[ExI] Psi and gullibility
thespike at satx.rr.com
Wed Jan 27 05:58:50 UTC 2010
On 1/26/2010 11:44 PM, John Clark wrote:
>> That's what scientific protocols are for--to put such wishes under
>> pressure, and see if the phenomenon at issue actually is there, and
>> what constrains it, and finally to generate a theory able to
>> accommodate it. The first is established, the second is somewhat in
>> hand (given the astonishingly sparse funding compared to burger
>> advertising or particle physics or sports or religion, not bad), the
>> third is hardly begun.
> The proof of psi's existence is somewhat in hand?
Sometimes you skim too fast to understand what has been written. My
sentences above mean
(1) it has been established that the phenomenon actually is there
(2) some of what constrains it is known
(3) a theory to accommodate it has hardly begun.
And to repeat (tediously): since you and many other giant brains refuse
to examine the available evidence, you don't even know that point (1) is
true. That's really special, and I'm happy for you.
More information about the extropy-chat