Talk:Levitation (paranormal)

message: There are so many references in the bible of levitating people, why isnt it included ?.
Or why favor budhism here, the list of levitating saints is a lot larger to give it a start :
Saint Teresa of Avila
Simon Magus (he was considered evil)
Saint Francis of Paula 
Gemma Galgani
Joseph of Cupertino 
Saint Benedict.
And jesus walking over water counts too i think.
etc etc  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.107.161.119 (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible 

message: The term "metaphysical" doesn't seem to apply to this concept...I have never heard of "metaphysical levitation" used as a term before, and I challege any of this article's authors to find a reputable source to legitimize this article's title. I think Mystical levitation would be more appropriate. Shaggorama 10:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Metaphysical?" 

message: I've removed this entire section:
 At the King & Low-Heywood Thomas School in Stamford, CT 17 students in Mr. Schpero's 
 Vietnam History class successfully elevated their school 30 feet in the air for 
 approximately 2 minutes. This levitation occured between 12:18 and 12:20 pm on 
 November 22nd, 2006.
Given that levitating an entire school would require the reconstruction of all the plumbing and wiring thereto, that the article is not sourced, that the editor made only this one entry to Wikipedia, and that there are no relevant Google entries that don't lead back to this article, I'm going to delete this as nonsense.*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 19:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Levitation at the King & Low-Heywood Thomas School 

message: Are people just making these lists up? Few have any citations. I'm going to rip them all out soon William M. Connolley (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Levitating saints 

message: For the sake of preserving information for future expansion, here is how the article appeared before it was stubbed to barely nothing. -- œ™ 01:28, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And this is the diff . I don't see any discussion of that. It wasn't a great article, more a list of lists. Was that valuable? I'm not sure William M. Connolley (talk) 08:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No it wasn't that great. But however bad it was, indiscriminately blanking everything "pending a rewrite" which never came, was worse. -- œ™ 09:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, since I agree I've restored the article but then tried to regroup it a bit. I think it could do with more text and less examples. For example, I'd be tempted to say (of Christianity, say) that levitation used to be a proof of holiness but is now regarded as a bit of an embarassment. But I've no source for that so I won't. But some kind of context of how the Church views this stuff would be worth having William M. Connolley (talk) 09:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for restoring it. I really enjoy reading about these topics. Yes I agree it needs work. If only a prose-pro could come along and somehow weave this together into paragraphs, that would make for really interesting reading, but it would take more research and searching for references. In the meantime, the tags are there, and the article does its job sufficiently. -- œ™ 11:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  re: Recent article "improvement" 

message: I think this video should be linked in any part of the article.--85.55.134.145 (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Video

message: I propose this section be either expanded with a thorough critical discussion, or deleted altogether. In its current form, it is misleading about the scientific acceptance and underpinnings of the phenomenon, and includes vague legitimate-sounding terms which are basically just buzzwords and lacking any context. The use of quotation marks in "tapping into" is especially telling. Also, both the ideas of harnessing zero-point energy, and of the mind being able to directly manipulate the physical world are controversial and more in the domains of metaphysics and pseudoscience. --Rubseb (talk) 13:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, it's pseudoscientific gibberish. - Sikon (talk) 04:37, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Glad you agree. I'm not sure what the conventions are for handling this sort of thing but I'll just remove it and see what happens. If people think it should be included then hopefully they'll react by putting it back in a better form or at least making a case for it. --Rubseb (talk) 21:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible scientific explanation 

message: You forgot that one. It's mentioned in all four Gospels. Jesus flew from a mountaintop high into the air to meet Moses and Elijah, who were descending from heaven to have a conference. According to the story, the three of them levitated quite some time having a conversation. 2600:8801:BE26:2700:B09F:3FEF:E7EB:2AC5 (talk) 00:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't recall that one. Care to give a source? Or rather, four sources, since it is "in all four Gospels"? --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:57, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Transfiguration of Jesus, the flying Messiah.