224 replies to this topic

[plindboe]

Hi plindboe,
You are the type of Skeptic I incounter time and time again, shouting the same things as the ones before you (pseudoscientific studies) nothing will even be good enough because the paranormal does not fit into the physical laws.

A true Skeptic will indeed be open minded to except other possiblitys when all fails, but the majority of worldly claimed skeptics (in reality) are point blank ingorant to fact and think that us believers in other demisions are loonys and are one big joke for even thinking such thoughts. are you one of them???

So just by uttering the word "pseudoscientific" you jump to the conclusion that nothing will ever be good enough for me? Do you reject that there is such a thing as pseudoscience? Do you understand why scientific studies need to have several safe-guards, like controls and double-blinding? In fact they do it in all science, it's not just concerning the paranormal that the so-called closeminded skeptics call for proper testing procedures, it's with every single trial ever conducted by a scientist out there, otherwise their data will end up flawed, often reflecting the bias of the researcher.

And no, I don't think people who believe in ghosts are loonies. I do think however that believers who complain that their favorite beliefs are not accepted in the scientific community very often haven't the faintest clue what constitutes good or bad evidence and can't distinguish between pseudoscience and actual science, and instead just side with any self-proclaimed scientist who offer results they like to hear. Of course there's nothing wrong with ignorance in itself, as we all are ignorant in some fields. But when people go on anti-science tirades, I think it would be healthy if they at least tried to learn about what they are attacking, and try to understand how it works, how new ideas get accepted or rejected instead of conjuring up negative attributes to science or conspiracy theories, in puzzlement over why their favorite beliefs are not accepted.

[lance11]

Hi
I am fully aware of the science and its laws, however I disagree to science when it refuses to take on board data that has been put forward by many specialized people in the field.
For EG, My specialized subject is EVP, I can name you scientist (independant) from Brazil, France, germany, USA, Sweden, Belgium etc etc all have good arguments and prove to back up their theoris that EVP has a case for further research and has been tried and tested in Faraday cages, doubled shielded rooms, all within a controlled expriemental conditions, to come up with voices still being reproduced time and time again on recordings.

Ellis back in the 1970 tys was one of the first to expriement with this (in Cambridge UNiversisty) he was shocked by his findings, yet the science community would not release him more funding and closed ongoing expriements. Talks revealed that they didn't want to look like fools, in such matters and the data revealed far more than what they expected.

Also check out Ske lab in Scotland, where on going research is being done in this field, using the Alpha system.

Now this is not pseudoscientific expriements, But yet, the science community will not except the finding, WHY?

[plindboe]

I'd like to see the evidence. Links or some info I can search for would be a good first step. I'd normally ask for peer-reviewed papers, but I'm not aware of any in the paranormal field. The next best thing would be scientific protocols with positive results that other researchers have been able to replicate. Researchers who are keen to establish their favorite hypothesis, be it paranormal or mundane, often manage to cheat either themselves subconciously or, more rarely, others consciously, which is why we need protocols where other scientists can try to replicate the results. This is why cherry-picking trials that look promising doesn't really cut it alone. In science, if something looks promising, all it means is that we need more research.

That said, have you tried listening to the skeptics instead of simply dismissing them as being closeminded? In all scientific fields skepticism is used to sort good research from bad research, to point out problems where bias can skew the data, and thereby forcing researchers to do their very best, and continuously better their research. Without skepticism science can't function.

That skeptics actually address the paranormal, instead of ignoring it, should be warmly welcomed, instead of the almost religious dismissal; "how dare you question my beliefs, you closeminded cynic!". If paranormal research want to be referred to as science, it needs skepticism, because without it, the research will never grow, and the results will never be viewed as anything more than unreliable.

[lance11]

Yea thats fair enough, I class myself as middle of the road person, I look at all the eveidence first before I start shouting Ghost!!! We need this its ver important to the production of things..

Heres one of Ske labs expriemnts performed back in 2003..

SKELAB

[plindboe]

Thanks for the link. I've read it, but before I address the paper, I'd like to ask you what you think that study showed. What did they predict, and how did their results affirm their predictions? How did their conclusion follow from the results? And lastly, I'd like to ask you whether you can spot anything in that paper that's not scientific?

[spiritalk]

Is Dr. Bernard Grad of McGill University, Montreal in your catagory of pseudoscience? This is your definition. No my world view is not based on any ONE study in any topic. Perhaps broadening your views would include what is good science.

It is also obvious you would like others to do your research for you by supplying web references.

God bless, J

Edited by spiritalk, 12 February 2007 - 11:06 AM.

[lance11]

Thanks for the link. I've read it, but before I address the paper, I'd like to ask you what you think that study showed. What did they predict, and how did their results affirm their predictions? How did their conclusion follow from the results? And lastly, I'd like to ask you whether you can spot anything in that paper that's not scientific

I could give you my opinion, but I am not! I don't want to come over as being biased..
It is up to you to judge if this paper is pseudoscience?
this is one of many from the same lab which are constanly ongoing with their expriments and changing their methods etc..

Like I say world wide there are many other Expriements going on using different methods, but after the same thing.

[canuck]

Hey Folks:

Before things start to get too ugly, let me throw in my two cents.

In this debate, there are two poles. Both seem to be missing the point.

The point is: there are phenomena which occur, and which can't be explained by our current body of knowledge.

Accordingly, one camp (the "scientific" camp), says: "we don't know what that is so it doesn't exist, and we are not going to waste time studying it".

The other camp (the "believers" camp) says: we don't know what this is, but it surely is ghosts, goblins, fairies, etc etc, and if you don't believe it, it is because you are biased and ignorant.

The way to resolve this issue is to study the phenomena and based on what is found, determine what they are.

The problem with studying them is that we don't know what we are studying, so we don't know HOW to study them.

WE DONT YET HAVE THE TOOLS OR THE KNOWLEDGE TO STUDY WHATEVER IT IS WE ARE TRYING TO STUDY.

At the moment, the science of studying paranormal phenomena is in its infancy and we can hope that eventually someone will develop the tools and methods needed to study whatever it is.

To consider "science" and all "scientists" to be open minded or even seekers of "truth" is naive. Science has its dogmas and beliefs just as does any religion. And scientists are just as capable as anyone else of pursuing beliefs, despite the fact that they may clash with the facts.

Two cases in point: polywater and cold fusion.

"Scientists" from opposing camps in these two issues literally came to blows over these issues, before both were proven to be nonsense.

Bottom line: paranormal phenomena exist. We don't know what they are. We currently don't have the tools, the means or the methods to study them.

Paranormal investigations are ridiculed because they haven't been fully studied. The reason they haven't been studied is because we don't know anything about them.

Notice the circular argument?

[evad_83647]

I see a lot of misconceptions thrown in here. First science is studying paranormal. However it mostly low budget studies because science depends on grants to do their research.

The paranormal is not mainstream and scientists are very careful not to associate their names with something that could ruin their reputations and end funding for their "legitimate" research.

The debate going on in here is typical of any group debateing anything, I 've seen people accuse others or not wanting to do their own research. Well friends this is a community, everyone does their own research and if your willing to share what you have found great. There are millions of webpages on the paranormal and I personally do not have time to read everyone, and if you do you need to get a life. lol

We all have differing opinions on everything, and we all have different levels of experience and knowledge on most things. Some of us have been researching the paranormal for 10-20-30 years, some of us have only been doing it 10-20-30 days.

Their have been a lot of great scientists and inventors which have delved into parnormal studies. You won't see any papers from them on it because they came up with no credible proof. People with names like Einstein and Franklin. So when people say paranormal is not being taken seriously by the scientific communtity; they are flat out mistaken.

When I find something that I think is worthy enough to share with you guys I share, I am not doing your research only giving you information I have that you may not have stumbled across, you are free to do with that information anything you please. Just as I am free to use any informatin you may forward to me as I please. And just because I post a link doesn't mean I beleive the info, just that I found it interesting.

Personaly I'd like to see more respect for each other feelings in here. If we are having a debate we need to be concious of the fact that we have differing viewpoints. We need to get out of that "I'm right and you're an idiot" mindframe. There isn't anyone in this world that I can't learn something from and there isn't anyone in this world that I can't teach something to.

Dave

[spooksareus]

Good lord I love ya' Dave! Thanks for posting that.

[evad_83647]

Thanks Spooks your fence is holding up well. lol

[spooksareus]

Ha, well of course my dear, it holds precious cargo...

[Richard Kimmel]

Hay Dave,

You forgot Thomas Edison ... PSYCHO-PHONE DEVICE. Couldn't have been a more prominent, respected figure in the scientific comunity? Check it out, link below.

http://www.sdparanor...page/265918.htm

Richard

Edited by MoonChild, 14 February 2007 - 03:27 PM.

[plindboe]

I could give you my opinion, but I am not! I don't want to come over as being biased..
It is up to you to judge if this paper is pseudoscience?
this is one of many from the same lab which are constanly ongoing with their expriments and changing their methods etc..

Like I say world wide there are many other Expriements going on using different methods, but after the same thing.

I had planned to do an analysis of the paper (which is quite poor btw, and certainly not science), but my girlfriend's coming tomorrow and I'm running around in a panic cleaning up the apartment. I might have more time a week from now, but for now I'll leave you to it.

[evad_83647]

I didn't list more names than I listed, We can go on and on about which famous people were also delving into the otherworld. I just listed the two who stuck out predominately at the time I wrote the reply. You can include DaVinci and a lot of others. I remember reading something about Edison a while back too.

We also had a lot of smart people trying to make gold from lead, their experiments didn't turn out so well.

As far as my research has shown people have believed in ghosts since we have been able to think of anything other than our basic survival. Just about every clan or tribe or whatever you want to call them had a shaman or something equivelant who could call the spirits at will. Most of these shamen used mind altering drugs to accomplish this feet and they shared their drugs with the tribe so everyone could talk to the spirits. Out of this grew medicine and religion. The stuff that was provable and repeatable became the stuff of doctors and the stuff you had to believe in went down the spiritual path.

Now it seems we are coming full circle, you have to have faith in science, you have to have faith in your doctor, studies show people of strong religious faith heal better than those who don't practice.