New PSI forum

[Stitch]

Personally, I think this debate will last for eternity anyway. Maybe that is just the way it has to be.

I think any and all debates of this nature will last for eternity. Some members of both camps will not change their views regardless and some closer to the middle will migrate from one camp to the other and vice versa.

It's all good fun though huh?

(I will get enough posts to have my own avatar soon )

 

[Lucianarchy]

An assumption, based no doubt, on my registration date. I have been a lurker for a significant time, but felt no need to register as I wasn't ready to post yet. I am well aware of the history between You and CF (and indeed a few others).

My mistake. It often seems like the forum is host to about 5 archetypes, and a whole draw full of socks. There are obviously a lot of lurkers like yourself judging by the views though. Welcome.

 

[BillHoyt]

My mistake. It often seems like the forum is host to about 5 archetypes, and a whole draw full of socks. There are obviously a lot of lurkers like yourself judging by the views though. Welcome.

Quick, mama, where's that camera? Isn't that precious? Luci's playing nice, in a back-handed sort of way! Will wonders never cease? Next thing you know, Luci might be rational in a post. Maybe we can even get one honest post out of Luci. And if we do that in a single thread, we've got the hat trick.

[pmod=Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]This post has been reported. Let's try to avoid unnecessarily ragging on other members and keep the conversation moving along.[/pmod]

 

[UndercoverElephant]

It's all good fun though huh?

Yes. Isn't life wonderful?

 

[flyboy217]

I hope you can convince me that you did not recognize him.

I hope you don't really think I care.

Not at all. Based on the examples I gave you, it would be in conflict with those not to reach that conclusion.

The examples you gave me were based on other psi claims... like the Princeton Noosphere experiment, which we were not discussing. I thought we had agreed to stick to this experiment. As such, it would be imprudent to jump to conclusions about how millions of people watching a person would affect her. As I said, it can make for an interesting topic, but only once we've resolved the one presented to us.

But since you brought it up, I want to mention that I considered the exact same thing (news anchors) before you said it. I've got an idea for an experiment, but I don't want to discuss that until we've discussed the experiment in question. Suffice it to say that I see no reason to conclude that the cumulative effect would turn a person to mush.

Of course. I don't PM, though. You can email me at editor@skepticreport.com

For the record, my email to Claus has provided evidence that, at my time at the University of Michigan, I:

• Was affiliated with the Quantum Circuits group, where
• I coauthored several (published) papers, one of which won an IEEE Best Paper award
• Demonstrated exceptional talent in mathematics

I promised Claus I would dig up my certificates for the US Physics Olympiad upon my next visit home, but hopefully my demonstrated prowess in math competitions and quantum computing will convince him I'm not purposely stalling.

Anyway, I hope to dispel the rumor that only those who fail at math and science are interested in psi and related topics. Indeed, I believe one must acquire a solid reputation in the hard sciences before attempting to undertake research in psi.

 

[CFLarsen]

The examples you gave me were based on other psi claims... like the Princeton Noosphere experiment, which we were not discussing. I thought we had agreed to stick to this experiment. As such, it would be imprudent to jump to conclusions about how millions of people watching a person would affect her. As I said, it can make for an interesting topic, but only once we've resolved the one presented to us.

But what's to discuss in the experiment? There is no evidence that people sweat more, just because they are stared at through videos.

...well, yes, if the experimenter believes in psi, but I hope you won't call that evidence of psi.

But since you brought it up, I want to mention that I considered the exact same thing (news anchors) before you said it. I've got an idea for an experiment, but I don't want to discuss that until we've discussed the experiment in question. Suffice it to say that I see no reason to conclude that the cumulative effect would turn a person to mush.

Feel free to open a new thread. Don't let one discussion depend on another, especially not if it is another claim.

Was affiliated with the Quantum Circuits group, where

Tell us more about this group.

I coauthored several (published) papers, one of which won an IEEE Best Paper award

Tell us more about the papers, and the award.

Demonstrated exceptional talent in mathematics

I don't see any evidence of this.

I promised Claus I would dig up my certificates for the US Physics Olympiad upon my next visit home, but hopefully my demonstrated prowess in math competitions and quantum computing will convince him I'm not purposely stalling.

Oh, I'm not. I would just like to see some corresponding evidence. As I understand you, this is impossible?

Anyway, I hope to dispel the rumor that only those who fail at math and science are interested in psi and related topics. Indeed, I believe one must acquire a solid reputation in the hard sciences before attempting to undertake research in psi.

Huh?? Who has spread that rumor? I have never seen that before.

 

[CFLarsen]

The examples you gave me were based on other psi claims... like the Princeton Noosphere experiment, which we were not discussing. I thought we had agreed to stick to this experiment. As such, it would be imprudent to jump to conclusions about how millions of people watching a person would affect her. As I said, it can make for an interesting topic, but only once we've resolved the one presented to us.

But what's to discuss in the experiment? There is no evidence that people sweat more, just because they are stared at through videos.

...well, yes, if the experimenter believes in psi, but I hope you won't call that evidence of psi.

But since you brought it up, I want to mention that I considered the exact same thing (news anchors) before you said it. I've got an idea for an experiment, but I don't want to discuss that until we've discussed the experiment in question. Suffice it to say that I see no reason to conclude that the cumulative effect would turn a person to mush.

Feel free to open a new thread. Don't let one discussion depend on another, especially not if it is another claim.

Was affiliated with the Quantum Circuits group, where

Tell us more about this group.

I coauthored several (published) papers, one of which won an IEEE Best Paper award

Tell us more about the papers, and the award.

Demonstrated exceptional talent in mathematics

I don't see any evidence of this.

I promised Claus I would dig up my certificates for the US Physics Olympiad upon my next visit home, but hopefully my demonstrated prowess in math competitions and quantum computing will convince him I'm not purposely stalling.

Oh, I'm not. I would just like to see some corresponding evidence. As I understand you, this is impossible?

Anyway, I hope to dispel the rumor that only those who fail at math and science are interested in psi and related topics. Indeed, I believe one must acquire a solid reputation in the hard sciences before attempting to undertake research in psi.

Huh?? Who has spread that rumor? I have never seen that before.

 

[flyboy217]

Originally posted by CFLarsen

But what's to discuss in the experiment? There is no evidence that people sweat more, just because they are stared at through videos.

...well, yes, if the experimenter believes in psi, but I hope you won't call that evidence of psi.

Feel free to open a new thread. Don't let one discussion depend on another, especially not if it is another claim.

Feel free to re-read the last page or so. I've spent it trying to explain to you why you shouldn't be bringing in things like anchormen turning to a "mass of blubber" (your quote, not mine). Nice attempt to turn it around on me, though.

Tell us more about this group.

Tell us more about the papers, and the award.

I don't see any evidence of this.

If you want to know more about the group, papers, or award, I've e-mailed you more than sufficient information on all three.

I've even given you ways to externally verify each of them (for my math talent, the name and phone of the math professor whose recommendation I showed you; for my IEEE award, the number (732-465-5853), e-mail (h.zazza@ieee.org), and street address of the award committee; for the Quantum Circuits Group, a link to our homepage).

I don't care to discuss my qualifications further in this thread. If you want to do it by e-mail, let me know.

(Edited for length)

 

[Lucianarchy]

Experimenter Expectations - Dr R Sheldrake

requently things turn out just as expected or prophesied, not because of a mysterious knowledge of the future, but because people's behaviour tends to make the prophecy come true. For example, a teacher who predicts that a student will fail may treat the student in ways that make failure more likely, thus fulfilling the original prophecy. The tendency for prophecies to be self fulfilling is well known in the realms of economics, politics and religion. It is also a matter of practical psychology. Various ways of using these powers are the bases of countless self-help books, showing how avoiding negative attitudes and adopting positive ones help to bring about remarkable successes in politics, business and love. Likewise confidence and optimism play an important part in the practice of medicine and healing - and in sports, fighting and many other activities."

http://www.sheldrake.org/experiments/expectations/

 

[Lucianarchy]

Claus, would you mind deleting your duplicate post. Thanks.

 

[Lucianarchy]

Kennedy, J E & Taddonio, Judith L (1976). Experimenter effects in parapsychological research. Journal of Parapsychology, 40(1), (pp. 1-33)

Abstract

Outlines the types of E effects that occur in parapsychological research. A distinction is drawn between those effects that seem to be mediated by psychological variables and those that result from extrasensory processes. The term "psi experimenter effect" is introduced to refer to unintentional psi which affects experimental outcomes in ways that are directly related to the E's needs, wishes, expectancies, or moods. Several channels for the operation of psi E effects are discussed, as well as numerous studies which support their existence. A review of the literature suggests that E psychokinesis can influence laboratory investigations of psychokinesis and precognition. In addition, psi E effects are indicated in studies showing variations in the Ss' reactions to different Es and in studies involving unintentional psi tasks.

 

[Lucianarchy]

'Empirical Evidence for a Non-Classical Experimenter Effect: An Experimental, Double-Blind Investigation of Unconventional Information Transfer' - Journal of Scientific Exploration 11.1

Harald Walach and Stefan Schmidt, Department of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Rehabilitation Psychology, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany

We set up a rigidly controlled, double-blind dowsing experiment with three repetitions to test whether dowsers are able to extract information out of a system in an unconventional way. One hundred and four professional and lay dowsers had to distinguish between randomly distributed, sealed and indistinguishable probes of pure mineral water or parathione, using a one-hand dowsing rod. The subjects were unable, on the whole, to distinguish between the probes better than chance. Performance was significantly negatively correlated with paranormal beliefs. Subjects instructed by one among three blinded experimenters were able to distinguish between the probes significantly better than chance. As we have excluded any conceivable way of leakage of relevant information, we conclude that we found a non-classical experimenter effect.

 

[Ed]

Experimenter Expectations - Dr R Sheldrake

requently things turn out just as expected or prophesied, not because of a mysterious knowledge of the future, but because people's behaviour tends to make the prophecy come true. For example, a teacher who predicts that a student will fail may treat the student in ways that make failure more likely, thus fulfilling the original prophecy. The tendency for prophecies to be self fulfilling is well known in the realms of economics, politics and religion. It is also a matter of practical psychology. Various ways of using these powers are the bases of countless self-help books, showing how avoiding negative attitudes and adopting positive ones help to bring about remarkable successes in politics, business and love. Likewise confidence and optimism play an important part in the practice of medicine and healing - and in sports, fighting and many other activities."

http://www.sheldrake.org/experiments/expectations/

And your interpretation is..........?

 

[Ed]

Kennedy, J E & Taddonio, Judith L (1976). Experimenter effects in parapsychological research. Journal of Parapsychology, 40(1), (pp. 1-33)

Abstract

Outlines the types of E effects that occur in parapsychological research. A distinction is drawn between those effects that seem to be mediated by psychological variables and those that result from extrasensory processes. The term "psi experimenter effect" is introduced to refer to unintentional psi which affects experimental outcomes in ways that are directly related to the E's needs, wishes, expectancies, or moods. Several channels for the operation of psi E effects are discussed, as well as numerous studies which support their existence. A review of the literature suggests that E psychokinesis can influence laboratory investigations of psychokinesis and precognition. In addition, psi E effects are indicated in studies showing variations in the Ss' reactions to different Es and in studies involving unintentional psi tasks.

And your interpretation is..........?

 

[Ed]

'Empirical Evidence for a Non-Classical Experimenter Effect: An Experimental, Double-Blind Investigation of Unconventional Information Transfer' - Journal of Scientific Exploration 11.1

Harald Walach and Stefan Schmidt, Department of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Rehabilitation Psychology, D-79085 Freiburg, Germany

We set up a rigidly controlled, double-blind dowsing experiment with three repetitions to test whether dowsers are able to extract information out of a system in an unconventional way. One hundred and four professional and lay dowsers had to distinguish between randomly distributed, sealed and indistinguishable probes of pure mineral water or parathione, using a one-hand dowsing rod. The subjects were unable, on the whole, to distinguish between the probes better than chance. Performance was significantly negatively correlated with paranormal beliefs. Subjects instructed by one among three blinded experimenters were able to distinguish between the probes significantly better than chance. As we have excluded any conceivable way of leakage of relevant information, we conclude that we found a non-classical experimenter effect.

And your interpretation is..........?

 

[Ratman_tf]

So where's this new Psi forum Luci?

 

[CFLarsen]

flyboy217,

Who has spread the rumor that only those who fail at math and science are interested in psi and related topics?

 

[Ersby]

I think he saud eariler it was a quote from Feynman. But I've read Feynman quite a lot, and I don't recognise it.

 

[flyboy217]

flyboy217,

Who has spread the rumor that only those who fail at math and science are interested in psi and related topics?

Originally posted by Ersby

I think he saud eariler it was a quote from Feynman. But I've read Feynman quite a lot, and I don't recognise it.

Ersby, my previous claim was:

Both Feynman and Hawking are/were fond of claiming that only those who fail at math and science turn to mysticism.

This was one of the quotes I recall reading from Hawking:

If you find theoretical physics and mathematics too hard, you turn to mysticism. I think people who have this idea about mysticism in physics are people who really can't understand the mathematics.

The rumor regarding psi is just the impression I have gotten. Please forgive me if it is wrong--I understand that psi and mysticism are not necessarily related, but often seem to get correlated. I certainly don't claim the rumor as fact.

Anyway, considering that we have strayed pretty far from the topic we were discussing (the remote staring experiment), I'm happy to end this deviation here before we derail it.

 

[Lucianarchy]

remote staring

"[...]This model is called Decision Augmentation Theory and holds that people can use their ESP ability to systematically bias decisions toward favorable outcomes. When applied to the vast literature of random number generator experiments where subjects are asked to use their minds to alter the statistical outputs, the analysis strongly favors the ESP over the influence model. In short, these subjects are PSI-mediated statistical opportunists in that the initiate runs to capture locally deviant subsequences form larger unperturbed and unbiased binary sequences. Similar techniques may be applied to future DMILS data. [...]" http://www.hf.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/hnctt/get/show212/10.html?nogifs