• 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.

What about this crop circle?

Limbo said:
Carefully crafted? You make it sound premeditated. "Today, I'm going to carefully craft a set of excuses." Is that what you think Gertrude Schmeidler did? Did she carefully craft the sheep-goat effect for a purpose?

"The data convinced me. Repeatedly, average ESP scores of subjects who rejected any possibility of ESP success (whom I called goats) were lower than average ESP scores of all other subjects (whom I called sheep). This was inexplicable by the physical laws we knew; it implied unexplored processes in the universe, an exciting new field for research. From then on, naturally, my primary research interest was parapsychology." -Gertrude Schmeidler

So Linda, was the sheep-goat effect born from data or born from an agenda?
Click to expand...

there is a more down to earth phenomena that explains these results
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_mental_attitude
Psi not required
 
Limbo said:
So you're saying there is a correlation between being a positive person, believing in psi, and doing well on psi tests? And that the cause is being positive, not using psi?
Click to expand...

if you approach any experience with a positive outlook you'll do better than someone who doesnt.

Psi seems to be an answer to a question that hasn't been asked, it has nothing to do with crop circles either
so I'm asking whats the point of talking about psi in this thread, its already been proven that crop circles are made by regular humans using non psychic methods

maybe you should start a new thread on woo mind powers, its off topic here
;)
 
From experience in the UFO thread, I'm not expecting any sort of rational response, but I'm a masochist, so: what are you seeing in crop circles that couldn't be done by people, Limbo?
 
Marduk said:
if you approach any experience with a positive outlook you'll do better than someone who doesnt.
Click to expand...


So goats don't have a positive mental outlook? Why would that be?

Why would being positive about guessing help one guess better? Why would being positive about a random process alter probability to accord with intent?

Psi seems to be an answer to a question that hasn't been asked, it has nothing to do with crop circles either
so I'm asking whats the point of talking about psi in this thread, its already been proven that crop circles are made by regular humans using non psychic methods
Click to expand...


Psi does have to do with crop circles, just have to know what to look for.
 
Last edited:
cyborg said:
If you don't demonstrate psi then that's because you're using psi without knowing it to undermine the evidence for the existence of psi.

How convenient.
Click to expand...

And circular.

I think I'm on ignore, so would someone please post this and see if I can get an answer?

Elizabeth I said:
What is "humanity's collective unconscious"?

Where is it stored?

How can it be accessed?

How can it be perceived?

How is this different from someone's using something he's seen/read/heard/felt/smelled as a springboard for something else?

Is "Ode on a Grecian Urn" an example of "humanity's collective unconscious expressing itself" or is it Keats' emotional response to something he found beautiful?

What about Picasso's "Guernica"?

What about Pride and Prejudice and Zombies?

What about the fact that there are about 8 jillion artistic representations of the Holy Virgin?

Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 
By request:

What is "humanity's collective unconscious"?

Where is it stored?

How can it be accessed?

How can it be perceived?

How is this different from someone's using something he's seen/read/heard/felt/smelled as a springboard for something else?

Is "Ode on a Grecian Urn" an example of "humanity's collective unconscious expressing itself" or is it Keats' emotional response to something he found beautiful?

What about Picasso's "Guernica"?

What about Pride and Prejudice and Zombies?

What about the fact that there are about 8 jillion artistic representations of the Holy Virgin?

Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...
 
Limbo said:
Carefully crafted? You make it sound premeditated.
Click to expand...

It is now, in that it is invoked whenever it is necessary to discard or alter results which otherwise disprove psi (i.e. fail to make psi necessary).

"Today, I'm going to carefully craft a set of excuses." Is that what you think Gertrude Schmeidler did? Did she carefully craft the sheep-goat effect for that purpose?

"The data convinced me. Repeatedly, average ESP scores of subjects who rejected any possibility of ESP success (whom I called goats) were lower than average ESP scores of all other subjects (whom I called sheep). This was inexplicable by the physical laws we knew; it implied unexplored processes in the universe, an exciting new field for research. From then on, naturally, my primary research interest was parapsychology." -Gertrude Schmeidler

So Linda, was the sheep-goat effect born from data or born from an agenda?
Click to expand...

The assumption that it represents psi is born from belief, since psi is not necessary to explain the 'effect'. Simple regression and experimental and cognitive biases will do the trick. For example, here is an experiment which purportedly tests this association and purportedly supports the idea. Yet the results can only be made 'positive' through the use of experimental bias (a reminder that bias produces 'positive' research findings where none should be found). It is only through the use of (uncorrected) multiple comparisons, selective reporting, and trying out several analytic methods that a 'positive' result can be claimed.

Linda
 
Ersby said:
I'd say from an agenda, though not from Schmeilder herself. That quote is referring to data from the 1940s, when Rhine had in place a policy of publishing only positive or interesting papers.
Click to expand...


So just to be clear you are accusing Rhine of committing deliberate dishonesty to further his philosophical "woo" agenda?


Then, having brought this "pattern" to light, whenever it occurred in subsequent papers by other experimenters it would be mentioned (and not mentioned when it didn't), which lead to the meta-analysis in the 90s 'confirming' the effect.
Click to expand...


Can you give an example of a) a subsequent paper in which the effect did not occur and was not mentioned, and b) a subsequent paper in which the effect did occur and was mentioned.
 
First, I want to point out I deleted the post Limbo is quoting because I decided it was wrong of me to comment without seeing the original paper. Meanwhile...

Limbo said:
So just to be clear you are accusing Rhine of committing deliberate dishonesty to further his philosophical "woo" agenda?
Click to expand...

Rhine didn't consider it "dishonest". He was quite open about this and wrote about it, believing it to be the best way for parapsychology to become established. It has, however, left use with quite a skewed database. However, I don't know if Schmeidler used that database (actually I don't think she did), which is why I deleted it.

Can you give an example of a) a subsequent paper in which the effect did not occur and was not mentioned, and b) a subsequent paper in which the effect did occur and was mentioned.
Click to expand...

I'll have to answer this on monday when I have access to more papers.
 
Last edited:
Ersby said:
Rhine didn't consider it "dishonest". He was quite open about this and wrote about it, believing it to be the best way for parapsychology to become established. It has, however, left use with quite a skewed database. However, I don't know if Schmeidler used that database (actually I don't think she did), which is why I deleted it.
Click to expand...


But clearly you consider something dishonest. C'mon, don't mince words. Out with it.
 
fls said:
It is now, in that it is invoked whenever it is necessary to discard or alter results which otherwise disprove psi (i.e. fail to make psi necessary).
Click to expand...


I can't speak for anyone else but I did not premeditate the crafting of excuses so that I could invoke the sheep-goat effect. Your thinly veiled accusation shows exactly where you cross the line into pseudo-skepticism, IMO.

I came across the sheep-goat effect in the literature while investigating my own spontaneous psi experiences. I investigate parapsychology to understand psi, not to craft a rhetoric device.

And since I have psychic, UFO, poltergeist, and other paranormal experience under my belt, it gives me the advantage of by-passing the traps that pseudo-skeptics get caught in. So I'm not prone to invoking and tossing around accusations of dishonesty or whatnot. Which btw it seems you and your peers can do whenever you feel it's necessary to discard something.
 
Last edited:
Limbo said:
But clearly you consider something dishonest. C'mon, don't mince words. Out with it.
Click to expand...

I think it was a mistake, but I do not morally judge people from a different time. That would be very presumptious.
 
I can't speak for anyone else but I did not premeditate the crafting of excuses so that I could invoke the sheep-goat effect. Your thinly veiled accusation shows exactly where you cross the line into pseudo-skepticism, IMO.

I came across the sheep-goat effect in the literature while investigating my own spontaneous psi experiences. I investigate parapsychology to understand psi, not to craft a rhetoric device.

And since I have psychic, UFO, poltergeist, and other paranormal experience under my belt, it gives me the advantage of by-passing the traps that pseudo-skeptics get caught in. So I'm not prone to invoking and tossing around accusations of dishonesty. Which btw it seems you can do whenever you feel it's necessary to discard something.
Click to expand...

You don't think publishing positive results and suppressing negative results in order to give psi research a "footing" is dishonest?
 
One more try, without the quotes. Just testing here.

What is "humanity's collective unconscious"?

Where is it stored?

How can it be accessed?

How can it be perceived?

How is this different from someone's using something he's seen/read/heard/felt/smelled as a springboard for something else?

Is "Ode on a Grecian Urn" an example of "humanity's collective unconscious expressing itself" or is it Keats' emotional response to something he found beautiful?

What about Picasso's "Guernica"?

What about Pride and Prejudice and Zombies?

What about the fact that there are about 8 jillion artistic representations of the Holy Virgin?

Where do you draw the line?
 
Those are big questions dude. Can you pick just one or two to start with?
 
Sledge said:
From experience in the UFO thread, I'm not expecting any sort of rational response, but I'm a masochist, so: what are you seeing in crop circles that couldn't be done by people, Limbo?
Click to expand...
.
He seems to miss this frequent request.
Wonder why? :)
 
Limbo said:
Those are big questions dude. Can you pick just one or two to start with?
Click to expand...

1 - what are you seeing in crop circles that couldn't be done by people?

2 - How is "humanity's collective unconscious" different from someone's using something he's seen/read/heard/felt/smelled as a springboard for something else? (Like me when I subconsciously work other songs into my jazz improvisation, for example)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom