[extropy-chat] Re: Damien grants psi evidence

[Samantha Atkins]

Read it again.  That is not what she said.  She said effectively that 
if one is looking for statistically significant proof that ESP is real 
then one is wasting time as that level of proof is already in hand.   
She may be right or wrong about that but I wouldn't dismiss the entire 
quite well done piece just because she states her professional opinion 
on the evidence strongly.

- s

On Dec 17, 2004, at 9:36 AM, John K Clark wrote:

> "Damien Broderick" <thespike at satx.rr.com> Wrote:
>
>>  http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/
>
> I went to the page you cited with the intention on reading the entire 
> thing
> but in the end I just glanced at it. I confess I totally lost interest 
> when
> I read the following:
>
> "There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer 
> proof,
> since there is little more to be offered to anyone who does not accept 
> the
> current collection of data."
>
> In other words Jessica Utts thinks the proof that this phenomena 
> actually
> exists is as good as it's ever going to get and in her opinion it's 
> good
> enough. In my wildest dreams I can't imagine Faraday saying that about
> electromagnetism 150 years ago, or a scientist today at CERN saying 
> the same
> thing about a theory of particle physics that was far less radical 
> than ESP.
> When I read those words my baloney detector went off big time!
>
>  John K Clark        jonkc at att.net
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat