I'm with you on the whole subject: I don't believe PSI exists, but I also believe that it shouldn't be dismissed without closer examination, that a huge lot of the skeptics out there don't even take the time to check the data or to make valid arguments and that a lot of the public just agrees with them without examining their work.
Can you give me references of articles that tend to show psi is real (or at least that there's smtg "traditional science" can't explain)? What i'd like to have is references of articles that have been published in mainstream "serious" magazines (Nature, Scientific American...). Thanks you.
What I can reference is the Delgado-Romero and Howard paper "(2005). Finding and Correcting Flawed
Research Literatures. THE HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGIST, 33(4), 293303." I'll private message you with an online link to the article and the journal so you can read the rest of the articles there. This is a relatively mainstream, skeptical, peer-reviewed journal. It is worth mentioning that the replication was done by meta-analysis and they considered the cause of it to be Meehl's crud factor.
However, given the fact that I couldn't see any way as to how they came up with the secondary hypothesis they tested (namely that 1 in 4 people should be psychic, when the 25 percent applied to chance expectation with target material), I'm still looking into this aspect with a grain of salt. I'm not saying this is proof, but it is a replication (albeit by meta-analysis), by skeptical independent sources. Between you and me, I strongly suspect that if psi exists, it eventually will be explained
(cont) by science. Basically because of this replication, I figure that it is probably worth continuing to investigate, tightening protocols to remove the possibility of Meehl's crud factor, (or seeing if that really is a likely artifact) and also seeing if we can figure out why this replication happened by meta-analysis rather than from study to study. (In short, what the cause is.)
I would also recommend googling Meehl's crud factor. Part of the issue covered in this paper is something of a debate going on pertaining to psych research in general, namely, whether conventional hypothesis and significance testing techniques are the correct way to statistically assess results in behavioral research.
Well I personally am glad we have people like this on Earth. He is open minded yet skeptical as well and that is how we all should be. He is careful and doesn't just jump at something because he wants to believe in it soo bad. That is what I do and I need people like this to bring me down to Earth and relook everything. I agree with him, we need to keep doing more and more research! If what Radin says is true, then we will just prove his point stronger and stronger.
Most of ESP is only subjective to the first person. I've first hand experience of clairvoyance being real...but, of course, I cannot prove it to anyone. Vist a few readers at the same time and see if their visions tally is one way.
Have you read Radin's books,"The Conscious Universe" and "Entangled Minds"? There has already been quite a lot of "research." Time to start coming up with explanations, using the principles of "string theory."
People arguing with Radin about whether or not there is such a thing as "psi" are like people telling Sir Francis Drake he will need more proof that the world is not really flat, besides just sailing around it!
As for why psychologists are the least open to "psi," they are taught>>>
I've watched all of Radin's videos and read his work. Again, I am highly impressed by the research Radin and his colleagues have conducted, and am almost convinced of its existence. That being said, there is still one last variable that needs to be dealt with, which is replication from study to study as opposed to from meta-analysis to meta-analysis in some areas. Also, with a few exceptions, the other issue is the motivational bias problem plaguing all parapsych research, both skeptical and
(cont) proponent. Experimenter effects, psi or otherwise, are the one issue needing serious research by both proponents and skeptics in this field. Once that variable/issue has been addressed, then I will be convinced one hundred percent. Until then, I'm an extremely open-minded skeptic, I consider the evidence to be quite compellng, but needs quite a bit more research before any firm conclusions can be drawn yet. That being said, I agree with you that string theory and quantum hypotheses
The "Catch 22" with testing "psi" phenomena is that "skepticism" blocks positive results by virtue of the "skeptic's" own subconscious P.K. influence on the results. If you've read Radin's books, then you know about the numerous instances in which some researchers produced results BELOW CHANCE PROBABILITY.
As if some hidden factor is preventing "normal" chance probability.
Someone like the "Amazing Randi" will never witness a "true" psi event.Negative expectations produce negative results.
That's why I have a couple of methods for getting around that. One, have skeptics outnumbered by believers during any psi experiment to negate their pk. Two, keep the skeptic observing, but out of sight, so the subject never knows he is being tested by a skeptic and the motivational bias issue is dealt with. Three, test it multiple times, both with skeptics and believers, and randomize the times as to which are testing it, and look for significance with the believers, while the skeptics stay
(cont) at chance. If such an effect is found, you have proof of psi, and that skepticism blocks it. Ironically, I actually emailed Randi about modifying his test claims to properly deal with this since his current approach was logically flawed, and I pointed out this out as a fellow skeptic trying to help him make his challenge immune to criticism. He simply blew me off, which was odd, as I thought he would honestly welcome more effective solutions to this problem.
The most grotesque aspect of this paradox is the way that religions have latched onto the realization that in order to maximize "positive results," no disenting opinion can be tolerated. Religions are a cultural evolution of Man's intuitive understanding of psi effects--rooted in the ancient shamanic practices. >>>>
>>>> But as they became all-powerful social institutions, the religious intolerance of disbelief became lethal. Ironically, this led to the "Age of Reason" backlash which now causes skepticism of what should be a natural part of being human.Everyone possesses an intrinsic ability to perform psi as much as an ability to learn language or play music.
Unfortunately, it is often suppressed by social "norms." >>>>>>
>>>>> The key to psi lies in the physical structure of the brain itself and the fact that the same atoms that were created and "entangled" in supernovae comprise both the brain's neurons and the surrounding physical world.Psi is no more "supernatural" or "sacred" than speech,digestion or procreation.Once humanity gets a handle on this,we will all get along a lot more peacefully and productively.But that abyss between religious extremism and ultra-materialistic skeptics makes this quite a task.
Look after 130 years of research, trying to DISPROVE that Psi exists and the scientists have failed. Read Radin's book, Entangeled Minds for further clarification. BTW...I am MEDIUM and a reader!
Actually, the issue is not trying to disprove psi, but that other explanations are more likely than the psi hypothesis to account for the anomalies. On another note, I have read entangled minds, and I follow both Dean Radin and Ray Hyman both in order to maintain a balanced view on this subject. The state of the evidence FOR the psi hypothesis, is compelling at this point, and worthy of further research. However, there are a couple of issues that need to be addressed first before said evidence
(cont) becomes convincing. I'm actually conducting an experiment on one of those issues to have it addressed and am working with a few other parapsychologists to take care of it.
I would suggest that if you told this to the Rhine's in NC, and the Universiteit in Eindhoven and the group in Scotland, they would laugh you off the face of the earth. There has been in excess of 150 years of research...with no explanations for the successes that all of these institutions have had. These institutions and many others including the Russians...
also aiki i heard there is a university in scotland edinburgh where skeptics do testing can you look into that and see if its true and what their data is?
I'll give it a check. Who knows? Perhaps it might give some crucial insights in the so called skeptic suppression effect (I'm just referring to it as this because it is unknown if it is psi, or just psychological.)
I'm with you on the whole subject: I don't believe PSI exists, but I also believe that it shouldn't be dismissed without closer examination, that a huge lot of the skeptics out there don't even take the time to check the data or to make valid arguments and that a lot of the public just agrees with them without examining their work.
ThisOneIsTaken 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you're such a fag
ILIKESFLAN 2 years ago
Can you give me references of articles that tend to show psi is real (or at least that there's smtg "traditional science" can't explain)? What i'd like to have is references of articles that have been published in mainstream "serious" magazines (Nature, Scientific American...). Thanks you.
scopein79 2 years ago
What I can reference is the Delgado-Romero and Howard paper "(2005). Finding and Correcting Flawed
Research Literatures. THE HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGIST, 33(4), 293303." I'll private message you with an online link to the article and the journal so you can read the rest of the articles there. This is a relatively mainstream, skeptical, peer-reviewed journal. It is worth mentioning that the replication was done by meta-analysis and they considered the cause of it to be Meehl's crud factor.
aikiboy2 2 years ago
However, given the fact that I couldn't see any way as to how they came up with the secondary hypothesis they tested (namely that 1 in 4 people should be psychic, when the 25 percent applied to chance expectation with target material), I'm still looking into this aspect with a grain of salt. I'm not saying this is proof, but it is a replication (albeit by meta-analysis), by skeptical independent sources. Between you and me, I strongly suspect that if psi exists, it eventually will be explained
aikiboy2 2 years ago
(cont) by science. Basically because of this replication, I figure that it is probably worth continuing to investigate, tightening protocols to remove the possibility of Meehl's crud factor, (or seeing if that really is a likely artifact) and also seeing if we can figure out why this replication happened by meta-analysis rather than from study to study. (In short, what the cause is.)
aikiboy2 2 years ago
I would also recommend googling Meehl's crud factor. Part of the issue covered in this paper is something of a debate going on pertaining to psych research in general, namely, whether conventional hypothesis and significance testing techniques are the correct way to statistically assess results in behavioral research.
aikiboy2 2 years ago
Well I personally am glad we have people like this on Earth. He is open minded yet skeptical as well and that is how we all should be. He is careful and doesn't just jump at something because he wants to believe in it soo bad. That is what I do and I need people like this to bring me down to Earth and relook everything. I agree with him, we need to keep doing more and more research! If what Radin says is true, then we will just prove his point stronger and stronger.
foreverago02 3 years ago
Thank you for your anwsers! I'll read this article and do a little research on Meehl's crude factor.
When you say that if psi exists it'll eventually be explained by science, do you mean a "new" science or "traditionnal" science?
(Sorry for my bad english: english is only my second language...)
scopein79 2 years ago
I have a question: when are you gonna leave your mom's basement and start living life on your own?
Aersis32 3 years ago
skepticsdictionary redid there article on parapsychology, another survery showed 30 psychologists believe, 30 are so so, 30 are for it.
TheDevilsAdvocate55 3 years ago
hello.like your vids.peace from belgium
ayadan 3 years ago
Most of ESP is only subjective to the first person. I've first hand experience of clairvoyance being real...but, of course, I cannot prove it to anyone. Vist a few readers at the same time and see if their visions tally is one way.
Markisagoodboy 3 years ago
Have you read Radin's books,"The Conscious Universe" and "Entangled Minds"? There has already been quite a lot of "research." Time to start coming up with explanations, using the principles of "string theory."
People arguing with Radin about whether or not there is such a thing as "psi" are like people telling Sir Francis Drake he will need more proof that the world is not really flat, besides just sailing around it!
As for why psychologists are the least open to "psi," they are taught>>>
TheBaby8myDingo 3 years ago
>>>>> to believe that belief in "psi" is a sign of mental illness!!!!!!!!!!
Kind of risky to admit to your professional peers that you are exhibiting symptoms of mental illness!!!!!!!!
See Radin's other video about "Taboos in Science."
TheBaby8myDingo 3 years ago
I've watched all of Radin's videos and read his work. Again, I am highly impressed by the research Radin and his colleagues have conducted, and am almost convinced of its existence. That being said, there is still one last variable that needs to be dealt with, which is replication from study to study as opposed to from meta-analysis to meta-analysis in some areas. Also, with a few exceptions, the other issue is the motivational bias problem plaguing all parapsych research, both skeptical and
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
(cont) proponent. Experimenter effects, psi or otherwise, are the one issue needing serious research by both proponents and skeptics in this field. Once that variable/issue has been addressed, then I will be convinced one hundred percent. Until then, I'm an extremely open-minded skeptic, I consider the evidence to be quite compellng, but needs quite a bit more research before any firm conclusions can be drawn yet. That being said, I agree with you that string theory and quantum hypotheses
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
The "Catch 22" with testing "psi" phenomena is that "skepticism" blocks positive results by virtue of the "skeptic's" own subconscious P.K. influence on the results. If you've read Radin's books, then you know about the numerous instances in which some researchers produced results BELOW CHANCE PROBABILITY.
As if some hidden factor is preventing "normal" chance probability.
Someone like the "Amazing Randi" will never witness a "true" psi event.Negative expectations produce negative results.
TeaWrecksGodzilla 3 years ago
That's why I have a couple of methods for getting around that. One, have skeptics outnumbered by believers during any psi experiment to negate their pk. Two, keep the skeptic observing, but out of sight, so the subject never knows he is being tested by a skeptic and the motivational bias issue is dealt with. Three, test it multiple times, both with skeptics and believers, and randomize the times as to which are testing it, and look for significance with the believers, while the skeptics stay
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
(cont) at chance. If such an effect is found, you have proof of psi, and that skepticism blocks it. Ironically, I actually emailed Randi about modifying his test claims to properly deal with this since his current approach was logically flawed, and I pointed out this out as a fellow skeptic trying to help him make his challenge immune to criticism. He simply blew me off, which was odd, as I thought he would honestly welcome more effective solutions to this problem.
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
Read "The World of Ted Serios" and "PK Man."
It appears that "Randi" has a habit of weaseling out of any serious challenges.
He is as convinced of the infallibility of his "position" as the Pope. Not a serious "scientist" at all.
TeaWrecksGodzilla 3 years ago 2
The most grotesque aspect of this paradox is the way that religions have latched onto the realization that in order to maximize "positive results," no disenting opinion can be tolerated. Religions are a cultural evolution of Man's intuitive understanding of psi effects--rooted in the ancient shamanic practices. >>>>
TeaWrecksGodzilla 3 years ago
>>>> But as they became all-powerful social institutions, the religious intolerance of disbelief became lethal. Ironically, this led to the "Age of Reason" backlash which now causes skepticism of what should be a natural part of being human.Everyone possesses an intrinsic ability to perform psi as much as an ability to learn language or play music.
Unfortunately, it is often suppressed by social "norms." >>>>>>
TeaWrecksGodzilla 3 years ago
>>>>> The key to psi lies in the physical structure of the brain itself and the fact that the same atoms that were created and "entangled" in supernovae comprise both the brain's neurons and the surrounding physical world.Psi is no more "supernatural" or "sacred" than speech,digestion or procreation.Once humanity gets a handle on this,we will all get along a lot more peacefully and productively.But that abyss between religious extremism and ultra-materialistic skeptics makes this quite a task.
TeaWrecksGodzilla 3 years ago
Look after 130 years of research, trying to DISPROVE that Psi exists and the scientists have failed. Read Radin's book, Entangeled Minds for further clarification. BTW...I am MEDIUM and a reader!
Threadsi 3 years ago
Actually, the issue is not trying to disprove psi, but that other explanations are more likely than the psi hypothesis to account for the anomalies. On another note, I have read entangled minds, and I follow both Dean Radin and Ray Hyman both in order to maintain a balanced view on this subject. The state of the evidence FOR the psi hypothesis, is compelling at this point, and worthy of further research. However, there are a couple of issues that need to be addressed first before said evidence
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
(cont) becomes convincing. I'm actually conducting an experiment on one of those issues to have it addressed and am working with a few other parapsychologists to take care of it.
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
I would suggest that if you told this to the Rhine's in NC, and the Universiteit in Eindhoven and the group in Scotland, they would laugh you off the face of the earth. There has been in excess of 150 years of research...with no explanations for the successes that all of these institutions have had. These institutions and many others including the Russians...
Threadsi 3 years ago
Read Dr Carl Jung's ideas on synchronicity...and don't put so much faith on machines and stats...b/c that may not be the way the universe works.
tychored 3 years ago
also aiki i heard there is a university in scotland edinburgh where skeptics do testing can you look into that and see if its true and what their data is?
mindfreak419666 4 years ago
I'll give it a check. Who knows? Perhaps it might give some crucial insights in the so called skeptic suppression effect (I'm just referring to it as this because it is unknown if it is psi, or just psychological.)
aikiboy1111111 4 years ago
good vid !
mindfreak419666 4 years ago