It is a remote viewing experiment conducted by Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff in the 1970s. If you would like to view the full 89 minute program it is linked below. Enjoy.
No one can take these "skeptics" seriously. They don't investigate the paranormal they just ridicule it from a great distance. A typical ignorant behaviour which no reasonable person interested in the truth is allowed to accept.
I should mention that I'm a skeptic too. But I won't reject true facts about parapsychology that have already been proven in several repeatable experiments. Remote Viewing is one of these proven facts.
Not an ad hominem attack. He was questioning how trustworthy the results of this dubious claim were. In that case, he is perfectly justified in bringing into question the character of someone who had a significant part in the orchestration of the "experiment."
Fuck the living shit out of you. People like you are a disgrace. You hide behind the banner of "science" but you're really insecure assholes who need to belittle others to feel like your life means something.
You've just betrayed yourself as a skep-dick for mentioning Randi in a serious manner. You've just been blocked. Thank you for showing you're overwhelming bias and antiscientific way of thinking.
i was in debate with one of those pseudo skeptics. but as you call them skep-dicks i think that sums up these folks rather nicely, hahhah,
anyway he couldnt produce any evidence for his claims and he couldn't produce any evidence in support of his master randi, i asked some pertinent questions about randi, the skep-dicks have no self awareness or understanding of true skepticism, that people have been taken in by randi and follow him uncritically screams of cultism.
Because the judge did not find the researchers and say "I know nothing about the experiment so let me judge it." That would set off red flags in any sensible person. The judge was the one who was found by the researchers, like in any experiment. Couldn't the people judging every experiment equally be lying? Well, I've just debunked all of science!
Pointing out that scientific standards are not upheld is not an ad hominem fallacy. And of course using the term "skep-dick" is rather hypocritical if you want to accuse people of ad hominem.
Without further context there is really not much to say about the episode.
The skep-dick in question, Marx (unsure of spelling), is not "pointing out that scientific standards are not upheld," if you read the commentary. The first point he raises is a blatant lie. As stated immediately before in the program, the judge was selected because he knew nothing about the experiment. To then go off and say the judge knew about the experiment already is a lie.
The second part he raised about Tart editing the papers is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Elvis edited them as long as they were edited correctly. Notice Marx doesn't bring up that they were edited incorrectly, instead he says that since Charles Tart is biased that automatically disqualifies his effort. Charles Tart addressed every criticizm Marx had against the original experiment and the results came out exactly the same as before.
Seeing that the results didn't change, Marx decided to make up some bullshit reason why the experiment is still wrong because he believes psi can't exist so any experiment that shows psi existing must be wrong.
Marx set the standard required for the experiment to be a success and when it was a success instead of doing the scientific thing of accepting the results he changed the definition of what a success is to show the experiment failed. This is a classic debunking maneuver and has no place in legitimate science.
Can someone bring me up to speed? What was this experiment about and what are you actually arguing?
Subher0 2 years ago
I answered these questions in four comments made in response to
janwillem1982 . I direct you to those comments (below) for your answers.
wpaxton 2 years ago
It's still not clear to me what experiment has been done and it only explains that someone is falsely discrediting the experiment.
Subher0 2 years ago
It is a remote viewing experiment conducted by Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff in the 1970s. If you would like to view the full 89 minute program it is linked below. Enjoy.
vids(dot)myspace(dot)com/index(dot)cfm?fuseaction=vids(dot)individual&videoid=34531657
wpaxton 2 years ago
No one can take these "skeptics" seriously. They don't investigate the paranormal they just ridicule it from a great distance. A typical ignorant behaviour which no reasonable person interested in the truth is allowed to accept.
I should mention that I'm a skeptic too. But I won't reject true facts about parapsychology that have already been proven in several repeatable experiments. Remote Viewing is one of these proven facts.
Biochips1 2 years ago
Not an ad hominem attack. He was questioning how trustworthy the results of this dubious claim were. In that case, he is perfectly justified in bringing into question the character of someone who had a significant part in the orchestration of the "experiment."
Ev3rliving 3 years ago
Fuck the living shit out of you. People like you are a disgrace. You hide behind the banner of "science" but you're really insecure assholes who need to belittle others to feel like your life means something.
wpaxton 3 years ago
The argument was based on Dr. Tart's honesty as a researcher. That is an ad hominem argument.
TurboSwami 2 years ago
thanks for this. Can you supply the rest of this episode of Horizon?
Thanks.
M
michaelduggan3 3 years ago
You've just betrayed yourself as a skep-dick for mentioning Randi in a serious manner. You've just been blocked. Thank you for showing you're overwhelming bias and antiscientific way of thinking.
wpaxton 3 years ago
i was in debate with one of those pseudo skeptics. but as you call them skep-dicks i think that sums up these folks rather nicely, hahhah,
anyway he couldnt produce any evidence for his claims and he couldn't produce any evidence in support of his master randi, i asked some pertinent questions about randi, the skep-dicks have no self awareness or understanding of true skepticism, that people have been taken in by randi and follow him uncritically screams of cultism.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
couldn't a person just say they knew nothing about a subject? How can you test someone on not knowing something?
Andjealous 3 years ago
Because the judge did not find the researchers and say "I know nothing about the experiment so let me judge it." That would set off red flags in any sensible person. The judge was the one who was found by the researchers, like in any experiment. Couldn't the people judging every experiment equally be lying? Well, I've just debunked all of science!
wpaxton 3 years ago
Pointing out that scientific standards are not upheld is not an ad hominem fallacy. And of course using the term "skep-dick" is rather hypocritical if you want to accuse people of ad hominem.
Without further context there is really not much to say about the episode.
janwillem1982 3 years ago
The skep-dick in question, Marx (unsure of spelling), is not "pointing out that scientific standards are not upheld," if you read the commentary. The first point he raises is a blatant lie. As stated immediately before in the program, the judge was selected because he knew nothing about the experiment. To then go off and say the judge knew about the experiment already is a lie.
wpaxton 3 years ago
The second part he raised about Tart editing the papers is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Elvis edited them as long as they were edited correctly. Notice Marx doesn't bring up that they were edited incorrectly, instead he says that since Charles Tart is biased that automatically disqualifies his effort. Charles Tart addressed every criticizm Marx had against the original experiment and the results came out exactly the same as before.
wpaxton 3 years ago
Seeing that the results didn't change, Marx decided to make up some bullshit reason why the experiment is still wrong because he believes psi can't exist so any experiment that shows psi existing must be wrong.
wpaxton 3 years ago
Marx set the standard required for the experiment to be a success and when it was a success instead of doing the scientific thing of accepting the results he changed the definition of what a success is to show the experiment failed. This is a classic debunking maneuver and has no place in legitimate science.
wpaxton 3 years ago
ah....a GEM!!
odin422 3 years ago