From: Damien Broderick (thespike@satx.rr.com)
Date: Mon Jan 02 2006 - 12:26:06 MST
At 01:42 PM 1/2/2006 -0500, Jeff wrote:
>It isn't that positive and negative (i.e., any) results are
>interpreted as support. Richard is claiming specifically that:
>
>- Believers in such experiments have consistently positive results
>- Skeptics in such experiments have consistently negative results
Not even that clear-cut, alas. More like:
- Believers in such experiments have, in the long run, significantly
positive results
- Skeptics in such experiments have, in the long run, significantly
negative results
Not (note well): Skeptics in such experiments have null or chance results
We're dealing with humans, and human performance fluctuates--but does tend
to be predictable in the mass and the long run.
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT