Using "text-to-speech" anonymously to conduct a smear campaign against someone seriously damages your credibility, and it's also quite notable that Google didn't return any site where that article was published. (I expect you might post it somewhere now that I've written that).
@technowey I dont care if Wiseman is your pin up poster boy. Bulk of the video was written by real live peer reviewed scientists. And you just cant drive Google real good. Your insistence about some one you claim not to know, who must surely be without sin, because your elaborate cobbled together fantasy says so is confabulation most amusing. So there is never bad egg in any group, thats your "guess" Not Wiseman anyway, who you dont even know. Shot yourself in the foot there. Game over LOL
@kimbo99 1. I wrote, "my guess". Since you apparently aren't aware what a "guess" is, it;s not a claim.
My comments are because making a public attack is bad form, even when true, but in this case, there is absolutely no corroborating evidence because you leave out important details and because there is no corroborating news story that I have been able to find. Rather than give a source, you now attack me. As I made clear, I don't know Richard Wiseman, but I do recognize a hatchet job.
@technowey Wisdom is knowing when to stop pursuing something. Its kinda obvious you can't read real good.
Important details are included but you just cant read them. Wiseman is the hatchet man ad his behaviour is described by named acknowledged commentators in the video. You had best cease commenting here.
Give the name of the organization, the names of who booted him (not one name) and exactly what is meant by 29 hits, otherwise, your claims mean nothing to me. All of that has relevance to your claim. None of that is in the story.
I am tempted to try to contact Richard Wiseman to find out his side of the story.
@technowey So here you have, in a few entries destroyed your own credibility with your house of cards, defending your hero you don't know. " I do believe someone is lying." Its OK. Pseudoskeptics do that a lot. Its necessary And its quite OK, quite OK to adore someone.
My 'guess' is that Richard Wiseman called the paranormal researchers for their bad practices and they kicked him out. Real scientists don't conduct such smear attacks against other scientists as done in this video, they let the published peer-reviewed articles speak for themselves.
I don't know Richard Wiseman at all. He could have acted badly, but I doubt very much he did because your video is exactly the type of smear attack I would expect if the scenario I described above was the case.
@technowey" I don't know Richard Wiseman at all. He could have acted badly, but I doubt very much he did because your video is exactly the type of smear attack I would expect if the scenario I described above was the case." An elaborate story YOU HAVE JUST MADE UP BY YOUR OWN WRITTEN ADMISSION. YOUR OWN FANTASY.House of cards you have built there. And you pretend not to know him.......LOL So why do you care about this gay rights campaigner? Liar Liar pants on fire !
Richard Wiseman is NOT trying to keep the public ignorant of any research, whether for or against psychic research. He's trying to make people aware of alternate explanations for experimental phenomenon and, in some cases, of flaws in some research.
Some paranormal researchers attack those who deny their claims. Real researchers don't attack opponents, they cite the actual research. Psychic researchers have no valid research to cite - and yes, I've read some psychic research...
@technowey" Psychic researchers have no valid research to cite - and yes, I've read some psychic research.." FALSE You have read a few PSEUDOSKEPTICS and you are here practising your traditional denialism. Wiseman was EXPELLED from a science peer group because of his continued dishonesty.He was declared a non scientist, an imposter. Now deny all that.( denialism, contrarianism, so pskep)
@kimbo99 - You wrote: "FALSE You have read a few PSEUDOSKEPTICS". This is an irrational response to my statement. A rational response would be, "What research have you read?" I couldn't list it all here though even if you asked.
I have not heard of Richard Wiseman being expelled from anything, but even if that were true, it wouldn't lend credence to any other specific extraordinary claims, not would it necessarily refute anything he's asserted. Ad-hominem is not an argument for anything.
@technowey " Ad-hominem is not an argument for anything" Well said, but its mirror image is equally unbalanced and irrational and unscientiific and indadmissable because its only a personal affection. Its called unjustified out of control admiration, unjustified heroisation. Perhaps groupie adulation..And its just as unhinged as ad hominem. And you appear too be doing just that.
By the way, I searched the string, "Richard Wisemen, might first be described as" with Google. That's the first part of the first sentence in the article in the video. I got zero hits! Who wrote that article and where was it first published?
The text under the video claims he was "sacked from his own professional association". His "own" association? What association are you referring to?
Your comment in the article about "code for lying" doesn't seem like lying to me.
@technowey Sacked from his own scientific peer review group. True. And ho ho you measure the world with a dice? Dice rules everything? You wake in the morning and throw a dice to see if it was an accident you woke? Another 10 throws to see if you should get out of bed? Whats for breakfast- throw the dice? LOL
"code for lying" doesn't seem like lying to me" Heroes cant lie, RIGHT?
@kimbo99 - Kimbo, when did I ever suggest I would roll dice to determine anything. Clearly I was referring to 'coincidence' as a 'possible' explanation for 'some' phenomenon that has been attributed to paranormal causes.
Again, I am unable to find the article in the video with Google. Where was it first published? I also haven't been able corroborate most of the claims you make.
For example, claiming 29 hits out of 30 isn't amazing without knowing the claims and the context for those claims
@kimbo99 - The disagreement regards statistical results. If you roll a dice 10 times in a row, and it comes up 6 every time, either the dice is stacked, it's a rare statistical coincidence, or it's something extraordinary, i.e. paranormal. This is the disagreement. To call it lying is disingenuous.
So, what has the "Society for Psychical Research" found anyway? (I found that with Google - it's apparently the society he was kicked off of - if I can believe that article I found).
@technowey ou are an Apologist for a confrmed liar and fraud ejected from the halls of science by his peers. Your avid apology suggests you have similar problems with personal dishonesty just like your hero Wiseman. Now we test YOU and YOUR honesty. Video coming. Hee Hee
CSICOP opposes psychic research and research into the effects of political corruption because continuing to do so keeps presenting them with mainstream media status, where they want to belong.
Now that CSICOP´s reputation has gone the way of Area 51´s reputation as a military base, there is no wonder so few people respect CSICOP.
Very good! I've just finished reviewing Prof Richard Wiseman's new book "Paranormality". I'm particularly interested in the first part of the video; your ideas about WHY there is this backlash against belief in the Paranormal like Life-After-Death and PSI. It's a field of study I'm exploring myself and you've said in your own words a lot of things I've wondered too. I'll email you the review.
Using "text-to-speech" anonymously to conduct a smear campaign against someone seriously damages your credibility, and it's also quite notable that Google didn't return any site where that article was published. (I expect you might post it somewhere now that I've written that).
I do believe that someone is lying.
I 'can' tell who is lying.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey I dont care if Wiseman is your pin up poster boy. Bulk of the video was written by real live peer reviewed scientists. And you just cant drive Google real good. Your insistence about some one you claim not to know, who must surely be without sin, because your elaborate cobbled together fantasy says so is confabulation most amusing. So there is never bad egg in any group, thats your "guess" Not Wiseman anyway, who you dont even know. Shot yourself in the foot there. Game over LOL
kimbo99 6 months ago
@kimbo99 1. I wrote, "my guess". Since you apparently aren't aware what a "guess" is, it;s not a claim.
My comments are because making a public attack is bad form, even when true, but in this case, there is absolutely no corroborating evidence because you leave out important details and because there is no corroborating news story that I have been able to find. Rather than give a source, you now attack me. As I made clear, I don't know Richard Wiseman, but I do recognize a hatchet job.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey Wisdom is knowing when to stop pursuing something. Its kinda obvious you can't read real good.
Important details are included but you just cant read them. Wiseman is the hatchet man ad his behaviour is described by named acknowledged commentators in the video. You had best cease commenting here.
kimbo99 6 months ago
Give the name of the organization, the names of who booted him (not one name) and exactly what is meant by 29 hits, otherwise, your claims mean nothing to me. All of that has relevance to your claim. None of that is in the story.
I am tempted to try to contact Richard Wiseman to find out his side of the story.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey So here you have, in a few entries destroyed your own credibility with your house of cards, defending your hero you don't know. " I do believe someone is lying." Its OK. Pseudoskeptics do that a lot. Its necessary And its quite OK, quite OK to adore someone.
kimbo99 6 months ago
My 'guess' is that Richard Wiseman called the paranormal researchers for their bad practices and they kicked him out. Real scientists don't conduct such smear attacks against other scientists as done in this video, they let the published peer-reviewed articles speak for themselves.
I don't know Richard Wiseman at all. He could have acted badly, but I doubt very much he did because your video is exactly the type of smear attack I would expect if the scenario I described above was the case.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey" I don't know Richard Wiseman at all. He could have acted badly, but I doubt very much he did because your video is exactly the type of smear attack I would expect if the scenario I described above was the case." An elaborate story YOU HAVE JUST MADE UP BY YOUR OWN WRITTEN ADMISSION. YOUR OWN FANTASY.House of cards you have built there. And you pretend not to know him.......LOL So why do you care about this gay rights campaigner? Liar Liar pants on fire !
kimbo99 6 months ago
Richard Wiseman is NOT trying to keep the public ignorant of any research, whether for or against psychic research. He's trying to make people aware of alternate explanations for experimental phenomenon and, in some cases, of flaws in some research.
Some paranormal researchers attack those who deny their claims. Real researchers don't attack opponents, they cite the actual research. Psychic researchers have no valid research to cite - and yes, I've read some psychic research...
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey" Psychic researchers have no valid research to cite - and yes, I've read some psychic research.." FALSE You have read a few PSEUDOSKEPTICS and you are here practising your traditional denialism. Wiseman was EXPELLED from a science peer group because of his continued dishonesty.He was declared a non scientist, an imposter. Now deny all that.( denialism, contrarianism, so pskep)
kimbo99 6 months ago
@kimbo99 - You wrote: "FALSE You have read a few PSEUDOSKEPTICS". This is an irrational response to my statement. A rational response would be, "What research have you read?" I couldn't list it all here though even if you asked.
I have not heard of Richard Wiseman being expelled from anything, but even if that were true, it wouldn't lend credence to any other specific extraordinary claims, not would it necessarily refute anything he's asserted. Ad-hominem is not an argument for anything.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey " Ad-hominem is not an argument for anything" Well said, but its mirror image is equally unbalanced and irrational and unscientiific and indadmissable because its only a personal affection. Its called unjustified out of control admiration, unjustified heroisation. Perhaps groupie adulation..And its just as unhinged as ad hominem. And you appear too be doing just that.
kimbo99 6 months ago
By the way, I searched the string, "Richard Wisemen, might first be described as" with Google. That's the first part of the first sentence in the article in the video. I got zero hits! Who wrote that article and where was it first published?
The text under the video claims he was "sacked from his own professional association". His "own" association? What association are you referring to?
Your comment in the article about "code for lying" doesn't seem like lying to me.
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey Sacked from his own scientific peer review group. True. And ho ho you measure the world with a dice? Dice rules everything? You wake in the morning and throw a dice to see if it was an accident you woke? Another 10 throws to see if you should get out of bed? Whats for breakfast- throw the dice? LOL
"code for lying" doesn't seem like lying to me" Heroes cant lie, RIGHT?
kimbo99 6 months ago
@kimbo99 - Kimbo, when did I ever suggest I would roll dice to determine anything. Clearly I was referring to 'coincidence' as a 'possible' explanation for 'some' phenomenon that has been attributed to paranormal causes.
Again, I am unable to find the article in the video with Google. Where was it first published? I also haven't been able corroborate most of the claims you make.
For example, claiming 29 hits out of 30 isn't amazing without knowing the claims and the context for those claims
technowey 6 months ago
@kimbo99 - The disagreement regards statistical results. If you roll a dice 10 times in a row, and it comes up 6 every time, either the dice is stacked, it's a rare statistical coincidence, or it's something extraordinary, i.e. paranormal. This is the disagreement. To call it lying is disingenuous.
So, what has the "Society for Psychical Research" found anyway? (I found that with Google - it's apparently the society he was kicked off of - if I can believe that article I found).
technowey 6 months ago
@technowey ou are an Apologist for a confrmed liar and fraud ejected from the halls of science by his peers. Your avid apology suggests you have similar problems with personal dishonesty just like your hero Wiseman. Now we test YOU and YOUR honesty. Video coming. Hee Hee
kimbo99 6 months ago
CSICOP opposes psychic research and research into the effects of political corruption because continuing to do so keeps presenting them with mainstream media status, where they want to belong.
Now that CSICOP´s reputation has gone the way of Area 51´s reputation as a military base, there is no wonder so few people respect CSICOP.
mzedong001 7 months ago
CSICOP is all about money and supporting the State.
They don´t care one bit about the truth - all they care about is preaching lies and more lies and profiting from it.
mzedong001 7 months ago
Very good! I've just finished reviewing Prof Richard Wiseman's new book "Paranormality". I'm particularly interested in the first part of the video; your ideas about WHY there is this backlash against belief in the Paranormal like Life-After-Death and PSI. It's a field of study I'm exploring myself and you've said in your own words a lot of things I've wondered too. I'll email you the review.
benthejrporter 9 months ago