Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Debunking the Debunkers

  1. Aug 26, 2004 #1
    "The Research of the Skeptics"

    "This lack of research may surprise anyone whose main source of information has been the skeptical literature."

    Skeptics or Dogmatists?
    A Who's Who of Media Skeptics
    (the CSICOPs=here's some brief 'bios'
    of the motley crew and their MO)

    Susan Blackmore
    Richard Dawkins
    David Deutsch
    Chris French
    Martin Gardner
    Nicholas Humphrey
    Mike Hutchison
    Ray Hyman
    Paul Kurtz
    David Marks
    James Randi
    Michael Shermer
    Richard Wiseman
    Lewis Wolpert

    this will 'open your mind' to how the 'closed mind' operates :yuck:
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 27, 2004 #2
    Wow, www.skepticalinvestigations.org is really close minded. They really seem like they've already decided so many things without considering the huge number of possibilities. Wonder what it would take to open their mind to new ideas?
  4. Aug 27, 2004 #3
    "Well, if you don’t find evidence of ESP, what can you say? Only that you have failed to find something which, according to science, shouldn’t have been there in the first place! "
    I agree with them. If all signs say "NO" and there is no proof, then where would be the logic in believing otherwise? And ESP is not religion, therefor should not be a faith based science. There is no evidence to support ESP speculation. If there were, we'd have all head about it by now.

    On another note, I just want to point out that I truely believe if something were to happen such as visitors from another planet, ESP, magic, etc. the government would release the information and not try to cover it up.
  5. Aug 27, 2004 #4
    To be fair... undisputable evidence of something is proof that it exists, whilst an absence of evidence of something is merely saying that it may or may not exist.
  6. Aug 27, 2004 #5
    "One of McMoneagle's most successful demonstrations was in front of those who attended a meeting at the Rhine Research Center. The ubiquitous Wiseman was again involved in changing the protocol to suit his requirements, which did not prevent 29 out of the 30 members of the audience matching McMoneagle's drawing to the correct target out of a pool of five possible targets. Of this demonstration, shown on the Discovery channel, McMoneagle notes drily that "Richard has refused to discuss it since".

    "There is so much proof for the existence of psi," he concludes, "it's foolish to continue spending time, money and effort 'proving it' to the satisfaction of idiots."



    and re Susan Blackmore's 'research'

    "the odds against 7 successes out of 21 happening by chance are over 20,000 to one!

    ....led parapsychologist Rick Berger to critically examine the Blackmore experiments in great detail, and he found that “The claim of ‘ten years of psi research’ actually represents a series of hastily constructed, executed, and reported studies that were primarily conducted during a 2-year period.’” These consisted of a set of experiments conducted between October 1976 and December 1978 for her PhD dissertation.

    Blackmore reported 29 experiments completed over this two-year period, of which 21 were eventually published as separate experiments in five parapsychology journal papers. Seven of these experiments produced statistically significant results. Although these experiments form the basis of Blackmore’s claim of “failing to find the paranormal”, the odds against 7 successes out of 21 happening by chance are over 20,000 to one!
    So, how does Blackmore reconcile the fact of 7 successful experiments out of 21 with her often-repeated claim that her own research led her to become a skeptic?"


    Anyone know who Howard Blum was writing about at the beginning of "Out There"?
    the guy who gave a 'demonstration' of tracking Soviet submarines....
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Debunking the Debunkers
  1. Debunking Debunkers (Replies: 27)

  2. Debunking (The Method) (Replies: 43)

  3. Debunking the debunkers (Replies: 24)

  4. Debunk this dream (Replies: 14)