I agree. I am just really excited that they had found some proof.
Such amazing studies - if verified -
Two completely different things. The idea of predicting the future based on the past is completely different from predicting the future without any past data for building the predictive model.Who says that a mechanism for people to predict the future doesn't already exist? People predict the future all the time, e.g., when they step out of the way of a falling object (by predicting its future path). Could these things, or at least some of them, be people simply deriving the future, or a possible future, from past experiences rather than somehow receiving information from the future? It seems to me that our brains can do an awful lot of computing without us, and perhaps these vague feelings are just subconscious theoretical predictions. No?
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_RadinDean Radin is a researcher and author in the field of parapsychology. He is Senior Scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, in Petaluma, California, USA, on the Adjunct Faculty at Sonoma State University, on the Distinguished Consulting Faculty at Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center, and four-time former President of the Parapsychological Association.
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Noetic_SciencesResearch supported by the Institute of Noetic Sciences has been criticized as lacking in strict "peer-reviewed empiricism". In an article that critiqued the New Age movement's detachment from the mainstream scientific community, Thomas W. Clark, founder of the Center for Naturalism, referenced work supported by the Institute as suffering from "what humanist philosopher Paul Kurtz calls the 'transcendental temptation' [that] drives the flight from standard, peer-reviewed empiricism into the arms of a dualism that privileges the mental over the physical, the teleological over the non-purposive."
The skeptical organization Quackwatch includes the Institute of Noetic Sciences on its list of questionable organizations. The list outlines nine criteria they feel are useful in determining the reliability of groups offering health-related information.
The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry have also criticized distance healing research supported by the Institute of Noetic Sciences, citing a ten-week study in their critique of parapsychologist Elisabeth Targ where "healers directed their psi energy to the [AIDS] patients by using prayer or meditation."
Oh geeze, if Dean Radin is involved, the results are more than likely skewed.
Yeah, he got raked over the coals in a review of one of his nonsense books, the criticism of his book is what appeared in Nature.you often see these sort of empty attacks against Radin- yet the man's work has been published and reviewed in the likes of Nature/ Science/ Phys Review
I'm assuming, ofcourse, that they are speaking of the red fart button.PROFESSOR Dick Bierman sits hunched over his computer in a darkened room. The gentle whirring of machinery can be heard faintly in the background. He smiles and presses a grubby-looking red button. In the next room, a patient slips slowly inside a hospital brain scanner. If it wasn't for the strange smiles and grimaces that flicker across the woman's face, you could be forgiven for thinking this was just a normal health check.
And he has concluded somehow that experience has nothing to do with this survival?The military has long been fascinated by such phenomena. For many years the U.S. military (and latterly the CIA) funded a secretive programme known as Stargate, which set out to investigate premonitions and the ability of mediums to predict the future.
Dr Dean Radin worked on the Stargate programme and became fascinated by the ability of 'lucky' soldiers to forecast the future.
These are the ones who survived battles against seemingly impossible odds.
Yeah, he got raked over the coals in a review of one of his nonsense books, the criticism of his book is what appeared in Nature.
Please post links to those Radin "peer reviewed" papers, I'd love to see them.I refered to the many papers of experimental data published in peer reviewed journals- not an editorial book review or other ephemera located in one of the magazines- [which was mostly ranting against a straw-man of radin's personal interpretations of that data- not the data itself- which includes well-established results such as Bell's Inequalities and the DCQE]