Comments on: My First True Diva Moment

By: Alan

Alan — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:57:34 +0000

psmith @ 72

I know this is getting to be the coffee dregs of this particular blogs comments but try this.
Submit your comment to each of the authors of “Irreducible Mind : Toward a Psychology for the 21st Century”, Profs. Kelly and Kelly, Prof. Greyson, Prof. Grosso, Dr. Gauld, Dr. Crabtree. You should get a swift reply.
I am slowly reading this mighty 800 page tome, the best overview of the “Psi” field, it’s really got it all. But you must let us know their replies – that’s the tricky bit!

Or give it a go (i.e. read it) yourself. But you shouldn’t comment in a way that is, quite frankly, general unchallengeable nonsense. At least do your reading research, old chap.

By: sandycharm

sandycharm — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:51:25 +0000

That was funny. Sorry! Call it a Schadenfreude. =D

By: KY

KY — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 18:20:53 +0000

This sounds just like what (in)famously happened to Prof David Albert! Luckily, you cut it off mid-interview. But I bet if you called them and made a stink and tried to withdraw your consent form, they would let you. Unfortunately, Albert’s misleadingly-edited footage is still out there.

By: sean h

sean h — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 01:48:36 +0000

have you read the novel `ghost’ by (physicist) alan lightman? it’s a thoughtful, human and interesting take on science and the paranormal.

By: Phillip Helbig

Phillip Helbig — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:59:52 +0000

Dating myself there, but I still think Geraldo set the bar for silliness (and referring to himself in the 3rd person).

Wasn’t he a real Mike-Wallace-style investigative reporter at the beginning but then transformed into a what-dress-is-this-celebrity-wearing type?

For the largest paranormal research institution, the the James Randi Educational Foundation, out of all of the applicants who applied for the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, nobody has even passed the preliminary tests.

Randi once mentioned a psychic (talks to ghosts) who had applied for the challenge, then vanished without a trace. When Randi got a hold of her sometime later, her excuse was that she didn’t know how to contact him.

By: psmith

psmith — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:29:40 +0000

If this discussion has shown anything, it is the widespread attraction that pseudo science has for all, the closet believers, the sceptics as well as the ardent advocates. It is easy to laugh at pseudo science and deride it but it is a hydra headed monster that just won’t go away. What is the attraction that pseudo science has? Why is it such a persistent phenomena that defies evidence based thinking? I think we need to understand the underlying psychology of this phenomenon before we can reply to it effectively. I have spent so much of my time trying to answer such people, first with rational argument and then in frustration, with derision and scorn. But all I have succeeded in doing is make myself look cantankerous, inflexible and stubborn. So, while we must answer their arguments I have come to the conclusion that the real battleground is to understand the underlying drives that motivate their belief systems.

By: Reginald Selkirk

Reginald Selkirk — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:16:11 +0000

RE #65 Alan: when you write “to finish up” that should indicate that it is your final post on a subject.

By: Reginald Selkirk

Reginald Selkirk — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:48:05 +0000

I suspect you haven’t studied physics but you could try Professor Bernard Carr’s article, “Is there space for psi in modern physics?” So the subject is being addressed at the theoretical level.

Once again, I won’t be bothered to explore possible mechanisms for magical psi powers until reliable evidence is presented for their existence. You have failed to do so.

I believe he stands by his remote viewing research at SRI and have seen a recent video to that effect.

That’s just sad. I read his book (Mind-Reach, written with Targ) on the topic, and it contains obvious experimental weaknesses, even if you accept everything they write at face value.

Consider that in T&P, remote viewing is not described as a rare, difficult lab phenomenon, but as a widespread, every day occurence. This does not jibe with the world I live in.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:46:08 +0000

Just to be clear though, I think Josephson’s transformation to someone who, for example, thinks that
“molecular memory” of water can be transmitted to other water over the internet, is clearly delusional thinking that would respond to major tranquilisers.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:36:40 +0000

Nothing personal, Alan. I get a bit worked up on some topics, particularly on the net. I could actually look at the paper you posted I have profound respect for Josephson’s early work for which he got the Nobel Prize.
I know this is OT, but Scientology has to be one of the most flaky and bizarre cargo cult “religions”
out there. South Park’s satire of it has nothing on the real thing. If people can believe in it, they can believe in anything.