Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

[El_Spectre]

Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

Thing is, you have to be gullible to believe that the paranormal is worth investigating.

THAT right there is a dangerous attitude to have. Should we investigate the same damned claim over and over, if it has been shown to be without merit? No. But if new evidence arises, we should be willing to look into it.

Of course, most of the time new "evidence" is a rehashing of old themes or misunderstanding of scientific principles. These can be quickly detected and explained, but we shouldn't just ignore them.

Dogma and forbidden subjects are the domain of Mother Church, not big papa Science

 

[Ashles]

You must be joking. As if some sceptic could create a work of art as good as I.

True - 'Jambo372' is the David Brent of the paranormal world.

 

[Mojo]

Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

I know of several investigators who've had official studies published proving PSI.

Again, do you have the references for these? If they're official publications they should be reasonably easy to get hold of.

 

[Bronze Dog]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

Again, do you have the references for these? If they're official publications they should be reasonably easy to get hold of.

Yeah, we should maintain a hold on that. One of these days, we might actually get a believer to reference one of these amazing studies. This ties in with one of my alternate hypotheses about the lack of evidence for the paranormal: The believers are covering it up, because if skeptics saw the evidence, they'd be convinced, and there'd be no one that believers can turn into imaginary Wickerman skeptics to make fun of.

 

[jambo372]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

Again, do you have the references for these? If they're official publications they should be reasonably easy to get hold of.

I've given many already, several times over.

 

[El_Spectre]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

I've given many already, several times over.

And most paranormal claims have been refuted many times as well. It's not an efficient world. Humor us...

 

[drkitten]

Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

THAT right there is a dangerous attitude to have. Should we investigate the same damned claim over and over, if it has been shown to be without merit? No. But if new evidence arises, we should be willing to look into it.

Nice in theory, but impractical in practice. There are too many other things that are worth investigating for which much better evidence is available.

Think of it this way. Over my fifty year research career, I will be able to put in about 100,000 hours of active research. The produce of that hundred thousand hours will be required to feed and clothe myself and my family, provide for my retirement, secure my place in the annals of history,.... and, incidentally, make the world a better place in a small way.

How many of those irreplaceable hundred thousand hours do you want me to spend investigating things that I fully expect to be useless, flawed, and a complete waste of my time?

 

[Mojo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

I've given many already, several times over.

Any chance of giving them again? If you can't find them or can't be bothered to post them again, could you at least give us the names of the "investigators who've had official studies published proving PSI" of which you claim knowlege. Then we could try to track them down for ourselves.

Edited to add: Or perhaps you could provide links to the threads where you originally posted them. Assuming that you did, of course.

 

[billydkid]

Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

THAT right there is a dangerous attitude to have. Should we investigate the same damned claim over and over, if it has been shown to be without merit? No. But if new evidence arises, we should be willing to look into it.

Of course, most of the time new "evidence" is a rehashing of old themes or misunderstanding of scientific principles. These can be quickly detected and explained, but we shouldn't just ignore them.

Dogma and forbidden subjects are the domain of Mother Church, not big papa Science

But did you digest the rest of my post? In as much as there is no less genuine evidence to support the claim that there are red-assed, three legged moon monkeys living on the dark side of that celestial body than there is to support any other claim of the paranormal then why not be open minded about investigating that possibility? That is my issue with being open to "investigating" the paranormal - where do you stop. Clearly, there is no end to possible, hypothetical paranormal claims and in as much as none has any more obvious merit than another how does one determine which claim is worth investigating? Do we devote the time and energy and resources needed to "investigate" every single claim made by every single nitwit? Does the fact that a fair number of nitwits seem to have settled on the claim of being able to talk to dead people make that particular unsupportable claim worth investigating? At what point does actually being rational factor into this whole business?

 

[El_Spectre]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

But did you digest the rest of my post?

I wasn't trying to give you a hard time, and I'm with you on how much time can be wasted investigating every damned silly claim. It's just dangerous to start considering certain subjects off limits.

 

[Suezoled]

Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

Don't try to put words in my mouth, I know of several investigators who've had official studies published proving PSI. I'm looking for institutes who actually test currently.

Yes and they must all be biased if you're looking for unbiased organizations.

 

[jambo372]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

Any chance of giving them again? If you can't find them or can't be bothered to post them again, could you at least give us the names of the "investigators who've had official studies published proving PSI" of which you claim knowlege. Then we could try to track them down for ourselves.

Edited to add: Or perhaps you could provide links to the threads where you originally posted them. Assuming that you did, of course.

It's irrelevant but I'll give you a few details anyway ... for the last time.

Helen Duncan materialised a deceased magician by the stage name of "The Great Lafayette" in a magician's club full of experts on fraudulent mediumship, none of them could work out how she did it and believed her mediumship to be genuine. In tests with a medium named Rita Goold the spirit of Helen Duncan has materialised and spoken to her daughter Gena.

Nina Kulagina demonstrated her various psychic talents including healing, medical vision and most famously psychokinesis to no less than 40 scientists in several repeated tests over a period of a decade or so. She was recruited by the soviet government to see if she could use her talents to help Nikita Khruschev. Scientists who tested her include LL Vasiliev, G Sergeyev, E Naumov, G Pratt, Ye Terletsky and Mr Blazek.

Julius Krmessky has shown to several scientists psychokinesis similar to that of Kulagina.

Rudi Schneider and DD Home demonstrated powerful physical mediumship to several scientists.

The Fox Sisters "founders of modern spiritualism" demonstrated their mediumship to several scientists. Sceptics say that they cracked their toes to produce spirit rappings and that Margaretta Fox confessed to this herself. What sceptics don't tell is the second half of the tale :

Margaretta admitted that her confession was a lie devised by herself and her youngest sister Kate to get revenge on their older sister Leah. Margaretta and Kate devised the spirit communication methods themselves, it was their older sister Leah however who took most of the credit and gained most respect as a medium because of her resources, money and older age, she then disowned her 2 youngest alcoholic sisters who'd brought her fame. Margaretta and Kate became jealous and this is why Margaretta made up a confession which she later retracted.

 

[Starrman]

Helen Duncan materialised a deceased magician by the stage name of "The Great Lafayette" in a magician's club full of experts on fraudulent mediumship, none of them could work out how she did it and believed her mediumship to be genuine. In tests with a medium named Rita Goold the spirit of Helen Duncan has materialised and spoken to her daughter Gena.

You do realize that this is a story - not an 'official investigation'. All links I can find are stories as well. As usual they grandstand about her being proven over and over, without any kind of real results or documentation of testing.

I see a lot of

Sceptics must have winced at the daily reporting of case after case where 'dead' relatives had materialised and given absolute proof of their continued existence .

But no actual listing of what that proof was beyond witnesses playing the "couldn't have known" card. All I have to say to that is, if at least one person knows, then it is possible for someone else to know. Just because you can't think of how doesn't mean it was magic.

I love this one "One Kathleen McNeill, wife of a Glaswegian forgemaster, told how she has attended such a seance at which her sister appeared. Her sister had died some a few hours previously, after an operation, and news of her death could not have been known."

Well, the doctor knew, the sister knew, any nurses that were at the hospital would have knows, other family members could have known - but wait, there is NO WAY she could know - right?

No official studies, just a parade of stories.

Jambo - why don't you think magicians are really magical?

 

[Ashles]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

It's irrelevant but I'll give you a few details anyway ... for the last time.

Yes you have provided those examples before and they have all been debunked, or it has been explained how they likely did it.

Another thread with Jambo's ludicrous claims

I really can't be bothered to look for the rest.

 

[Azrael 5]

Will you ever give us a "real medium" who is alive,jambo?
On the subject of dera Helen Duncan,read this

In the July 14, 1931, Morning Post, a long article was published on her exposure there and Harry Price branded her in a statement "as one of the cleverest frauds in the history of Spiritualism." A portion of her teleplasm was found to be composed of woodpulp and white of egg. Photographs taken during the séance disclosed India rubber gloves and rough portraits wrapped in cheesecloth. An X-ray examination revealed that Mrs. Duncan was possessed of a remarkable faculty of regurgitation and she merely swallowed the necessary paraphernalia before the séance.

From herehttp://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/duncan.htm

She was left with[regurgitated]egg on her face!

On the subject od D D Home and his amazing levitation out of windows,do remember jambo:no-one actually saw him do this.Merely leave one room and appear in the next- in the dark! No-one watching was allowed to move.Real test conditions,them.

 

[Mojo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

It's irrelevant but I'll give you a few details anyway ... for the last time.

The usual suspects again, I see. What about the "official studies ... proving PSI" which you claim have been published? You don't seem to mention them.

Edited to add: And by the way, if you say you know of reports "proving PSI," it is hardly irrelevant to ask for references. If they are irrelevant, why did you bring them up in the first place?

 

[Suezoled]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phenomena

The Fox Sisters "founders of modern spiritualism" demonstrated their mediumship to several scientists. Sceptics say that they cracked their toes to produce spirit rappings and that Margaretta Fox confessed to this herself. What sceptics don't tell is the second half of the tale :

Margaretta admitted that her confession was a lie devised by herself and her youngest sister Kate to get revenge on their older sister Leah. Margaretta and Kate devised the spirit communication methods themselves, it was their older sister Leah however who took most of the credit and gained most respect as a medium because of her resources, money and older age, she then disowned her 2 youngest alcoholic sisters who'd brought her fame. Margaretta and Kate became jealous and this is why Margaretta made up a confession which she later retracted.

Margaretta admitted she wasn't cracking her toes. She was cracking her butt. The toes were a lie devised with her sister Kate because they were jealous that Leah could crack her @ss better than her sisters. Leah, who showed herself to be the superior @ss cracker, disowned her sisters, because they were failures in the peculiar family treat that so many Foxs' inherited: that of being able to control and manipulate the muscles in her hind end to produce a degree and range of popping, hissing, and cracking sounds from her hind end. In fact, in ancient times, people begged for prophecies from the Oracle of the Bottom. Royals and Aristicrats delighted in filling a theater just to hear the musical wind of the accomplished Foxs' performances.
Margaretta and Kate became jealous and this is why Margaretta made the confession with the sole intent to undermine the family talent that was not simply Leah's alone.

 

[El_Spectre]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Open Minded Testing Organisations For Paranormal Phen

who showed herself to be the superior @ss cracker

Ya know... you just don't see this phrase often enough in the world...

 

[John the Skeptic]

How do you do “open-minded testing”?

The whole point of a rigorous test is to remove potential biases and so test only that which is under consideration. You don’t set out to prove or disprove something; you test it for validity.

Strictly controlled, well designed tests actually benefit the claimant: if their ability is real then they will pass the test and the result will be very hard for skeptics to argue against.

Of course, strict tests show up, or have done so far, that psi abilities do not exist. That’s not because testers are “close-minded”, it’s more likely to be because psi abilities don’t exist.

When a “believer” comes out with the “open-minded” argument, all they are usually saying is: be credulous. (e.g. You must read this book on Astrology with an open mind…)

Well, there’s a lot of credulous testing goes on where the investigators “open-mindedly” set out to prove that which they believe. The problem is: it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny and the results are therefore meaningless.

Testing has to be done properly otherwise it is a waste of time.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Nina Kulagina demonstrated her various psychic talents including healing, medical vision and most famously psychokinesis to no less than 40 scientists in several repeated tests over a period of a decade or so. She was recruited by the soviet government to see if she could use her talents to help Nikita Khruschev. Scientists who tested her include LL Vasiliev, G Sergeyev, E Naumov, G Pratt, Ye Terletsky and Mr Blazek.

Goodbye, Nina Kulagina.