of serrated tussock (a noxious weed) on his 40-acre hobby farm, serious enough for the local council to threaten forced entry by contractors to spray it with chemicals (which they are permitted to do by law). Well he didn't want toxins on his place so he tried a few ideas out himself and then contacted the agronomist at a government centre for weed research. "Did you know serrated tussock can be killed with boiling water?" he asked."Nonsense, no way!" the agronomist replied. "Have you tried it?" my friend asked. "Of course not, I know it wouldn't work," was the reply. So my friend sent him the newspaper article which told of the success of a Sydney council in weed control using a prime mover towing a water tanker and spray unit which jetted superheated steam on to weeds, killing them outright.

You speak of this water and that water but once imprinted with another positive pattern whether radionically or otherwise it is no longer water in the accepted sense of the word. Instead it is a fluid vibrating at a higher frequency than the stuff which flows out of your kitchen tap.

My experience with waterless nutrient applications (WNA) has suggested to me that a radionic device (such as a black box) is an unnecessary step which complicates what should be a simple natural procedure. But even so I would be the last person to dismiss the fact and use of it. If someone wishes to spend their dollars on purchase and training that's their business. What it comes down to in the end is whether the procedure works for them or not. Pseudo-science or scientific analysis or opinion is irrelevant.

V
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Post by Mark »

OK, it seems I cannot be gentle enough in my expression of caution. I don't mean to shoot it down. I don't get it - that's a fact. I have tried it with little success - fact. I am open to it - opinion. I'm happy for there to be free and non toxic agriculture - and if it can be done with radionics then that sure sounds like progress to me. Let those for whom it works go to it with my blessing.
Vincent wrote:
My experience with waterless nutrient applications (WNA) has suggested to me that a radionic device (such as a black box) is an unnecessary step which complicates what should be a simple natural procedure. But even so I would be the last person to dismiss the fact and use of it. If someone wishes to spend their dollars on purchase and training that's their business. What it comes down to in the end is whether the procedure works for them or not. Pseudo-science or scientific analysis or opinion is irrelevant.

V
Are the nutrients measurable after this application compared to before. If so how shall we get this techniques widely known?
Vincent
Posts: 4
Joined: 31 Jan 2008, 06:19
Location: KRAWARREE NSW

Post by Vincent »

Nutrients are measurable anytime using a pendulum and fanchart, you don't even need to take samples, just mark the places which have been read so they can be found again for recheck. But my take on nutrient increase is the actual result - ie increased or decreased vegetation or heavier/lighter stock. Reading the landscape also comes into it a lot. For instance the farmer who bemoans the fact he hasn't any water when plentiful scattered growth of great mullein is in evidence is displaying his ignorance for all to hear. GM is a groundwater indicator, generally this precious fluid is not far below the surface.

How to get the message across? Good question, I wish I knew the answer. Almost impossible in the present climate but if a population collapse ever occurred - well it could be a lot different.

V
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 908
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Post by Mark »

Vincent wrote: How to get the message across? Good question, I wish I knew the answer.
I think the message would come across really well if one could use standard methods to demonstrate heretical approaches. This is one goal of Considera and why it would be something special to get standard lab results showing that nutrients can be adjusted / created / manipulated by radionics.

If the plants react 'as if' they were getting material nutrients then photos and comparative trails will be an excellent start.
GT
Posts: 10
Joined: 03 Jun 2008, 04:10
Location: usa

Post by GT »

Interesting posts by Dr. Sahni

Hair Transmission Therapy
Views: 1,586
Posted By MKSAHNI
http://www.otherhealth.com/images/icons/icon1.gif Hair Transmission



Transmission of HomeoDrug energy from a Distance - By Dr. B Sahni
Unfathomed Regions of Homeopathy - By Dr. S. Alam Bihabi
Bioenergetic Medicines East and West - By Manning and Vanranen

Teletherapy - By Dr. A.K. Bhattacharya
Vibrational Medicine - By R. Gerber MD
The Power of Rays - S.G.J. Ouseley


http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.co...hesia_gina.htm
My own article on this subject inspired by dr. Sahni


While reading this I got some indications that how energies can possibily be transmited(in science) to some remote area which can be very important understanding. I shall be indicating the same in my other topic. How homeopathy can work, scientifically.

B.Jain have onebook on this:BB2069:Unfathomed Regions of Homoeo. Hair Transmission by BIHARI SULTAN, A.
Ed
Posts: 3
Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 11:25
Location: USA

Looking for Proof

Post by Ed »

Grettings to all,
I am a radionics practioner who deals with the Human Energy Field not the Energy Field of plants, animals, or agricultural systems but the principals are the same.

Seems like people want proof that radionics actually works, but the problem is that so far science has not come up with a a way to measure universal life force energy. This is about to change becuase NASA is currently working on this thanks to T. Galen Hieronymus who did some work with NASA back in the 1960's. For now the only proof that one has is "that it works". When this energy field is finally measurable then science will embrace this technology and the world will become a different place.

However, let me remind everyone that Big Business along with government does NOT want this technology to be used for good because a lot of fat cats will loose a lot of money. Agriculturally the need for chemicals would decline greatly (actually completely disappear) so you see the economic ramifications. For humans, pharmaceutical drugs would not be needed.

If you get little or no results when using radionics, the reason is that you don't fully understand this technology and therfore are not using it properly. In the hands of a competent practitioner radionics is very effective. Experiments to prove that it works should be fairly easy to conduct. Hieronymus already did much of this work and proved many times that it works yet scientist insist that it doesn't. One just needs to read the history of radionics to see how it has been systematically stamped out over the past one hundred years or so. Remember, big business and government do not want it to work.

Cheers,
Ed
GT
Posts: 10
Joined: 03 Jun 2008, 04:10
Location: usa

Post by GT »

Agriculturally the need for chemicals would decline greatly (actually completely disappear) so you see the economic ramifications. For humans, pharmaceutical drugs would not be needed.

So true. This has already begun. Perhaps Kaviraj can say more about this.

GT
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic