[ExI] few bits per second
ross.evans11 at gmail.com
Sun Jun 27 12:42:16 UTC 2010
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>wrote:
> On 6/26/2010 10:25 PM, Ross Evans wrote:
> The work of P.E.A.R has been debunked many times, I am surprised that
>> this is news to you.
> I suggest you read some of the detailed statistical reports from PEAR. Go
> to http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publications.html<http://www.princeton.edu/%7Epear/publications.html>and look at any of the experimental reports (not the discursive essays). (Of
> course you won't, you know in your bones, as John Clark does, that it's all
The detail isn't the problem, the conclusions being drawn are.
> Regarding the review...
> More hilarity. This is your idea of a killer review of my book? Professor
> Caroline Watts' mostly positive reading?
No, it was me demonstrating that I had taken the time to find a review of
the book. In this case from a particularly sympathetic audience.
> > Please provide a link to just one of these scientifically credible
> > papers in support of the phenomena you claim exist.
> Read Prof Bem and Charles Honorton <dbem.ws/Does%20Psi%20Exist%3F.pdf>
Yet, 16 years later, here we are, no replicable 'psi' phenomena are known
> Read linked from <http://www.ics.uci.edu/~jutts/psipapers.html<http://www.ics.uci.edu/%7Ejutts/psipapers.html>
> Utts, J. M. (1996) An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning,
> Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10 (1), 3-30. Also in Journal of
> Parapsychology, 59(4), 289-320.
> Hyman, R. (1996) Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena
> Journal of Scientific Exploration 10(1), 31-58. Also in Journal of
> Parapsychology, 59(4), 321-352.
> Utts, J. M. (1996) Response to Ray Hyman's Report of September 11, 1995,
> "Evaluation of Program on Anomalous Mental Phenomena." Journal of
> Scientific Exploration 10(1), 59-61. Also in Journal of Parapsychology,
> 59(4), 353-356.
> May, E.C. (1996). The American Institutes for Research Review of the
> Department of Defense's STAR GATE Program: A Commentary. Journal of
> Scientific Exploration 10(1), 89-107.
The fact that seemingly educated people devote time to this nonsense, is
not evidence of its validity. Geller managed to fool numerous scientists,
into crediting him with some hitherto unexplained ability to manipulate
matter with his mind. Scrutiny of these claims by persons not credulous of
such claims, has without fail shown the to be rubbish.
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat