[ExI] Randi again

[Emlyn]

On 06/03/2008, Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Henrique Moraes Machado
> <cetico.iconoclasta at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  But my point is that a true psychic's acuracy should tend to one hundred
> >  percent, not to zero. To paraphrase Obi Wan Kenobi: Never underestimate the
> >  power of randomness.
>
> Well, this is a definition of a "true psychic's accuracy" as good as any.
>
> A problem remains however if consistent, albeit slight, statistical
> deviations tend to accumulate or at least stay there instead of
> cancelling out. If this is the case, I believe they beg for an
> explanation, even though of course the same need not be "supernatural"
> in any sense.
>
> Stefano Vaj

As natural seems to just be a word for the set of things we can
explain, supernatural explanation is an oxymoron.

Although there are other definitions of natural. eg: in the marketing
sense, where it means "buy this now".

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com