On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > If the journals were honest, they would review the papers seriously > according to their data and results, > So you think the reason the journals Science, Nature and Physical Review Letters don't publish ESP stuff has all to do with sociology and nothing to do with Science. I think they don't publish ESP crap because what they contain conflicts with reality. On my side I have journals that have published every major scientific discovery of the 20th century, on your side you have some bozo nobody ever heard of who typed some stuff onto a website or onto a dead tree that also nobody has ever heard of. > > rather than reject them out of hand because the idea doesn't fit into > their existing conceptual framework. > That is just utterly ridiculous. It is the dream of ALL experimenters to find something that existing science can not explain, and it is the dream of theorists to find red meat to sink their teeth into, it's the only reason people do science. If the good people who run the LHC don't find something that, unlike the Higgs, does NOT fit with known physics then a large number of them will need to be put on a suicide watch. And you don't need a 10 bullion dollar accelerator to do that sort of research, if there were anything to parapsychology it would have been proven to everybody's satisfaction centuries ago. When Roentgen discovered X rays there was no theoretical framework to explain them, zero, zilch, nada, goose egg; and yet the man was treated as a conquering hero by his fellow scientists and received the very first Nobel Prize in physics. Why? Because he used those X rays, whatever the hell they were, to photograph the bones in his wife's hand. Roentgen made a extraordinary claim but he had extraordinary evidence, parapsychology also makes extraordinary claims but unlike Roentgen parapsychology has no bones to show. Suppose the Everything list existed in 1865 what would be different? Well, we'd be using Morse Code and a telegraph key instead of the Internet (with a lot less quoted material I'll bet), and the discussions about biology and astronomy and mathematics and physics would be vastly different because in the last 150 years those subjects have advanced radically; but the field of parapsychology has not advanced one inch in all that time, not one nanometer, even the evidence that the field of parapsychology actually exists is not one iota better today than it was in 1865. The evidence stinked then and it stinks now, nevertheless in 1865 people would be telegraphing messages to the Everything list complaining about how modern natural philosophers like Darwin and Maxwell don't pay enough attention to recent developments in spiritualism. > > the leading journals points to a dangerous attitude present in those > academic journals which will only stifle the rate of progress > Yeah, the trouble with the world is there just isn't enough junk science. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
