Is Psi Real? A Look at the Evidence and Controversy Surrounding Psi Research

[Ivan Seeking]

On the contrary, if precognition is real, the after-the-fact claims that "I knew this disaster would happen" would have have been preceded by a big spike of warnings prior to 9/11. There were no such warnings, and there is no such thing as precognition.

Not at all. Any after the fact claims only speak to those claims. Again, what reason do we have to believe that we should expect any more precognitive events as per 911 than on any other day?

Also, do you run down to the local TV station if you have a dream that something is going to happen?

Finally, how do you know that there were no claims in advance? If on 9/10 I told my brother what was going to happen on 9/11, would that constitute proof now? Would you even know?

 

[setAI]

I am a big fan of skeptics like Penn and Teller and James Randi- they go after the charlatans and fakes- but I think they-like many uber-reductionists have thrown the baby out with the bathwater- or as Richard Dawkins would say they have missed the perinormal while trying to debunk the paranormal [that is more subtle- more general but measurable 'Psi' effects- not magical feats but subtle environmental signals and modulation of random observations- consider that the SAME neural responses against chance are found in WORMS as in humans! no special powers for the talking monkey!]

I would recommend reading Dean Radin's new book http://www.deanradin.com/NewWeb/EMblurbs.html - it contains references and data from huge quantities of peer-reviewed experiments that show there is something to Psi- the references and hard data here is very impressive- take out the questionable and biased experiments and you are still left with a mountain of rigorously controlled experiments

one of the main points of the book is how for many decades there has been a HUGE amount of experimental data that was not cooked or biased that shows undisputable results against chance- but even when this stuff is published and acknowledged it is still ignored by the mainstream as if the discoveries were never made!

so you still hear the old "extraordinary proof" spiel even though there HAS been many many peer-reviewed experiments that provide just that! and have been published in the right publications- but were simply ignored- not disputed- ignored-

another illuminating thing: there were a number of Ganzfield and RNG-PK experiments using random number generators that were essentially the same experimental framework as the Bell Inequality experiments- yet Bell's Inequalities are the foundation of quantum mechanics- yet the SAME EXPERIMENTS merely NAMED differently- in reference to psi research are ignored entirely- yet they show the same results- yet neither set of experiments claim any interpretation of the data- it's only the stigma of the paranormal that seems to make these findings ignored-

pretty shameful- especially from sciences that are quite incomplete and ignorant of the systems they study [namely psychology / neuroscience and the micro scale physics where quantum and classical dynamics meet]-

of course one must avoid 'quantum flapdoodle' like "what the bleep" like the plague- yet at the end of the day we must recognize that all the arguments against Psi are based on classical physics- which are unphysical approximations- and that the Schrödinger Equation shows that a quantum system is in a superposition until observed- but what is the ultimate nature of an observer ? I think that 'existential feedback' of trying to pin-down a single observer out of the complex interactions of a trillion synaptic connections abstractly interacting with the environment may offer more insights to Psi than anti-flapdoodlers will wish to admit!
Psi doesn't work in a classical world- but we DON'T LIVE in a classical world-