• 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.

Reiki Rubbish

Why do Randi's results need to be in a peer-reviewed journal to have any importance?

The result of the test is not a scientific conclusion (though he may very well make a scientific analysis after the fact)... the result of the test is success or failure at what the claimant and JREF agreed would be performed. If designed according to the rules, the result is clear without scientific analysis, for example, a ball is under a cup or it isn't.

Surely from this you can conclude that the claimant was unable to perform as he claimed, without peer review?

Do you need a symposium to settle a coin toss?

(edited to add additional comments)
 
True, but it would be an interesting exercise to publish the protocol in such a journal.
 
Oh, I agree completely, I just think that the lack of such publication doesn't mean the results are insignificant.
 
You just don't get it, do you, guys?
This man is selling snake oil. That's deliberate fraud, and he has to be shut down. If you think I'm abrasive, you really don't understand the issue at hand here.
Click to expand...

I do get that there is not a scintilla of evidence in favor of Reiki producing anything other than a placebo effect. I do get that there is no possible mechanism for it to work that does not require re-writing physics, biology, and medicine. I do get that sick people may forego helpful treatments and waste time and money having someone wave his or her hands. But, I also do get that using words like quack, criminal, and fraud will not convince anyone reading a believer site. Such terms will only make them dig their heals in harder.

If your goal is to convince the people reading that site to reconsider, then reconsider your approach. If your goal is to prevent snake oil salespeople from harming sick people, then you are posting to the wrong site. Until it is outlawed, people will offer it and people will pay for it. Try approaching state or federal governments. Try educating the media. Try educating young people in critical thinking skills. Ranting on a believer site is as effective as ranting in a foreign language.

Lastly, let me say that I could be completely wrong - your approach may be working. Simply go back to the site and ask for a quick show of hands as to who has been converted. If you have changed any opinions, then I'll eat my post; otherwise, take a breath and remember the old saw about honey and vinegar.
 
Whodini said:

However, why do you expect people to take it seriously when the results aren't published in a peer reviewed journal?
Click to expand...
Didn't we cover this issue in the other "JREF Science" thread?

Whodini, you may be shocked to learn that in addition to the fact that you won't find discriptions of JREF challenge events in a "peer reviewed journal," you also won't find the American Dental Association's official seal of approval on any of them. Yet even my toothbrush has that, fer chrissakes!
 
sundog said:

You already owe it to me, remember?
Click to expand...


I drank that one.

:)

I have some seltzer and Guiness in the fridge though.

(and squid jerky)

Ish is mad tasty. :)
 
The idea of being published in a peer reviewed journal is that:

1) other people check your methodology- else you are just doing what you do in a vacumn, with no input from other professionals

2) your results are all in a place that people can check and reference. The only way currently is to hopefully pick out some info from the archives, email Randi, or physically go to the JREF and politely ask to go through their files. The only way to reference their work is to say "Check out www. ...", which isn't really authoritative or useful at all.

3) ?

There are probably a lot of other benefits of the peer review process. Right now I ate too much jerky and can't think.
 
Ladewig said:
Ranting on a believer site is as effective as ranting in a foreign language.
Click to expand...
This isn't a believer site; there are many lurkers sitting on the fence. MA tends to be top-heavy with frauds and charlatans (Kateda, or Yellow Bamboo, anyone?), so I'm targeting the waverers who read the thread. Joe Reiki is a lost cause, but if I can prevent a sick person from wasting their time and money going to him, I've achieved something.
 
gnome said:
The result of the test is not a scientific conclusion (though he may very well make a scientific analysis after the fact)... the result of the test is success or failure at what the claimant and JREF agreed would be performed.
Click to expand...
The JREF challenge is assisted by independent parties who know something about science. The challenge is done scientifically.


Do you need a symposium to settle a coin toss?
Click to expand...
Exactly. And the results of a coin toss aren't published in a "peer review journal," because those results are un-interesting. Likewise, if a dowser fails to show any ability to dowse, that information isn't getting into a journal --not because the experiment to test dowsing was unscientific, but because the results are uninteresting.

You can still read about the preliminary tests of applicants and decide for yourself about the validity of the test. Just read Randi's commentaries right here on this web site. Most of them are a riot.
 
----
And the results of a coin toss aren't published in a "peer review journal," because those results are un-interesting. Likewise, if a dowser fails to show any ability to dowse, that information isn't getting into a journal --not because the experiment to test dowsing was unscientific, but because the results are uninteresting.

You can still read about the preliminary tests of applicants and decide for yourself about the validity of the test. Just read Randi's commentaries right here on this web site. Most of them are a riot.
----


Would you like to have a nice big journal with a lot of JREF challenge results in it to look through?

That would be NEAT-O-RIFFIC!
 
Kimpatsu said:

I don't think I could ever get quite that low... :D
Click to expand...


You can do anything if you put your mind to it. Just try a little harder.

I'll train you to be my protege'. Here are some basic methods:

1) disagree with everything

2) follow this formula for post content:

45% confusing
20% serious and thoughtful
15% funny
10% abuse of emoticons
9% misc
1% mean

3) post a lot of serious posts too just to keep people on their toes

4) somehow bring religion into every post. Examples:

Q: What is that new game by ID?
A: You fundamental Christian! PROVE ID!

Q: Did you see that gymnastics meet the other night on ESPN? The way people can twist their bodies like that! What athleticism!
A: Cho' mama! That guy got into an Iron Cross on the rings. CROSS! You fundamental Christian!

Q: Does anyone have any educational theories on how to best raise children?
A: Don't teach them to color, else you will being up the word KORAN!

5) occasionally speak in a combination of foreign languages (only using 1st year knowledge, of course) Example:

Es la verdad que wode baba y mi papa (wode baba) hablan que wo yoh er dianhao en mi casa.

Lastly,

6) speak gangsta. Ya dig that foo? Shizzle my nizzle. Fo' I bust a cap. Blaaaooo!!! 2 ta ya dome! Freestyle:

Chillin on the JREF, foos tryin to take me to da mat
Come home, chizzeck the mail, BILLS-- no time ta pay dat!
Pour a 40 fo' my homies, eyo don't tattle
who would win: Rwald vs Chessman in an acne battle?
PEACE out!
Fresh for 2003, you succckkkaassss!
 
Whodini, you are in need of serious psychological help. Are you allowed crayons where they're keeping you? And how do you type wearing that straight jacket? ;)
 
Kimpatsu said:
Whodini, you are in need of serious psychological help. Are you allowed crayons where they're keeping you? And how do you type wearing that straight jacket? ;)
Click to expand...


I need psychological help yet you are the one debating reiki people.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

I do like coloring though. It is relaxing.
 
Kimpatsu said:

No, not witch hunts. Witches don't exist. I'd just silence all dissent, like Robert Mugabe.
Click to expand...

Heck of a roll model.

As has been stated many times before, you can't test everyhing, and if something hasn't been tested, or refuses to be tested, then you can't draw any conclusions. If something has been tested several times, and failed consistently, then it is usualy safe to say it will continue not to work.
 
Whodini said:
You say that because him or no one else has passed the JREF challenge. However, why do you expect people to take it seriously when the results aren't published in a peer reviewed journal?
Click to expand...
Why does Whodini expect us to take him seriously when he claims that the results of the JREF challenges "clearly" are not made available to all who are interested?
 
Whodini said:
Kimpatsu said:
I'll write up the results for any suitable peer-reviewed journal you care to nominate.
Click to expand...
Why? You know that JREF doesn't do that.
Click to expand...
Note that, when challenged to actually facilitate a JREF challenge to be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, Whodini declines the challenge. It would seem that he is not as anxious to see the JREF results published in a peer-reviewed journal as he would like us to believe.
 
gnome said:
Why do Randi's results need to be in a peer-reviewed journal to have any importance?
Click to expand...
They don't. Whodini has thrown up this smoke screen to avoid dealing with the results of the challenges themselves. It is worth noting that Whodini's original claim was that the results simply were not being made available; he created the "peer-reviewed journal" red herring after it was pointed out just how poorly his assertion correlated with reality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom