[Paleopsych] more on Tax $$$ at work: Air Force report wants $7.5 million for psychic teleportation

Werbos, Dr. Paul J. paul.werbos at verizon.net
Sat Nov 13 20:52:25 UTC 2004

At 09:09 PM 11/12/2004 -0500, K.E. wrote:
> From the other list i'm on
>From: "David P. Reed"
>Date: November 12, 2004 2:54:42 PM EST
>Subject: Re: [IP] Tax $$$ at work: Air Force report wants $7.5 million for 
>psychic teleportation
>Curious iconoclast that I am, I decided to read the actual AF report 
>concerning teleportation.
>I learned 2 things.
>1) the USA Today article was written by someone who obviously did not read 
>the report.  (Did Declan?)  In particular the sentence "The report calls 
>for $7.5 million to conduct psychic teleportation experiments" is 
>completely inaccurate, distorting the actual words, probably because of an 
>FAS agenda.   The report analyzes the costs for a set of experiments, 90+% 
>of which is to be focused on NON-psychic teleportation experiments - 
>experiments based on plausible, current physical theories, which just 
>happen to be a bit "out there".  It does not "call for" money at all - 
>merely recommending how one might take the next step in testing various 
>physical approaches to engineering teleportation.   Reminds me of Willy 
>Ley telling us how we might travel to the moon.
>2) The attempt by the author to describe the theories of highly regarded 
>physics professors (such as Kip Thorne of Caltech) seems honest and does 
>not seem to me to substantially misrepresent their work, those parts of 
>which I have read.
>I've seen some ideas that were called absurd (such as Continental Drift, 
>which is now accepted, and non-biological origins of some petroleum) turn 
>out to be true after many years of disrepute, and other very plausible 
>theories held by senior people (inheritance of acquired characteristics) 
>turn out to be largely false.   Argument from prestigious authority is a 
>weak way to establish scientific truth, as I think we all know.

I did not read the report. But I certainly know about people (not in FAS 
especially) who try to become
famous or powerful or to seek divine favor by acting as Grand Inquisitors, 
by trying to create purges of
all heretics and nonbelievers.

it is utterly sad. reminds me of Spengler and his comments about decay of 
aging cultures which
start to forget their original inspiration. The spirit of the scientific 
method is not well reflected in the
New Science which might better be called New Theology.

Not knowing this Air Force project... I have no idea whether the money is 
well spent.
But I seriously doubt there is more being wasted here than, say, with PEM 
fuel cells designed
for cars carrying cryogenic hydrogen around. It would be more honest to 
debunk Schwartzenegger
than to debunk these small fry. But some folks realize it's easier to get 
ahead by singling out the
weak and the vulnerable ...

>It saddens me that the FAS responds to such publications by putting out 
>press releases to USA Today, rather than pursuing the usual scientific 
>channels for challenge.   Is the FAS a part of science, or merely a 
>political lobbying organization?  Who is Stephen Aftergood?  On what basis 
>is he an expert in wormholes, for example?
>Now it may be that there is a larger context I don't understand.  For 
>example, there may be politicians using the report to justify investing in 
>such projects.   If true, that activity should be discussed and judged, 
>and I certainly think that other scientists should review the report 
>before funding such a hypothetical plan.
>paleopsych mailing list
>paleopsych at paleopsych.org

More information about the paleopsych mailing list