The PSI Conspiracy

[Ashles]

Why do we call them fraudulent psychics? It may be an oxymoron,

Isn't it a tautology?

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Humans are biased, even me, so let’s settle the debate in controlled trials over the coming years, lets not ridicule PSI researchers, if someone claims PSI in a controlled trial it deserves respect even if some others fail to replicate it, there could be many reasons why PSI doesn’t occur with mechanical regularity other than assumption of fraud. or conspiracy

How many test, trials and so on and for how long?

"Psi" has been around as long as any other claimed human ability; scientists have successfully explored those other areas and made immense strides in understanding the results. Yet "psi" appears to be one area that despite the 100 or so years of “modern scientific research” has not discovered anything or made any advances.

And you don't seem to have addressed my point of the effects you claim could be "psi" being large scale. I mean the communication of information is large scale no matte rthe underlying process, if it wasn’t we wouldn’t know anything had been communicated. It would be like saying someone who claims to be able to predict the lottery numbers isn’t making a claim for a large scale effect.

 

[dharlow]

The book 'The Psychic Mafia' is published by Prometheus Books founded by Paul Kurtz.

The Prometheus copy is a reprint of the original, from 1976, published by St. Martin Press. The book contains a very useful bibliography on pseudo-psychic deception.

 

[CFLarsen]

Houdini did expose fraud but sceptics need to remember he didn’t rule out PSI completely, he certainly wasn’t an atheist (he was a master mason, at his funeral Masonic and Zionist rites were performed. )

Your argumentation would probably be received with a bit more respect if you didn't constantly misrepresent the position of skeptics.

Skeptics don't rule out PSI at all. We just want to see evidence. Of which there is none.

I never used the term lie , I prefer the term ‘bias’. Philosopher Paul Kurtz has a humanist philosophy to promote. It appears he thinks PSI is impossible, so I doubt he would feel concerned about whether a 'blue book' conspiracy theory was adequate explanation or more anecdotal

No, no, no. When you cast doubt on the existence of the Blue Book, then you cast doubt about whether or not Kurtz tells the truth or not.

Paul Kurtz founded CSICOP (also Council of secular humanism, Centre for Inquiry, etc) .

How is that quote showing Kurtz' bias? It shows that he is pointing to the scientific method. Is that "bias"?

The book 'The Psychic Mafia' is published by Prometheus Books founded by Paul Kurtz.

As dharlow pointed out, the book was not published by PB originally. Does that make you reconsider your opinion?

I’ve seen this book quoted a lot by skeptics so I suppose it’s time I buy it. I cannot comment on American psychics as I’m in the UK but I admit you have some very strange people over there, it appears the New Age movement has dominated viewpoints on PSI.

On the amazon website one reviewer’s comments says ’I was very interested in the observation at the beginning that psychic phenomena do exist on a much smaller, more personal scale, …..which if the book says that, doesn’t contradict my argument that PSI is real and weak effect, but blown out of proportion by exaggerating enthusiasts, New Age movement giving skeptics fuel to set it on fire.

Another reviewer says the other mediums he exposes were dead, so they cannot defend themselves ’ I remember trying to find reference to any living person in his book years ago and there were none. What was or is Keene afraid of?

Another review says ’American psychic who used trickery and deceit to finance his extravagant lifestyle. At one point, he gave it up, and found strength from a friend (a Mason!) to expose his former friends and colleagues as frauds’

Ahh, no conspiracy topic is complete without a mason theory This reminds me of a Masonic conspiracy theory on PSI (I don’t believe it but it is mildly entertaining ) It goes along the lines Masons promote phony PSI to also debunk, they promote the New Age movement (which is Masonic in origin) ……. Supposedly masons and magicians are in a conspiracy to hide scientific (only) knowledge of PSI with New Age clap trap, trickery, debunks, etc. promoting known frauds to later expose them. ‘The international brotherhood of magicians logo’ supposedly looks Masonic (handshake, eye at bottom, intertwining serpents)……… very silly conspiracy theory

What you read on Amazon does not necessarily apply here. If you are going to criticize the skeptics here, please have the courtesy of addressing the points made here.

It is very possible tricksters pretending to psychic share information, I never doubted that. I do doubt all mediums are fraudulent or part of a psychic mafia (at least in UK) it’s another silly conspiracy IMHO

Who here has claimed this?? Names, please.

Even Richard Wiseman (magician, psychologist) doesn’t go that far …… ’ "I think the mediums are fairly sincere, but the person is reading a lot into what are fairly ambiguous comments," I agree most do but sometimes it is not ambiguous, it is beyond chance, beyond cold reading and requires the most contrived hot reading theory to explain it (i.e. conspiracy).

It is "beyond chance" and cold reading? Could you provide us with a reading in a controlled environment that was "beyond chance" and "cold reading"?

Naturally a magicians will think ‘it’s a trick’, naturally a psychologist will think ‘it sensory leakage’, naturally materialistic humanist philosopher will think ‘PSI doesn’t exist’ , naturally a Christian will view PSI as dangerous and naturally New Ager will see cosmic PSI relevance in anything everything …… they are all biased.

All we want to see is evidence. Got some?

Humans are biased, even me, so let’s settle the debate in controlled trials over the coming years, lets not ridicule PSI researchers, if someone claims PSI in a controlled trial it deserves respect even if some others fail to replicate it, there could be many reasons why PSI doesn’t occur with mechanical regularity other than assumption of fraud. or conspiracy

PSI researchers have for decades now claimed "controlled trials". They have gotten nowhere. Psychics don't want to be tested. Sure, Schwartz performed some experiments, but they were true abominations. They were so full of holes that they are worthless.

 

[Open Mind]

How many test, trials and so on and for how long?

"Psi" has been around as long as any other claimed human ability; scientists have successfully explored those other areas and made immense strides in understanding the results. Yet "psi" appears to be one area that despite the 100 or so years of “modern scientific research” has not discovered anything or made any advances.

PSI has been showing up in controlled trials for a century, causing controversy then as now. The progress made has been tighter and tighter controls .. and PSI still pops out, weaker perhaps than decades ago but the effect is still there in many trials, not all. I think progress is being made very slowly, it is being found in controlled trials of recent years highly skilled creative types such as skilled musicians, writers, etc are having better results than scientific minded types. The belief of the researcher and those involved seems to be having an effect. More research is required.

And you don't seem to have addressed my point of the effects you claim could be "psi" being large scale. I mean the communication of information is large scale no matte rthe underlying process, if it wasn’t we wouldn’t know anything had been communicated. It would be like saying someone who claims to be able to predict the lottery numbers isn’t making a claim for a large scale effect.

With regard to your previous comment.... Telepathy, ESP, remote viewing, Clairvoyance ….. can be very flawed but still supply information above chance odds of guessing.

(Psychokinesis, poltergeist and hauntings, are possibly not even under the control of the psychic , it might require the cooperation of whatever is causing it, who knows)

Accounts of reincarnation, OBE and NDE again do not need to be perfect, it is question of whether these supply information significantly beyond coincidence. The search should be for PSI in general, saying what the phenomena really is what is claimed, is another matter.

I'm not saying PSI can never be a strong effect but I'm happy to acknowledgea weak effect is taking place, the stronger claims are more problematic, generally in less controlled conditioned, so more prone to possible fraud.

 

[Open Mind]

Skeptics don't rule out PSI at all. We just want to see evidence. Of which there is none.

You mean there is apparently none after chewed by CSICOP Also read the researchers defend their experiments.

It is "beyond chance" and cold reading? Could you provide us with a reading in a controlled environment that was "beyond chance" and "cold reading"?

Wit regard to that type of phenomena in particular (i.e. mediums)
, there was the SSPR study on mediums, done a year or two ago, positive result. (I briefly mentioned in the topic Mediums:Talking to the dead) I'm sure you are aware of it, it's on your web I think, perhaps not.

All we want to see is evidence. Got some?

Controlled evidence has been debated elsewhere in here. I have some personal evidence but you will dismiss that as anecdotal (which is fine by me)

I'm going to be very busy, the next few days so if I don't reply to everyone's comments, sorry - it's rather time consuming ... but thanks for the comments and debate

 

[c4ts]

There's no conspiracy, just data that doesn't hold up under scrutiny, and people believing in it, rather than believing it.

 

[CFLarsen]

PSI has been showing up in controlled trials for a century, causing controversy then as now. The progress made has been tighter and tighter controls .. and PSI still pops out, weaker perhaps than decades ago but the effect is still there in many trials, not all. I think progress is being made very slowly, it is being found in controlled trials of recent years highly skilled creative types such as skilled musicians, writers, etc are having better results than scientific minded types. The belief of the researcher and those involved seems to be having an effect. More research is required.

Show me one controlled trial where PSI has showed up. Just one. Let's investigate it.

With regard to your previous comment.... Telepathy, ESP, remote viewing, Clairvoyance ….. can be very flawed but still supply information above chance odds of guessing.

Prove it. Let's see the experiments.

(Psychokinesis, poltergeist and hauntings, are possibly not even under the control of the psychic , it might require the cooperation of whatever is causing it, who knows)

We can speculate about how a phenomenon works after we have seen it. Can you show examples of psychokinesis, poltergeists and hauntings that could not have been natural phenomena?

Accounts of reincarnation, OBE and NDE again do not need to be perfect, it is question of whether these supply information significantly beyond coincidence. The search should be for PSI in general, saying what the phenomena really is what is claimed, is another matter.

Can you show examples of reincarnation, OBEs and NDEs that could not have been natural phenomena?`

I'm not saying PSI can never be a strong effect but I'm happy to acknowledgea weak effect is taking place, the stronger claims are more problematic, generally in less controlled conditioned, so more prone to possible fraud.

Exactly. When controls get stronger, the effect weakens. What does that tell you?

 

[CFLarsen]

You mean there is apparently none after chewed by CSICOP

CSICOP is not the only ones looking at paranormal phenomena. I have yet to see any such phenomenon.

Also read the researchers defend their experiments.

I have read some researchers defend their experiments. Which ones should I read to become convinced?

Wit regard to that type of phenomena in particular (i.e. mediums)
, there was the SSPR study on mediums, done a year or two ago, positive result. (I briefly mentioned in the topic Mediums:Talking to the dead) I'm sure you are aware of it, it's on your web I think, perhaps not.

Please be more specific.

Controlled evidence has been debated elsewhere in here. I have some personal evidence but you will dismiss that as anecdotal (which is fine by me)

Yes, I will. Can you point me to the threads where controlled evidence was debated?

I'm going to be very busy, the next few days so if I don't reply to everyone's comments, sorry - it's rather time consuming ... but thanks for the comments and debate

Fine with me. Take your time.

 

[Anders]

Re: Re: Re: The PSI Conspiracy

Could you provide the appropriate evidence?

Thanks.

In the works, mate! But at this point in time I have a lot on my hands. So, it's gonna take a while.

 

[Open Mind]

it is being found in controlled trials of recent years highly skilled creative types such as skilled musicians, writers, etc are having better results than scientific minded types. The belief of the researcher and those involved seems to be having an effect. More research is required.
-----------------------
Originally posted by CFLarsen
Show me one controlled trial where PSI has showed up. Just one. Let's investigate it.

Professor Robert Morris (unfortunately recently deceased) , Koestler Professor of Parapsychology at the University of Edinburgh . His later ganzfeld studies (after the Ray Hyman critique ….. after the Wiseman/Milton 1999 debunk most quoted by skeptics) … still produced evidence of PSI

"There appears to be an effect occurring that is not just due to chance fluctuations, or to a handful of clever cheats. I don't call it telepathy," he said, describing it as "anomalous cognition".

(New Scientist 2001 interview …….
http://groups.msn.com/PsychicAdventuresOnline/paranormaltales.msnw

Professor Robert Morris ……..
‘ The most recent Ganzfeld work has produced results showing that the odds against there being some paranormal effect would be in the millions to one.
Question: That sounds spectacular. But isn't your problem always going to be that no matter how good your results, outsiders will say the experiments are fixed?

Well, yes. There is one definition of ESP as "error some place"--as in "I can't quite find it but I know there is an error in there some place". My feeling is that as we've progressed, and as people have read our research in detail, more and more are saying that our research looks harder to beat than they thought. ……..
……………..Our best results were obtained with creative people--musicians and visual artists. As far as personality was concerned, we didn't get any consistent links between extroverts versus introverts or things like that’ …………..
………Taking a lot of care with how you recruit participants, how you welcome them into the lab, how you help them relax and feel as though it's OK to do well or succeed at these kinds of procedures. It also seems important to select participants from groups who appear to produce better results and avoid those who don't feel they will do well.

In otherwords, if you test a lot of science students or those doubtful PSI can exists or a group of people with low (i.e. normal) creative talent or anyone under pressure ……yes the usual trial ……. you possible get no or a weaker PSI effect

More research needs to be done on the earth magnetic field interference (Schumann resonance?) and the location where the PSI trial is done (geophysical structure) .

 

[Open Mind]

Originally posted by Anders


1) The better quality of the study, the less effect.


--------------
Originally posted by Interesting Ian

Could you provide the appropriate evidence?

Thanks.

------------

Incidentally Profrssor Rober Morris also said
'Our results have been getting better. The two most recent Ganzfeld ESP studies that we did actually have the highest outcome.' that statement goes back to 2001 though, still fairly recent as far as little funded paraspsychology studies go

 

[CFLarsen]

Professor Robert Morris (unfortunately recently deceased) , Koestler Professor of Parapsychology at the University of Edinburgh . His later ganzfeld studies (after the Ray Hyman critique ….. after the Wiseman/Milton 1999 debunk most quoted by skeptics) … still produced evidence of PSI

"There appears to be an effect occurring that is not just due to chance fluctuations, or to a handful of clever cheats. I don't call it telepathy," he said, describing it as "anomalous cognition".

I asked for one controlled trial. I did not ask for an interview.

In otherwords, if you test a lot of science students or those doubtful PSI can exists or a group of people with low (i.e. normal) creative talent or anyone under pressure ……yes the usual trial ……. you possible get no or a weaker PSI effect

So, it is the SuperPsiGuys who achieve these results? Who are these people? Names, please.

More research needs to be done on the earth magnetic field interference (Schumann resonance?) and the location where the PSI trial is done (geophysical structure) .

We can talk more about that after you provide evidence of PSI.

 

[CFLarsen]

Incidentally Profrssor Rober Morris also said
'Our results have been getting better. The two most recent Ganzfeld ESP studies that we did actually have the highest outcome.' that statement goes back to 2001 though, still fairly recent as far as little funded paraspsychology studies go

This is three years ago. What has happened with the studies?

I'll tell you what will happen: They will join the CIEPPCTBEBNW.

"Choir Invisible of Experiments of Paranormal Phenomena Claimed To Be Evidence, But Never Was."

We see this all the time: A study is hailed as evidence of PSI. After scrutiny, the results turn out to be less-than-impressive. Calls for more research. After years, a new study arrives, with the same claimed evidence.

The show must go on.

 

[Ashles]

Well, yes. There is one definition of ESP as "error some place"--as in "I can't quite find it but I know there is an error in there some place". My feeling is that as we've progressed, and as people have read our research in detail, more and more are saying that our research looks harder to beat than they thought.

Combined with:

In otherwords, if you test a lot of science students or those doubtful PSI can exists or a group of people with low (i.e. normal) creative talent or anyone under pressure ……yes the usual trial ……. you possible get no or a weaker PSI effect

More research needs to be done on the earth magnetic field interference (Schumann resonance?) and the location where the PSI trial is done (geophysical structure) .

If you do enough trials you will see some effect. We will retrospectively work out a reason why the failure groups failed.

This all looks incredibly unconvincing. Any phenomenon that can only be demonstrated by differences of opinions on very small statistical differences has by no mean been shown to exist

And even if we assume that Psi does exist (a huge logical leap), it would be the most useless and pointless ability in existence. Something that can only be demonstrated in certain places, at certain times by certain people to little or no effect. How are we EVER going to distinguish this from chance? An effect that small will never be clear.

Also is there not a colossal discrepency by what the Ganzfeld researchers show and what people claim their experiences of PSI are?
People claim it is a clear ability that the average person can judge to exist. Yet it never shows up like that in tests. What Ganzfeld tests show is different to the claims made by people who claim to have psychic ability.

Someone's deluding themselves.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Isn't this what we always see? It is certainly the same with homeopathy (my hobby-horse, at present ): As long as we're in anecdoticals, we hear of a strong and consistent effect, but the moment somebody even mumbles "test", everything suddenly becomes very vague.

Hans

 

[Open Mind]

I will reply to other points later … when I get more time …..briefly .

And even if we assume that Psi does exist (a huge logical leap), it would be the most useless and pointless ability in existence. Something that can only be demonstrated in certain places, at certain times by certain people to little or no effect. How are we EVER going to distinguish this from chance? An effect that small will never be clear.

(a) I think it is only a huge leap for some (b) If it was acknowledged to exist siginificant changes in theoretical physics (c) it is not chance, there is an effect, whether you think it is a PSI or something else is another matter – you are entitled to doubt

Also is there not a colossal discrepency by what the Ganzfeld researchers show and what people claim their experiences of PSI are?
People claim it is a clear ability that the average person can judge to exist. Yet it never shows up like that in tests. What Ganzfeld tests show is different to the claims made by people who claim to have psychic ability.

Studies do not generally use mediums …. The only two in recent years I am aware of done in the UK are Robertson/Roy 2003 (surprisingly positive result) and Wiseman/O’Keefe 2004 (negative result). The former was a larger, longer trial (as it should be) , Wiseman/O’Keefe very short trial but still got a lot of media coverage.

It has not been proven those claiming to be psychic are not more psychic than the general population, psychics are often reluctant to be scientifically tested in controlled trials because they don’t want to be tested for ESP or telepathy ability (that is not exactly their claim) most prefer to be tested on the dead contacting them with information (they do not even claim to contact the dead, they claim the dead contacts them with information) ….. so that has been a problem, it doesn’t make statistical analysis easy as a judgment had to be made on how evidential each statement was …. But the above 2 trials step neatly around that problem by simply measuring who the message fits best.

For ganzfeld type trials I think parapsychologists should look for those claiming to be remote viewers rather than mediums (unless willing) probably better to avoid fortune telling psychics (who use tarot, astrology, palmistry ….. none of which actually have much to do with PSI ability at all, anyone can follow such procedure, assuming it does anything )

Short of time to reply to other people’s points right now ….. later