> For example, Brian Josephson got his Nobel from an idea that he got when > he was around 21 years old. Currently he is "researching" telepathy and yet > people listen Brian because and only because he has won a Nobel > prize. Clearly it does not follow logically that Brian is smart because he > has a Nobel prize. On the other hand people should not unlisten Brian > because he is researching telepathy.
I'm not sure what you mean by "researching telepathy". Until something is shown to exist, there isn't much to research. Same with telekinesis and most things purported to be "paranormal" (whatever exactly that means). First show that the phenomenon exists, then let's research it! Brian Josephson also thinks there is merit to homeopathy. But homeopathy is a very old mistake being perpetuated in modern times when the technology and methods exist to falsify it. The homeopaths never do the experiment even in the face of a million dollar standing prize from James Randi if someone can simply differentiate a properly made homeopathic solution from it's solvent by *any* means whatsoever.
