[ExI] Psi (no need to read this post you already know what it says)

[Damien Broderick]

On 1/10/2010 1:02 PM, scerir quoted:

> Henry P. Stapp
> Theoretical Physics Group
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

But, says John Clark, why should we pay any attention to this bozo, who 
is probably really a truck driver who failed high school and is just 
pretending to work for the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, anyone can type.

Which raises the key question (or a key question):

What sort of evidence for psi phenomena would be publishable in Nature 
or Science, and how many replications by independent labs would be 
needed to make it acceptable?

And to be acceptable, is it necessary that the scientists involved have 
no previous history of work in parapsychology?

John failed to reply to my comment that once a reputable scientist or 
other academic reports apparent evidence for psi, he or she immediately 
falls into the "loony--safe to ignore" category. (Admittedly, some of 
the most distinguished scientists with an interest in psi do have a 
loony side, Nobelists included, and maybe they need to in order to get 
into that area of investigation to begin with. But we also know that 
Newton spent more time on astrology, alchemy and biblical codes than he 
did on physics and optics.)

Damien Broderick