From: fudley (fuddley@fastmail.fm)
Date: Thu Dec 29 2005 - 00:14:02 MST
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 "Richard Loosemore" <rpwl@lightlink.com> said:
> it is possible that conscious systems have effects on the
> world that are grossly at odds with the the "cause and
> effect" pattern that we see in normal science.
The normal cause and effect pattern is that everything happens because
of cause and effect or it does not and so is random; and even in the
unlikely event that voodoo turns out to be true that will not change.
> I personally have very strong evidence that there is
> something_ going on out there that is not encompassed
> by normal science.
Then you should be writing your Nobel Prize acceptance speech not
gabbing on the internet.
> I don't care to try to justify this to anyone else anymore
Oh dear that could be a problem, the Nobel Prize committee prefers it if
scientists can justify their results. Perhaps you’d better cancel that
reservation to Stockholm.
> because the eventual response from skeptics is that
> experimenter deceipt is a satisfactory explanation for the
> results that I got, and that is rather tedious if you are the
> experimenter
Can you really blame people for having this reaction? No area of
Science, if that’s what you want to call it, has a more dismal record of
wishful thinking, sloppiness, naivety, and downright fraud than
parapsychology. And even that is an understatement, few areas of human
activity has proven itself to be less productive than parapsychology.
After working hard on this for one century the net result is exactly
zero; and I’m not talking about something as ambitious as explaining how
it works, I’m just talking about showing there is something that needs
explaining. These witch doctors, I mean scientists, can’t even do that.
We could have been having this exact same conversation one century ago,
and in fact many people did. Back then fortune tellers and palm readers
insisted there was all sorts of fascinating stuff going on in the world
that mainstream science, for reasons never clearly explained, ignored.
Today the situation is exactly the same. Back then there was an inverse
relationship between the rigor of the experiment and the spectacular
results produced. Today the situation is exactly the same. Back then the
evidence for the existence of this odd phenomenon stank. It still stinks
today.
You can’t prove something never happens, but after experiment after
experiment produces nothing of interest a wise scientist realizes he’s
running up a blind alley and moves on to something else.
John K Clark
-- http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:54 MDT