[Huna-Ohana] Hawkins scale

[Guest guest]

bb_121 wrote:

 

> Gary,

>

> After hearing so much about Hawkins on this site I finally got

around to

> doing a net search on him.

>

> The first good hit I got said Hawkins scale was "influence of

> suggestion"...an "Idcompter action".

>

> Indeed, if you like someone they get a higher score...if you don't

a

> lower score.

 

Yes, if you want to do that way. If that's all you wanted though, why

bother doing the test in the first place? I can tell if I like someone

or not without the use of a scale or energy testing someone's arm

 

Pretty much how everyone else can. No magic there.

 

>

> David Hawkins is said to be a staunch conservative...so the

President

> gets a high score.

>

I don't know if that is the reason or not... as I said, I would have to

 

confirm it for myself. Do you understand what my point was about

testing

from a neutral state?

 

>

> They also went on to say that in double blind tests the Hawkins

scale

> (an offspring of Kinesiology) was ineffective.

>

Done by whom?

 

Are they really qualified, or do they 'think'' they are qualified? Is

it

possible there is a difference?

 

What was the procedure used?

 

Did they utilize any sort of method to remain neutral throughout the

testing?

 

Or did they perform the testing using their own filters?

 

What filters did they use?

 

Could those filters have influenced the results?

 

I remember a story that Doc told, and I thought it was in "Explore your

 

Psyhic World" by the Worrall's, but it wasn't in that book (that I

could

see). I probably have the book it is in somewhere around here...

 

Anyway, basic story goes that Olga Worrall had done some experiments w/

 

various people (scientists, doctors). One case was when Ogla was

lighting up some type of chamber w/ swirling light from something like

900 miles away, just moving her hands around what she visualized as the

 

chamber and imagining it charging, talking w/ the experimenters over

the

phone. They would cue her, she would do it, and it happened. They would

 

tell her stop, she would stop, then it would stop.

 

The guys performing the experiment then called in a colleague, who was

skeptical of it even being possible, to come in and observe. The

experiment would NOT work! Olga could not understand what was

happening,

she knew something was stopping her. As soon as he left... it would

work

just like it had before.

 

My whole premise of the previous post was about performing the test

while remaining in a neutral state to get the objective results. If you

 

have no specific method of doing this, then you probably are NOT

remaining neutral. I know there is one method that is in the back

posts... many, many times. In fact, there is a another thread going on

RIGHT NOW about it on this list.

 

The test CAN be influenced, especially by the conscious mind. At that

point, you are testing for something different. If you want valid

results, you MUST have a valid procedure, the correct tools used in a

correct manner to get the intended result.

 

Valid to whom?

 

Valid on what level?

 

For example...

 

I could mow your lawn w/ 5 gallons of gasoline and a match.

 

Or I could take that same 5 gallons and fill up your damn lawn mower,

turn it on...etc.

 

Will both methods work to shorten the grass? Yes, they will both work.

 

Are they both valid methods to get the results you want, though?

 

What result do you intend to get?

 

To attempt to validate your opinions and/or your beliefs... or to get

an

answer from a 'higher power', whatever that may be.

 

 

Gary Graves