• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Many Scientists are Convinced that Man Can See the Future"

orphia nay said:
It's my opinion these tests probably show activity related to the feeling of fear or suspense, not the glimpsing of the future.
Click to expand...

Olympic sprinters are not allowed to "jump the gun", which is to say, take a guess when the starting pistol will go off and start running. It's impossible to tell for sure, since we can't read minds, but the Olympics does have at least two rules to hold it back:

1. You jump too soon (false start) twice, you're out.

2. You start too soon after (yes, after) the pistol, it's presumed you are jumping the gun rather than reacting to it.

The small fraction of a second in #2, where you are presumed to be guessing rather than reacting had to be lowered about 10 years ago because some sprinters were legitimately reacting that quickly.
 
Beerina said:
The small fraction of a second in #2, where you are presumed to be guessing rather than reacting had to be lowered about 10 years ago because some sprinters were legitimately reacting that quickly.
Click to expand...

That sounds interesting. Can you elaborate because I'm not sure what you mean. What's your source?
 
Beerina said:
Olympic sprinters are not allowed to "jump the gun", which is to say, take a guess when the starting pistol will go off and start running. It's impossible to tell for sure, since we can't read minds, but the Olympics does have at least two rules to hold it back
Click to expand...


I think that's a little different though. The sprinters are not 'guessing' some random time when the gun will go off. There's a countdown like "on your mark, get ready, go" where the time between each of the 3 sections is supposed to be the same?

That wouldn't require any kind of 6th sense, just an ability to estimate the short interval of time between 'get ready' and 'go'.
 
skeptigirl said:
With 6 billion people on the planet, many people likely have what they believe are premonitions every day. If you only count the times the premonitions are correct and never count the times they are not correct, you really cannot tell random premonitions that are correct by coincidence from actual premonitions. It's a common fallacy. "Scientists" who understand the scientific process would know that you have to measure the background rate of events before you can determine the additional events specific to what you are testing (in this case real premonitions vs random premonitions that are only coincidentally correct). And "scientists" understand the effect selective memory has on the outcome of collecting these type of anecdotes. You remember the hits and forget the misses. This is not a scientific finding. Discuss and believe it all you want, but don't call it science. It isn't.
Click to expand...
We have actually tested this. As reported in this thread, I had a very strong premonition one day. Rather than keep it to myself, I decided to go public:
Skeptics often say that the reason premonitions of death pack such a wallop when they come to pass is that people forget the misses and remember only the hits.

I resolved that I ever had a premonition of death (e.g., in a dream, or a sudden notion that popped into my head that a person had died, even though I had no evidence to that effect), I would record it to see whether it is a hit or a miss.

This morning, I found myself thinking "Russell Johnson has died!" Russell Johnson is best known as the Professor on "Gilligan's Island." I had no reason whatsoever for this thought, and I subsequently dismissed it as unfounded.

I've never met Mr. Johnson, and have not heard his name in at least five years. According to the imdb, he is still alive and is 80 years old. His most recent work was as a guest on "Pyramid."

Anyway, if Mr. Johnson should meet his end within the next few days, it will be a "hit." Otherwise, I will remember this premonition as a "miss."
Click to expand...
I also reported the premonition event in detail:
In my case, my brain had a flash of emotions that went something like this:

"Russell Johnson is dead!"
"Awwwww, I liked him!" (accompanied by a profound feeling of sadness and loss)
"Wait a minute..."
"...I don't really know that he's dead, do I?"
"Hmmm."
"I wonder why I thought he was dead. Have I listened to the radio this morning or watched TV? No."
"Was his death--or ANYTHING about him--mentioned in the news yesterday? No."
"Do I have ANY reason for thinking he's dead? No."

The feelings of sadness and loss were very real. When I saw Johnny Carson's death announced on TV, I felt the same way. But in Carson's case, the emotions were prompted by the receipt of news of a factual event. In Johnson's case, the emotions were prompted by a premonition completely unsupported by evidence.
Click to expand...
A few days later, I called it:
It's been more than a week. I call it a miss. The next time Michael Shermer talks about premonitions of death and says, "We remember the hits but not the misses," I will be able to say, "I remember at least one miss."
Click to expand...
This was more than two years ago. When I last checked, Mr. Johnson was still alive. The premonition, no matter how vivid, did not impart any actual knowledge to me.
 
@Brown: Well, a quite shining example of a premonition gone wrong. I get that all the time when buying lottery tickets...
 
Brown said:
We have actually tested this. As reported in this thread, I had a very strong premonition one day. Rather than keep it to myself, I decided to go public:I also reported the premonition event in detail:A few days later, I called it:This was more than two years ago. When I last checked, Mr. Johnson was still alive. The premonition, no matter how vivid, did not impart any actual knowledge to me.
Click to expand...

Do you think your observations here were scientific in any way? I don't think they were. Firstly, the central objection to anecdotes is that they occur under uncontrolled conditions. And that is what you have reported - an anecdote under uncontrolled conditions. Secondly, you have only given us one report. I find myself wondering why your conclusion of a "failed premonition" means that you think your test is any more scientific than someone reporting a "successful premonition" under uncontrolled conditions and proclaiming a successful test.

The truth is that anecdotes don't prove anything either way. They only provide inspiration to perform the right scientific experiment, which may succeed of fail. Trying to demonstrate the probability of premonitions under uncontrolled conditions is fruitless.
 
Brown said:
We have actually tested this. As reported in this thread, I had a very strong premonition one day. Rather than keep it to myself, I decided to go public:I also reported the premonition event in detail:A few days later, I called it:This was more than two years ago. When I last checked, Mr. Johnson was still alive. The premonition, no matter how vivid, did not impart any actual knowledge to me.
Click to expand...


Man, that is a scary one. It will be a sad day when the great one expires.

Unfortunately, I am at home and don't have access to my "Everything I Ever Needed to Know I Learned from the Professor on Gilligan's Island" file.
 
For the results - released exclusively to the Daily Mail - suggest that ordinary people really do have a sixth sense that can help them 'see' the future.
Click to expand...

Nice to see it passed peer review then.

Never blame on poor methodology and exaggerated claims by scientists what could just as easily be the Daily Mail making things up.
 
davidsmith73 said:
Do you think your observations here were scientific in any way? I don't think they were.
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure (like 101%) that he didn't intend them to be.

davidsmith73 said:
The truth is that anecdotes don't prove anything either way.
Click to expand...


I suspect you missed the entire point. I believe the anecdote part of that story was the claim "We remember the hits but not the misses". The anecdotal rebuttal to that claim can now be (at least for Brown), "I remember at least one miss."
 
Bob Klase said:
I suspect you missed the entire point. I believe the anecdote part of that story was the claim "We remember the hits but not the misses". The anecdotal rebuttal to that claim can now be (at least for Brown), "I remember at least one miss."
Click to expand...

I think I have missed the point. Can you explain what the point of Brown's post is? It seems vacuous to me.
 
I think davidsmith73 is ignoring nearly everyone's point. His 'skepticalier than thou' attitude is tiresome, and rude.
 
Bob Klase said:
I just did (at least I explained what I thought the point was- Brown would have to explain whether I was right since it's his point).
Click to expand...
Yup, right.

My premonition had zero value as pertaining to knowledge of future events. (Since everyone is going to die at one time or another, and since my premonition dealt with no circumstances of death, my premonition could only have value--if any--in its temporal accuracy, i.e., whether it was an accurate description of an unknown recently past event or an accurate prediction of a future event that would occur within a very short time.)

But I've often wondered what I'd think if just by chance the lovable Professor just happened to pass on shortly after the event. For certain, I'd remember the hit, and it is very likely that there would have been a strong emotional impact that I'd remember for the rest of my life.

But because nothing happened, the event is nearly forgotten. Nearly, but because I made a record, not quite. I remember at least one miss.
 
Bob Klase said:
From the article:

Isn't the Daily Mail sort of a British version of the Enquirer?
Click to expand...

Put it like this, if The Daily Mail reports on the paranormal their two main questions will be:
1) How will it affect house prices?
2) Are immigrants somehow to blame?
 
Brown said:
Yup, right.

My premonition had zero value as pertaining to knowledge of future events. (Since everyone is going to die at one time or another, and since my premonition dealt with no circumstances of death, my premonition could only have value--if any--in its temporal accuracy, i.e., whether it was an accurate description of an unknown recently past event or an accurate prediction of a future event that would occur within a very short time.)

But I've often wondered what I'd think if just by chance the lovable Professor just happened to pass on shortly after the event. For certain, I'd remember the hit, and it is very likely that there would have been a strong emotional impact that I'd remember for the rest of my life.

But because nothing happened, the event is nearly forgotten. Nearly, but because I made a record, not quite. I remember at least one miss.
Click to expand...

My confusion lay in the fact that your anecdote doesn't pertain to the science behind the original presentiment article, so it doesn't give us any information about whether presentiment exists or not, which is the subject of this thread.

We all know that anecdotes aren't evidence for anything. They only give us hints at what experiment to perform. I think you'll agree that its practically impossible to estimate how many hits and misses you would expect by chance in a real life situation. I remember someone here actually trying to calculate how many precognitive dreams would be expected to occur within the world population each year! Despite this calculation problem, some scientists think that interesting anecdotes exist that may hint at precognitive effects and this is evidently reason for them to do the science. The scientists are well aware of the "remember the hits, forget the misses" interpretation in the real word scenario. But its because you can't estimate the hits and misses in an uncontrolled environment that the science is done. And thats what the article was about. Some scientists have done the science and found that, apparently, presentiment does happen.

So I think I now know that your general point is the "remeber the hits, forget the misses" explanation for real world anecdotes. What I am still perplexed about is what value you see in concluding that you have remembered at least one miss!
 
Ashles said:
Put it like this, if The Daily Mail reports on the paranormal their two main questions will be:
1) How will it affect house prices?
2) Are immigrants somehow to blame?
Click to expand...
You forgot

3) All paranormal is real
4) It's the EU's fault
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom