Nostradamus wrote:This is a misleading statement in a way NinjaPuppy. You are asking the scientists to prove a universal negative. You can't prove that psi does not exist. What is stated is that the evidence for psi does not exist. After many experiments the conclusion is that it does not. But the conclusion is not proof, it is an inference.
In what way is my statement misleading? Yes, you can't prove a negative. That is the skeptic creedo. But I'm not asking that a negative be proven, . I merely asked that the reader to "think about the question for a moment".
Is it true that there are physical things on this earth that science can not explain? Things that can be visually seen, touched and in fact be fully tested under proper laboratory conditions? Yes.
ND wrote:Here you say that scientists do not trust their subjective senses and turn to objective measurements. That is true. There is importance in using an objective measurement system. It's a way to allow someone else to replicate the results. But, the person is often an important part of the loop. In medical studies the identification of the structures observed in a microscope is difficult. A person states yes or no to an observed object. It is or is not something they are interested in studying. For example, is the cell a neuron or glial cell. They look a bit different. Writing a computer program that can successfully differentiate the two is difficult (as in it isn't done). So taking a person completely out of the measurement loop is not really done.
Agree. I believe that this is a very strong reason why there has been very little studied lately about things paranormal:
QUOTE TAKEN FROM ABOVE COMMENT wrote:It is or is not something they are interested in studying.
That's fine too. There are more important issues that need to be addressed such as medical cures and better fuel options and let's just say improving life on the planet for humans rather than me list a bunch of stuff here. Do you agree with me so far?
Researching why little Johnny keeps seeing grandma in his bedroom closet probably won't turn up grant money or funding quite as well as breeding a square tomato that will ship better, even if it tastes like crap. (the tomato, not grandma)
So how can psi be detected in the lab? It can be done in the lab if the results can be reduced a decidable question. I mentioned to Daz Smith that the problem with remote viewing was leaving the question up to others to decide. My suggestion was to have the viewer decide. He agreed that was the way to do it scientifically, but he said his methodology was to leave the answer up to the client. Now this agreement on our parts does not mean that we chose a good idea. What it really suggests is that it is likely that a method can be worked out that makes the issue more of a yes-no decision.