My no touch thesis

Ed.
Ideomotor effects are used by Qi masters to show 'the mind moves the qi, and the qi can move the hanging object'. I saw that done 20 years ago by a now jiujutsu grandmaster based in the UK. The ideomotor effect is suggestion if you can get someone to do it yo can get them to drop...as long as you shine it up with Qi blarney.
all the Best
darren
as for extrapolation of my work to qi effects such as the long distance punch, and the feeling of ki. Yes there is a connection, the long distance punch requires a higher level of 'Rapport' than the NTKO which mainly requires high levels of suggestion. What I mean by Rapport is mirroring body language and breathing rate synchronisation. The feeling of another persons ki is mostly down to suggestion but also largely down to the feeler actually being aware of temperature changes, that ordinarily they ignore on a day to day basis.

Thanks Darren, that does make sense and fits alot of other things/claims we've heard thru the years on these boards.

funny thing though, they hardly ever put up video and NEVER pursue the Randi million dollar challenge you mentioned.

They'll take teen's and midlife crisis people's money from a seminar, but have too many moral principles to collect the million from a scientist?

Ed... why risk loosing a fortune over a lifetime by trying to gain a small fortune just once.
average seminar fee $250 average seminar number 60, that is $15000 a seminar minus lets say at most $3000 for expenses and that a lot of expenses $12000. How many seminars a year? averaging between 10 for some masters to 45 for others thats earnings a year of $120000 to £5400000 so between 9 years and less than 2 years a master with the right act can make a million and as the no-touch master can be doing it into their eighties that might be 40 years of teaching so if seminar fees were to stay the same for the next 40 years a master could make between 4.5 million dollars and over 20 million... why risk it for the Randi test for only one million. OOOh and how many masters or instructors for that matter, do you know that declare tax on seminar earnings, so tats all clear profit for most of them. This is why so many of these people do not want anyone to question the golden-goose that is no-touch.
all the best darren

geez, you may have to go on a government witness protection program...

keep safe.

dazzacarmichael


Its even worse than that.

Its hugely financially stupid NOT to take Randi's challange--if somebody really thinks they can pull it off that is.

The potential rewards of being able to do the whole NTKO thing in a lab far outweigh any potential financial losses--again, IF somebody can really do it.

Having a lab certified test would enable you to triple (at least) your fees and number of seminars--as well as putting almost everyone else--those without such lab certified test-- out of business--thus giving you a near monoploy on the NTKO thing.

You could set your OWN price and have as many seminars as you wanted.

Since somebody that can really do NTKO has everything to gain and nothing to lose by stepping up and taking the Randi challange NOT doing so demands some pretty heavy duty reasons why they don't.

Again, IF they can really do it........or did just answer my own question.

On a more serious note, as one of my buddies that does Tai Chi once put it, (my paraphrase)

"Its not really a question of spooky abilties, pretty much everyone that has trained long enough has seen and even done some weird things, its really a question of reliabilty and consistant performence--can you count on it whenever you need it?
Can you call up the "force" whenever and where-ever its required on whomever your facing?
Can you reliably count on its effects? Say the way you can count on a the effects of a really good uppercut?

(and even that does not work all the time)

How that question is personally answered matters.

I think it was Pan Quin Fu (something like that) that once quiped:

"if those old masters could really jump 30 feet then why did they have stairs in their houses?"

I don't think anyone actually has anwered that mainly rhetorical question.

I find it interesting that the "chi" theories are all bunk (according to the "scientists" among us), but the ideomotor effects are "science"... when everything I could find on it clearly said it was a "psychological theory". If I use chi to create a physical effect, it's bunk... but if you explain it with a psychological theory , it's automatically scientific proof .

I was born at night, but it wasn't last night... and this whole "ideomotor effect" is no more scientific than the ouiji boards they're claiming to be in control of operating.
Where are all the "double blind" tests of this? I read that there were plenty of "hypnotic suggestions" that could cause ideomotor movements, but nobody is claiming to hypnotize anyone using chi...

Bull$*** is bull$***... and the ideomotor " $cientific explanation " is probably a good method to get grant money to "document the ideomotor effect" and write a psychological paper to have the nitwits in the "psychology profession (and I'm being generous there)" explain something they can't see or touch or define.

Sigmund Fraud would be proud of this explanation ...


This thread hit a 6 on my B-S meter...

Going off track a little here guys..I know I no longer mod this section of the forum but Underdog does and this subject makes her very "Lock Button" happy as it can rapidly spin into a pointless thread. Whilst we have the pleasure of Darren's attention please let's keep this relevant to his article and not get this one locked down!

Maybe I missed something, but Ed puports that since there ia no "scientific evidence" of chi, that it's bunk. In the same breath, he puports that "ideomotor effects" are "science", while the google-fu sources all say that it's a psychological theory.

Maybe we should just all join the flat earth society and stop using anything that we can't explain adequately. I'm the first guy to admit that a lot of things that are attributed to chi are actually body mechanics, but that fact doesn't necessarily negate everything else about it... and just because "scientists" can cause ideomotor effects from hypnosis doesn't mean that it's the answer to all things unexplainable in human contact and movement either.

Like everything psychologists and psychiatrists do, they start with the answer, and craft the arguments to match their findings by making everything else "bunk". I've had a number of friends in the psychology field over the years, and they've never met anyone that their first approach wasn't "you need to restructure your life"... Of course, it was to fit "their model" of how you should live... so I don't necessarily fall off the wagon every time some psychology wonk tells me about the "science" of theoretical arguments. One of my karate teachers was a psychologist, and I found out that I was "one of his projects". He got pi$$ed when I refused to alter my behavior to fit his "model" just so he could present his thesis, so don't tell me about how "scientific" these guys are. They think everybody they meet are their toys, and they can play with them any way they like...

His "theory" was that you could take "traditional trained karate people" and turn them into more "progressive" martial artists by trying to "un-do" their training. In my case, he was wrong... and just for the record, he would join any martial arts association that passed through town just to get another certificate to hang on the wall. He was obsessed with having his picture with "so and so" hanging on the wall, and his dojo was like trying to workout inside a photo album. He almost had a stroke when he asked me to start teaching jujutsu for him, and I came in and took all his pictures down and boxed them up.

I'm all for scientific proof, Ed, but let's not expose the thread participants to "psychological theories" as scientific proof of anything. It may be true, it might not... just like chi... but it sure isn't "science" at the same standard you pull out like a gun on anything you can't explain.

I asked the author a question. you extrapolated the rest.

congratualations though, you're doing a good job of giving an excuse to getting the thread locked...which is what many people would like, I'm sure.


To Darren, the author of the article: Have you received 'backlash' as a result of this article? Thanks.

With the interest in science expressed, does it at all matter that Darren has not done a hyno way NTKO? With all the respect I have for Darren for sharing information with me, this one stickler point bothers me. I'm actually surprised that no one else has even asked. Just curious, has ANYONE done a hypno way NTKO and if so, could you post a clip?

I won't lock the thread as long as it is respectful. I just don't like being insulted in a way that excedes disagreement and becomes ridicule. I'll accept as a given that people disagree with me and I have no desire to pursuade anyone. Don't need to.

This is a pretty elite group of discussants. I don't need to interfere. I may light touch with my magic mod mouse if we get infiltrated by 12 year olds who want to throw chi balls at their cats. Enjoy. I owe it to Darren to let him have unimpeded forum access that he would have difficulty having on Kyushospace and with an audience that genuinely wants to discuss his ideas.

Can someone clarify how there is more than one way to NTKO? What is the difference between hypno NTKO and anything else? The implication seems to be that one will work, but not the other. My understanding is that none of them will work.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query="no+touch"+knockout&search=Search

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa1nzD-n25Q&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM_qg5d1YGI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar1yXYOsxQk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC45kYb9Sjg&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxQ-e0GStpg


which of those are NON-hypno/NON-cooperative 'no touch' techniques? have you ever performed a hypno or non-hypno NTKO? If not, how do you know how it works?

Underdog, I was perplexed by your question to. The implication from your question is that NTKO (outside of these hypno induced phenomena) actually exist.

There has never been any proof to suggest this and the article that Darren wrote, unless you are seeing something differently, clearly states that he thinks it is trickery and does not have any metaphysical basis to it. This will work on only those who allow themselves to be knocked out through this hypnotic effect and not on an unwilling participant.

WT, I need more data to answer your question...here's what I need:
Someone winning the Randi $1,000,000 challenge prize.


Whoever makes ANY claim, bears the responsibility to prove it...it's not everyone elses responsibility to disprove it.

just using occam's razor logic in this case:
If only failure exists, with no proof positives, then the most likely is the most likely.


and btw, why do you keep mentioning the 'chi/ki' buzzword as an explaination to everything? why not the power of chakras? divine intervention? spirit of our ancestors? aliens using our bodies as hosts?
hmmmm?


another question for the author: When was the first NTKO claim publicized? I'm guessing early 1970's...right around the time cults were mutiplying.

Another thing that might be worth considering is looking at the subject using the very model that NTKO's are described with.

The NTKO is explained by its supporters as the manipulation of Qi. The classics tell us "Where the Yi goes Qi will follow!". Yi is often translated to intention. Therefore Qi is moved using our own intention, or an active thought process on our part. From a Oriental Medicine point of view (the model used to describe NTKO's by supporters) in order for me to influence a persons energetics they need to be willing to open themselves up energetically to me. There is a phenomenon in both Western and Eastern medicine called the therapeutic relationship, whereby the patient puts them self in the care of the practitioner. Therefore there is a state of required exceptence on the part of the receiver that they will be manipulated, if not they stick the barriers up to protect themselves.

In ALL the PP LTKO's and NTKO's I have seen the recipients have always been "energetically" open to the desired results. This is another argument I have against why you'd practice these stuff. Fight or Flight effects the energetics of someones ability to respond to danger as well which just isn't replicated in these sorts of demo.

Kinda lost the point I was trying to make, but I suppose I'm saying that from an Eastern point of view, IMHO, both NTKO's and LTKO's can be seen as self inflicted also.

Its not that there may be chi... that is not the question...there may very well be chi... the question is do you require it to explain the phenomena.. and you don't... we must apply Ockham's Razor in the analysis of these phenomena... we must e as economical with our theories as possible... we must not add to our theories that does not need to be there.. and if we do add that which does not need to be there we must ask our motivation why we have added it in the first place and for qi the motivation is the proof we require for a greater dimension to life ...the proof we require for the existence of the spiritual.. do we truly think we can find the inner dimensions of existence through the crass mechanism of knocking people out at a distance do we really think they are the mysterious ways the divine would move in... NTKO's are applied stage hypnotism we must come to terms with it and look for divinity in the hearts of good people not in the palms of charlatans.
all the best darren

Gavin,
I don't like "sitting duck" techniques of any kind... knockouts or not. You have to be a complete idiot to simply stand there and let somebody do brain damage to you.

Fighting techniques are actually what the knockouts are all about, and while a NTKO might be possible, in a fighting situation, it's highly unlikely. If for no other reason, the fact that both persons are "extending ki" would make it unlikely, and if you're doing a "hitting points" knockout, you have to make physical contact... hence no NTKO. It doesn't have anything to do with ideomotor effects and responses, but simply that if both people are extending ki, the resultant isn't going to be one of them absorbing it and being knocked out.Now, there are other forms of excitation that can be used... such as vibration, gravity, springing... but they all require contact with the recipient.

Like "fa jing" punching, where instead of the body being pushed back, it collapses around the fist and then springs outward away from the fist, extending ki has essentially that same effect. It drives the attachment away from the connection point in the direction that it's being extended mechanically however it's applied to the limbs involved.

I teach students that your arms have two directions of rotation, and if the elbows are locked, it's one set of techniques, if bent, it's a different set. While there's a "mechanical element" to it, extending ki in the technique is what makes it what it is. I teach them as "palms up" and "palms down" structures, and if simply extending ki would make the technique work, I'd be invincible... but I have to have contact to make anything work like that.

Now, there are some LTKO's that don't require much contact at all, but it's still "heavier" contact than the "point and pass out" NTKOs I've seen in videos... and most of them, as you say, are someone standing there "waiting to be knocked out".

How we describe the techniques, the effects of them, and the execution of them clearly affects the "believeability" of them. In 45 years, I've had lots of different experiences in martial arts, but I've never had a legitimate instructor tell me that all I had to do to knock somebody out is to extend ki. I believe that you can execute some techniques without touching, because I've had it happen... but whether I simply moved out of the way "better" than I expected, my timing was better than expected, or what, I have no idea. It certainly isn't a "repeatable on demand" ability that I have... but it has happened.

I think your take on the NTKOs and their description is pretty accurate.

MattJ

I think the question is not "if" some people can on occasion, every now and then, pull off something that defies scientific explanation---mainly because nobody seems to be able to replicate it in lab conditions.

The real question, IMO is can it be RELIABLY??????

I'm guessing it can't, again, because of the inablity to replicate it, at will, in a lab.

To certain extent all martial arts are pretty much high risk-high return stratagies ie. kicking a man in the face is risky, but if you can pull it off--IF, it tends to end fights in a hurry.

(just an example---but in general, all arts balance risk vs possible reward)

In that sense the question becomes just how much your willing to risk on a given stratagy and a given technique.

I would not try to talk people out of exploring some pretty "out there" aspects of the martial arts--its there time and effort after all and they should be the ones that get to choose how they spend it.

By the same token I demand a pretty high level of proofs on anything they come up with.

Like I said, the real question--TO ME, speaking JUST for me here--isn't if people can do strange and terrible things with overlooked and underexplored aspects of the martial arts.
The real question to me is just how reliable such abilties are and can they be summoned at will.

And as of today, in the abscence of the abilty to replicate it at will--under the light stress of a lab test--let alone under the chaos of an actual attack--I have to judge such ablities as "unreliable"---and thus to high a risk for too little reward.

Again, could be wrong--have been before--and no doubt will be again.

sorry I don't understand your comment. the only thing 'crossed' I saw was how you misquoted my post.

my point was, explaining something that can't be duplicated at will by attributing it to 'Ki', is just as provable as claiming a divine miracle or with chakra wheels. The explaination is fit into the framework of what the person believes it was.

If a Western-Religion based dojo for example, was teaching NTKO - they might explain it in terms of divine power.

or some sects in China would describe NTKO phenomenon as celestial positioning as source.

no belief based explainations for NTKO are repeatable...but there is one way to explain NTKO which IS repeatable - and that way is exactly what the article of this thread documents.

logically, if explainations A,B & C are not repeatable, but explaination D IS repeatable - I'll believe method D until the other explainations step up to the test area.