On Friday, January 4, 2013 12:48:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
> > So how ever many years ago you there confident that CERN would discover
>> the Higgs?
> About 15, and in not one of those 15 years would I have confidently
> predicted that nothing new about the Higgs would be discovered in the next
> year, but I will make that prediction about the paranormal.
>> And this post proves....?
> That in the last 200 years research into the supernatural has produced
> precisely ZERO results; and I'm not even talking about developing a theory
> to explain how it works, I'm talking about obtaining enough experimental
> evidence to show that a explanation is needed. We could be having this same
> exact conversation about the paranormal in 1913, or even 1813 and you could
> still be complaining that mainstream scientists (they were called Natural
> Philosophers back then) were not paying enough attention to psi or ESP or
> spiritualism or whatever. The field has not moved one inch in centuries,
> not one Planck Length. As a result those doing full time ESP work today are
> third or fourth rate, if they were really skilled in the art of
> experimentation they'd be doing other things, they would never pick a field
> as moribund as parapsychology. However if you're all thumbs in the lab then
> parapsychology researcher is the perfect career choice because if you're
> looking for something that doesn't exist a poor researcher will get more
> encouraging results than a good one.
>> > Pfft, do better, John.
> If you disagree with me then show the courage of your convictions and
> let's make a bet! If there is a article in Science or Nature or Physical
> Review Letters about something (by whatever name) in the brain or in the
> mind that violates the known laws of physics before January 4 2014 I will
> give you $1000, and if there is not you only have to give me $100. I don't
> demand a explanation of this new phenomena just that the editors of one of
> those journals thinks that there is something interesting there, something
> that needs to be explain. So do we have a bet? I'm completely serious about
> this and if there is anybody else who would like to take this bet please
> say so; come on, I'm giving you 10 to 1 odds. if you believe in this crap
> then it's easy money.
> John K Clark
That's like betting that the Catholic Church won't make Martin Luther a
saint again this year.
If you notice, no private phenomena can be easily substantiated. There
won't be any publications proving the fact that we laugh because things are
funny, or that there is another way that blueness can be demonstrated
besides seeing it for yourself.
Research of psi may indeed be misguided in trying to make public that which
is so specifically private. To me, it makes sense that there is a directly
proportionate relation, so that the more interior and esoteric the
experience, the more resistant it will be to public examination. This seems
to be our intuition - 'you're not going to believe this,' etc.
This doesn't mean that there are not experiences which do not fit easily
into a simplistic cartoon of physics which imagines thoughtless matter
accidentally thinking. Science may forever preside only over the realism of
public space, and forever sneer at private experience, or it may address
privacy itself in a scientific and unbiased way someday. As has been
pointed out here, quoted from Planck, it is not likely that the old guard
of physics will ever be able to get beyond their own prejudice, and will go
to their graves hanging on to the legacies of the 19th and 20th
centuries...two centuries which may, like the fossil fuels which powered
them, turn out to be anomalies.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at