Psychic abilities and phenomena: the scientific/skeptic analysis
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Saturday, August 26, 2006 22:49
VIEWED: 10059
PAGE 1 of 11
Here, this is for 'rational' discussion on the topic.
CUnknown, go for it. The anecdotal thread is not for a scientific evaluation (which is a valid way for some to go), it's for exploration and sharing of 'stories', if you will.
Thanks.
Let the analysis begin!
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Uh.. thanks, I guess. I pretty much said everything I wanted to say in the other thread. Mostly I just wanted to make sure people know that science is -not- scared of psychic phenomena, regardless of their truth/falsehood (something that was mentioned a couple times in the other thread).
I guess now that I'm here, I'll comment a little on Ruxton's response to my last post.
RUXTON said:
Quote:
Get you head out of your ass, dolt, look stuff up, and do me a favor and go away while you do so. You are not rational. Your "opinions" are nothing more than embarrassing admissions of your own limitations. They add zero to the discussions and only serve to waste the time of those willing to share and learn from this thread.
You FAILED to respond to my remark on remote viewing, so go here:
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html
or here:
http://www.militaryremoteviewers.com/cia_remote_viewing_sri.htm [same material]
or here: http://www.crystalinks.com/remote_viewing.html [techniques, with more links]
Look into things before you come here with your pants down and embarrass us all again. Find out the vastness of your shameful limitations.
CUNKNOWN, do you really think the CIA and DOD would have looked so seriously into this if there were nothing in it? Are you unaware that most pets are able to know when their owners are coming or going, or thinking about them? Can you be so totally blind, not to mention ignorant?
First of all, he's being extremely hostile, which is unwarrented because I was very polite in my posts.
So, Ruxton, I checked out those websites, and I'm a little shocked to read that the military really did do tests on this "Remote Viewing" stuff. I guess not that shocked though, I mean the US military is without a doubt the most wasteful organization on the planet, and I'm not even talking about the war in Iraq necessarily. Come on, Star Wars? They have no clue about whether that will ever work or not, but that doesn't stop them from spending billions of dollars on it. So, it's not out of character for them to be spending lots of time and money on something that's most likely bogus.
As far as whether "Remote Viewing" really is bogus or not, well... you have to admit it sounds like it. And since the military did finally cancel the project (thank God), I'd imagine that most of them think so, too.
I'm a little surprised that Bush isn't resurrecting the project in an attempt to find those lost weapons of mass destruction, huh?
That website you showed me did say that the psychics were drawing things correctly, and with a greater accuracy than chance would predict. Although it's difficult to say.. I mean, even that tracked platform thing isn't -exactly- like it is in the picture. I'd admit it counts as a success, but you'd need many more successes than that to even start to prove anything. "Greater than chance would predict." My question is, how much greater? If he's really Astrally Projecting himself, and can really see these things, why isn't he right all the time? It sounds more likely to me that the people who were experimenting on him might have accidentally given him enough clues to figure some of this out. And of course, if the project was cancelled, they'd lose their jobs, so they'd have a real incentive to hand over a tad more information then they're supposed to.
Anyway, I'll admit that there is a slight chance that "Remote Viewing" is real. I certainly don't believe it, but how can any of us know for sure? It's definitely not clear that it is for real anyway, that would be jumping to conclusions. More testing, more rigorous testing would have to be done to determine if there really is anything going on here. But, they canned the project, so I suppose the world will never know.
Ruxton, your point was what, again? That I didn't know all the details about "Remote Viewing?" Well, thanks to your links, I now know more about this "phenomenon" than most people should ever know, and it's changed my opinion not at all.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CUnknown:
Its perfectly possible to say something in a polite manner and be insulting at the same time.
You said that your sure that the experiences listed in the other thread were false.
Maybe we should ignore the fact that this is your belief, so makes you no more objective nor logical than anyone else, and get down to the point.
You said (albeit in not so many words) that I am (along with everyone else who listed experiences) a liar.
Please tell me how you have more knowledge of my experiences than I do?
Are you psychic? 
...
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don’t think there was anything insulting about what CUNKNOWN said in the other thread. He offered a perspective that was lacking from the other points of view in the thread. If it was intended that that thread be for purely speculative and anecdotal arguments, as the title suggested, then perhaps someone should have politely mentioned that to CUNKNOWN, but accusations of ignorance is a little like calling the kettle black. Although, if one cannot accept the fact that evidence for psychic abilities is miniscule and often more adequately explained with coincidence, then it draws one’s own observations and experiences into question, because it suggests that these observations and experiences are based on an irrational analysis. So I’m of the mind to believe that any discussion on psychic ability is basically trivial without the so-called “Scully” perspective to anchor it, or act as a control, as it were.
Obviously CUNKNOWN, by his own admission, was unaware that scientists have studied psychic abilities quite extensively. Many of the major universities in the US have or have had extensive psychic abilities research programs, and the CIA, NSA and DIA have funding some of these programs, particularly the one at Stanford I believe, rather lavishly. But clearly a similar unawarness existed among many others who claimed that scientists were afraid of researching psychic abilities, when in fact, that couldn’t be further from the truth. The reason scientists often avoid or dismiss the issue is because it has been studied, very extensively, and it has resulted in very little conclusive evidence, now that doesn’t mean that it isn’t true or that it should continue to be researched, but it does mean that most scientists will and should turn their attention to things that are more likely to provide results.
My own personal experiences are decidedly lacking in anecdotal evidence. Sure, I’ve turned on the tv to find a show that I wanted to watch or part of a movie that I hadn’t seen, but that was a coincidence or at best better explained by prior knowledge. Jumping to the conclusion that I had some psychic experience is probably a little rash. On the other hand, my grandmother might do the same thing and insist that the Lord Jesus brought her to the TV. How is that any different? One of the things that makes me very skeptical of the psychical ability argument is that many of the same people who would so passionately argue in favor of the psychic ability phenomena will as passionately discount the religious phenomena, which leads me to believe that most of the psychic abilities stuff is more ideological then rational. Conclusive evidence, or perhaps evidence, is lacking for both cases. I like to keep an open mind, though. I like to think that both could be true, but no rational argument would be complete without admitting that it is just as likely that neither is true. That’s the thing about speculative arguments; there just so speculative.
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree, Ruxton was a little too harsh.
My point is that in CUnknown's original statement said, outright, even without evidence, that those of us who mentioned we had experienced psychic phonomena were lying.
Then he went on to say this is based on impartial logical and reasoned thinking, when, frankly it was CUnknown's opinion based on CUnknown's belief.
See, my problem was not with CUnknown's agreeing or disagreeing with me or anyone else. Quite frankly I know what I've experinced, I know it wasn't a coincidence, or any other argument some would consider 'rational', as those just do not fit.
Furthermore, and I really don't mean this to offend, I couldn't give a 
whether you, Finn, CUnknown or anyone else believe me or not.
I know I am not lying.
What I take exception too is people parading their beliefs as established fact, and they're thinking as rational and logical. Especially when this is linked with an accusation that those who think differently are some how irrational, wrong, and lying.
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm blissfully ignorant of whatever actual research is being done/has been done in these areas; that's cool, because ideas and opinions are valuable, too--so long as they're not presented as fact.
What keeps me from dismissing the entire notion of "psychic abilities" as stuff and nonsense just from an intuitive level: I don't fully understand the physics behind how information can be recorded in magnetic media, then read and decoded with the proper mix of metals and electrons without even having to touch the media. That's pretty dang amazing, to me, as is the whole idea of broadcast radio and television. Someone out there knows how it all works to a fare-thee-well, but to me it might as well be magic.
So, what keeps the idea of matter recording imprints that can be read remotely, and information being broadcast invisibly, limited to the current ways in which they're being used? The idea does seem interesting, on the surface.
Just some musings from the ignorant-but-not-stupid.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I don't know what your problem is, but I bet it's hard to pronounce.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Of course we already 'read' peoples 'thoughts' all the time...
EKG's anyone?
People have controlled computers making the cursor move using similar equipment, this isn't pyschic, of course, its technology...
So why can't another persons brain pick up these 'brainwaves' just like an EKG?
And wouldn't another humans brain be able to decode them, I mean surely we all use the same mechanisms and 'formats' to think?
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don’t think anyone accused you of lying. That sounds like a superfluous interpretation of mine and CUNKNOWN posts. CUKNOWN simply suggested that there were alternative explanations to some of this phenomenon, and that he personally didn’t believe in it. He may have been critical of your opinions, but that doesn't suggest the he thinks you're lying; just the he might think your interpretation is poor. And I see no reason why you should care whether we believe you or not, but if you don’t care, then what is your point?
Originally posted by citizen:
Furthermore, and I really don't mean this to offend, I couldn't give a
I know I am not lying.
What do you think of people like Jeanine Garofalo, for instance, who refer to Christianity as being a “crutch” for people who can’t accept her version of reality? How many times have you heard someone make some comment about Christians that suggested that they didn’t have a grasp on reality? Isn’t that the same thing, at least? If a Christian were to tell you that he or she prayed to God for some fortune and that fortune occurred so God made it happen, how would you respond to that? How do you think many of those who were criticizing CUNKNOWN, would respond to that? How would you respond to the scientific studies that suggest that prayer has the power to physically heal ailments, such as reducing the risk of heart attack? The studies are no more conclusive then those done with psychic abilities, but they have been done and they have demonstrated marginal success.
What I find curious is that we tend to be very selective of the speculative phenomenology that we granted credence to.
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn:
It was a thread where some members posted their paranormal experiences. In this thread CUnknown posted this:
Quote:
There is a famous example of psychic abilities being disproved back in the 1800's (I think). The guy's name was Mesmer and he had this whole cult of people following him--he was famous enough that a group of prominent scientists (including Benjamin Franklin, if I remember right) got interested in him and his "abilities." Using the scientific method, he was exposed as a hoax and his following eventually disapeared. I'm sure the same could be done for any paranormal or psychic phenomenon you care to name.
In the same breath as mentioning a hoax he/she mentions any paranormal phenomenon can be dismissed in the same way. Since this was a thread where I, amongst others, had posted my own experiences, how else should I take that sentence? I read it as saying my own experiences were a hoax, ergo I was a liar.
I really do not see any other interpretation.
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Cumhal:
And I see no reason why you should care whether we believe you or not, but if you don’t care, then what is your point?
I don't care whether you believe what I have to say or not. I care about the fact that I made my point as my opinion, CUnknown made his/her point as gospel fact, that a logical reasoned mind could not think differently to him/her.
Quote:
Originally posted by CUnkown:
The odds that the various psychic claims of people on this board (and elsewhere) are real should seem small to any rational, dispassionate person.
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Cumhal:
Isn’t that the same thing, at least? If a Christian were to tell you that he or she prayed to God for some fortune and that fortune occurred so God made it happen, how would you respond to that?
It depends what it was, and how it happened. Do you know my own personal experience, it really doesn't fit into the realm of coincidence. It is far more fanciful for my experiences to fit into the realm of coincidence IMO.
As for christianity, do I believe in it. No.
Do I believe christians are inherinatly wrong? Not really.
I can't believe in a god who is spoken of as infinitely forgiving and just, but at the same time has no problem murdering innocents when god doesn't get gods own way.
Christinaity holds a human coloured view of god, that doesn't mean that god doesn't exist, I find that your argument doesn't fit. I'm sorry if I missed your point.
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There's a difference between saying somebody's mistaken or wrong and saying they're lying. Personally I think every example of "psychic" phenomena can be sorted neatly into "mistaken", "coincidence" and "fraud".
However, I'm well aware that trying to persuade those who believe they are "psychic" that they are not is about as likely to be successful as persuading someone that they do not have a sense of humour.
What does trouble me is how militant the psychics seem to have become over the last few years. Granted, this is generation X-Files and we are awash with conspiracy theories and unexplained occurences but even so, there seems to be this strange idea that the mainstream should accept the paranormal as fact.
It's like religion; you can believe whatever you want to believe but just don't expect the rest of us to swallow it. Not a drop. That's how it is. Jews don't see Christians in the street and sneer "Ha, you guys got had by a false prophet." They act like respectful adults to each other, even though they disagree with the fundamental beliefs of the other.
As should we all. This thread asked what I believed, I stated it. This doesn't mean I consider those who do believe to be liars or fools. Simply that we have different beliefs.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME