top of page

Letter from Zaquie Meredith to Sheldrake - December 2 - Reporting the results of the SHELDRAKE TELEP


Dear Rupert Sheldrake , I have some interesting news for your test. You might be surprised. I was delighted and I am very curious to learn what you think of this because I think it is very relevant to your tests. First we started performing your test “being stared at” with my group in São Paulo, you remember, adding that calm state of mind, getting into meditation, etc prior to the test. As we agreed to do with you. However we were disappointed to see that this special state: staying calm, getting into meditation did not seem to make a big difference to the results. The average results were 50 right to 50 wrong. We were l0 people doing the test and we gave 20 seconds between one answer and another. We tried both ways: 1 metre and 2 metres of distance between the looker and the person being looked at. No difference. But one important fact called my attention. I noticed that 2 people came out remarkably well: they had 15 right against 5 wrong and 12 right against 8 wrong. At first, It seemed to me that this had to do with being over sensitive (as I had mentioned to you previously)but someone, one of the students, called my attention that these 2 people had just “worked” together, in pair, prior to the test, exchanging healings. In fact, last time we performed this test this had happened too. I only had not noticed that the people who had a higher rate of positive results had been working together. This made me think that obviously the healings “helped” them to be more in ressonance with each other, in touch with each other but not only that. They probably were still in each others field. See, the other 8 people did healings with each other but not “in pairs” as these 2 people. To prove this again I asked 4 other students to do healings on each other, as a pair. When they finished I asked them to perform your tests exactly with the same people they were exchanging healings. Remarkable results : 13 right to 7 , 12 right to 8 wrong ,and 12 right to 8 wrong. Certainly this is very significant don’t you agree? It occurred to me that perhaps we are dealing with a different “hipótese”. Perhaps we “know” when we are being stared at only if the “looker” is somehow in “ressonance” with us. That means that we “miss” a lot of people who look at us and we will never know they were staring at us even if we are “sensitive”. By being in ressonance with us I mean someone who has something in common with us be it physical, emotional, mental, talents, vibrational frequency, etc even at an unconscious level. (probably at an unconscious level) Can we conclude that it is not with everybody that telepathy works? What conclusions can you make when you learn that people who exchanged healings have much more chances “to know” if they are being stared at? If you consider that healings “harmonize” peoples human field, thoughts and feelings and besides making them more sensitive they become more “tuned up” to each other can we say that telepathy works ONLY WITH people who have SOMEHOW some ressonance?? Can we narrow to that? I don’t know. Please tell me. What conclusions can we make out of this besides classifying these people as “sensitive”? I think it is more than that. Please consider Mr. Sheldrake that there is something important here. I meant to ask you before and I do it now: how do you see the possibility of visiting Brasil in the future and give some talks and courses here ? Is there any possibility in the future? Have you ever been in São Paulo? Yours truly,“

0 visualização0 comentário

Posts recentes

Ver tudo

“Dear Zaquie, Thanks for this new update. I’m glad you’re going on with this research and looking at who seems more ‘strong minded’. I suspect that in the real world this is what makes the most differ

“Dear Rupert Sheldrake, saudações and saludos! I hope everything is fine with you. I want to report some of the results of our tests. There were 2 groups: An entire new group which we didnt know who w

“Dear Zaquie Thanks for this feedback. It would be good to test the sensitive and strong people both ways round so I hope you can continue this in your next meeting. All the best Rupert”

bottom of page