--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <richardhughes...@...> wrote: > > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/may/12/psychic-claims-james-randi-paranormal > > This is interesting as it challenges a common view that > the James Randi Educational Foundation's million dollar > prize - to anyone who can demonstrate paranormal powers > under controlled consditions - is a fix with Randi putting > too many obstacles in the way of genuine psychics. >
I quote from the book: HOW WE KNOW WAHT ISN'T SO, by Thomas Gilovich, Phd. Psychology from Stanford and a professor at Cornell: "In part, this gloomy assessment of the status of ESP stems from a disturbing pattern that has repeated itself over the past 130 years. First, the believers and skeptics stake out their positions, the believers by citing anecdotes of unexplained phenomena in everyday life, and the skeptics by noting the inherent implausibility of psi (e.g., its existence would violate a number of physical laws such as the inverse square law and the second law of thermodynamics). While the debate rages on, the parapsychologists energetically conduct experiments on psi, and, at some point, produce supposedly 'definitive' evidence. At first blush, the evidence can seem rather convincing and the initial skeptical response can sound rather weak and even petty. Convinced that they hold the upper hand, the believers then chide the skeptics for their closed-mindedness. The skeptics are likened to the medieval clerics who refused to look through Galileo's telescope and persecuted those who espoused the heliocentric view of the solar system. The are castigated as representatives of a scientific 'establishment' who stand in the way of unprecedented progress in our understanding of our world and ourselves." "The believers' euphoria does not last long, however. As soon as enough time has elapsed to allow sufficient scrutiny of the evidence, it generally becomes clear that it is hardly definitive. Rather, it is often shown to be the result of deliberate fraud or critical methodological shortcomings." The author then goes on to describe a number of historical instances of both methodological problems and fraud. Most damaging to claims that ESP or other such phenomenon exist is the failure to produce a replicable experiment. Given these issues, it is hardly surprising that rigorous testing is required. Of course, there will always be those who believe that testing itself interferes with obtaining a positive result (from "bad vibes" to "nature doesn't want us to have proof"). There is nothing that can be done with that kind argument as it is not scientific. However, given that there are other explanations consistent with what we know about the world and about people, I tend to favor those explanations. They just aren't elegant. They can be messy and complicated and differ depending on the situation.
