Chi Knockouts

[Alaric]

Chi and chi knockouts are areas that interest me immensely. I'll confess to being a skeptic, not just of 'no-touch' knockouts, but of the whole concept of chi. I'm hoping to get the 'Truth about Chi' thread going again, so if you guys want to discuss it there, it'd probably be best.

As regards the chi knockouts, here's an fun video you may have seen before. Long story short: a kiai master who demonstrates his powers upon a mob of his hapless students accepts a challenge from a MMA fighter, and gets pwned. Hardly conclusive evidence that no-touch knockouts don't exist, but a worthwhile reminder that there's lots of charlatans out there in it for the money and renown.

[username13768]

While I lived in Arizona I had the chance to attend several seminars. One from Taika Seiyu Oyata and 2 from Rick Moneymaker and Tom Muncy from the Dragon Society International. I have been demonstrated on in all 3 seminars because I'm an advanced belt and a pretty big guy so it looks better with me as an uke. I have to say as a skeptic going in, the pain they can inflict with vital point strikes and techniques is considerable. Rick Moneymaker threw me with a basic hip throw and laid his forearm across my face on 3 nerve points. It felt like I was being electrocuted. I thought that I was screaming but everyone says that I only made small choking sounds. Like I said, I'm a big guy and he wasn't pressing that hard so I was impressed. However, I never once witnessed any of these guy perform a no touch KO so I don't really buy into it. Also from what I've seen on videos it looks impractical to me even if it were real. You have to stand in front of the guy waving your hands around until they pass out. I don't know about you but I've never been in a fight where I had time to do anything like that. I prefer the vital points from Okinawan karate because every one that I have ever seen lies over either a nerve, a plexus of nerves or a sinus or some other physical structure. That way I don't have to wonder if my chi is strong enough or whatever because I'm striking something physical that I can do damage to. All I have to know to make it effective is the proper direction of entry and the most efficient technique for the job. However, whoever earlier said that nerve strikes don't work on everyone is correct. Only one point I know of that is almost garaunteed to give you a KO everytime. The carotid sinus in the neck, when struck with a knife hand especially, will cause the body to sense a dramatic rise in blood pressure and will respond by drastically and immediately lowering the blood pressure causing a lack of blood flow to the brain. As a caution to any of you eager beavers out there you can cause death by striking someone there by sending them into cardiac arrest, causing too drastic a drop in blood pressure or by physically rupturing the carotid artery. If you don't believe me look up carotid sinus or carotid sinus reflex. I do not suggest that you go out and try this on your buddy or in your training unless you have proper supervision by an experienced instructor. I am not responsible for any use of the above information. It is presented for educational purposes only.

[GeoGiant]

Hi, i was just wondering what you guys think about Chi Knockouts that people like George Dillman claim to do?

Personally i think they're bogus but i'd like to hear your opinions on them and any evidence you have for them.

Thanks.

What empirical evidence is there for chi knockouts or for chi, for that matter? I’ve read article after article about chi (when I was younger I really wanted to believe) but at the end of the day all I had was self-validating statements that are offered in lieu of controlled scientific testing.

I would be interested to hear why anyone would believe in chi. If chi is real, why can’t it be scientifically validated?

[username13768]

I have to say that I'm not big into magical chi applications or no-touch ko's or anything along that vein, mainly because I don't think it's necessary for martial arts. However, that doesn't mean that it's not a reality regardless of what science can prove. Just because I ... or any of you don't believe in something does that make it any less real if it happens to be true? Of course the same can be said for false belief in something that is in fact not real. (Did I say that correctly ) Anyway, just because science can't prove something doesn't make it less factual. It makes it an unknown in our present. Modern science is still pretty much in it's toddler years if not it's infancy. If we knew everything about the human body we wouldn't have sickness and disease. I guess what I'm trying to say is that you can refuse to buy into something and still keep an open mind to the possibilities. Science doesn't work without the belief in possibilities.

[GeoGiant]

I have to respectfully disagree with you.

 

“I have to say that I'm not big into magical chi applications or no-touch ko's or anything along that vein, mainly because I don't think it's necessary for martial arts.”

Necessity has nothing to do with it. No-touch ko’s can’t be explained by physics. As someone else said, we know how ko’s occur – head trauma. If someone is proposing a different cause n’ effect explanation for a ko I’m listening.

“However, that doesn't mean that it's not a reality regardless of what science can prove. Just because I ... or any of you don't believe in something does that make it any less real if it happens to be true?”

 

If its true then you should be able to provide proof or at least a theory for why, aside from magic powers. If someone claims to be able to cause a knockout by using chi then the onus is on them to prove their claim. Just because you believe its true, doesn’t mean that it is.

 

“Of course the same can be said for false belief in something that is in fact not real. (Did I say that correctly ) Anyway, just because science can't prove something doesn't make it less factual.”

 

Huh??? If something is factual then it is based on facts, a fact is verified information.

“It makes it an unknown in our present. Modern science is still pretty much in it's toddler years if not it's infancy. If we knew everything about the human body we wouldn't have sickness and disease. I guess what I'm trying to say is that you can refuse to buy into something and still keep an open mind to the possibilities. Science doesn't work without the belief in possibilities.”

Huh??? The human body is evolving as is sickness and disease…. this is the reason why the doctor doesn’t give antibiotics unless its necessary. I have an open mind and the scientific theory is the best method for analysis. If you are going to present a topic like chi or anything else and you assume "x" is real, what are you basing that belief on?

Please don't take my rebuttal as an attack because is not. I'm always looking for answers so if you can get me to look at something in a different way I'm more than willing to listen.

[username13768]

GeoGiant said:

 

Necessity has nothing to do with it. No-touch ko’s can’t be explained by physics. As someone else said, we know how ko’s occur – head trauma. If someone is proposing a different cause n’ effect explanation for a ko I’m listening.

Let's see, you can effect a ko by cutting blood and/ or oxygen to the brain, you can lower the blood pressure to a point where a ko occurs, you can overload the nervous system with pain simulus and effect a ko. These are all medically proven methods.

IndoSilat said:

 

“However, that doesn't mean that it's not a reality regardless of what science can prove. Just because I ... or any of you don't believe in something does that make it any less real if it happens to be true?”

 

GeoGiant said:

 

If its true then you should be able to provide proof or at least a theory for why, aside from magic powers. If someone claims to be able to cause a knockout by using chi then the onus is on them to prove their claim. Just because you believe its true, doesn’t mean that it is.

As I said before, I don't believe in no touch ko's so I find it a bit odd to defend them but here goes. There are many scientific theories that are not proven .... yet. i.e. super string theory or quantum black holes. The math may have been proven but the physical manifestation of these objects is still beyond our scientific ability to prove. Science uses biofeedback to alter body systems that shouldn't be able to be altered. They know it works because the results are measurable but the mechanism still isn't well understood. As for theories, there are many concerning chi, ki, prana or whatever you want to call it. However, as far as I know there are no mathematical models that back up any of these theories.

GeoGiant said:

 

Huh??? The human body is evolving as is sickness and disease…. this is the reason why the doctor doesn’t give antibiotics unless its necessary. I have an open mind and the scientific theory is the best method for analysis. If you are going to present a topic like chi or anything else and you assume "x" is real, what are you basing that belief on?

For starters scientific theory is not the best method for analysis, the scientific method is. Next, I don't understand what you are getting at about the whole human body and antibiotics analogy. Lastly, I never said I believed. I simply have an open mind about it. There are many things still waiting to be discovered by science. Remember that science is just a tool to help us understand things more completely. It doesn't have all the answers yet. There have been too many cases of scientists saying that's impossible only later to be proven wrong for me to put too much faith in science alone.

[GeoGiant]

I'm not sure if we agree or disagree.

With respect to chi ko's. I think its bunk. There are several ways to ko someone however I think the use of chi is not one of them.

In my mind, I need more then someones belief in something to think its plausible. With respect to chi I never been presented with anything more than a belief.

[username13768]

I think we basically agree except that I never say that something absolutely cannot exist because I don't believe it.

[GeoGiant]

I think we basically agree except that I never say that something absolutely cannot exist because I don't believe it.

I hear ya but I looking at it like... if someone makes a claim then they should provide a reasonable justification for that claim. The idea of using chi, in my mind, is similar to spoon benders or psychics. Demonstrating a chi ko provides a cause (chi) and an effect (ko). We both seem to agree that the effect is not the result of chi.

I’m taking the position that chi doesn’t exist based on the evidence. When you mentioned black holes, etc, those are concepts based on something other than just a statement of existence.

Why would you be willing to give an idea the benefit of the doubt for no reason?

[GeoGiant]

I should further clarify. If you present me with a claim, lets say a perpetual motion machine. I'm not going to immediately dismiss the idea and walk away. I'm going to ask you questions about your claim. If you refuse to answer questions or you refuse to provide information, then I'm going to dismiss your claim.

I think you have the impression that I will say no, perpetual motions machines are impossible therefore I won't listen your claim.

The idea of chi was presented to me. I looked at both sides of the debate and walked away skeptical of the idea. At this point I need "something else" for me to consider so that I can reformulate my opinion.

I would follow the above criteria for any idea presented to me.