Discuss General Topics.
The one thing you may notice is that paranormal experiments don't plainly correlate well with personal experiences. What I saying is if you peruse paranormal message boards you'll come away with distinct conclusions that these personal paranormal experiences are as plain as the nose on your face. Yet when put to the test many tests have to be performed to find something that appears to stand out above statistical noise. To date as far as I know there is not one experiment or demonstration that clearly without reservations shows something paranormal. It's always fuzzy.
@ ciscop, I said experiences contribute to whether one BELIEVES. It has nothing to do with science or proof. Read what people say.
@ really? - Yes, there are definitely those tests. The problem is, parapsychologists don't like to run them because only people who are really good at consciously harnessing psychic abilities can perform at that level, on demand. That makes them hard to find, hard to develop a working definition, hard to separate from the kooks. And after all that, because it only works with *certain* people, all the skeptics immediately think they are a fraud.
In other words, we tried that already. That's why we use the scientific method. It's fuzzy, but it's more replicable. MOST scientific tests are fuzzy. That's why we have statistical methods and graphs.
Hey, you there. Yes, you. Read more journal articles.
If what I say sounds like the teacher from Charlie Brown (Wah wahh woohh wuh waah), then you should try college. It's fun, and only costs you your soul and several tens of thousands of dollars.
“I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven“ - Richard Wiseman
Let's make directional hypotheses, test them repeatedly, replicate experiments, and publish results! Yay, science!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests