Discussions about Psychics and Psychic Phenomena, Extra Sensory Perception, Telepathy, Psi, Clairvoyancy, 6th Sense, Psychokinesis, etc.
If I may chime in, how's this for an example of an extraordinary claim:
In 1950, if a person claimed that they could run a mile in less than 4 minutes, that would have been an extraordinary claim. If Roger Banister and Uri Geller just TOLD us that he could do it, that would probably NOT have met the evidence needed to support the extraordinary claim. It would have required a stop-watch and at least 2 "uninterested" people to verify it's extraordinary achievement.
I don't know, maybe?
I think Winston has dealt with this common pseudoskeptical fallacy
of extraordinary claims very well in the treatise. There is no such thing
in science as an exordinary claim, because what is ordinary in science is
basically what is the current understanding of the world. Heavier than air
objects flying was extraordinary before the Wright brothers proved it was
possible and since heavier-than-air objects flying is ordinary. Faster than
sound travel was extraordinary before the advent of supersonic travel, since
it is ordinary.
In neither case was a special(double) standard of science required to establish the
extrordinary conclusion. The extraordinary became ordinary, just as previous ordinary
things went from ordinary to extraordinary.
Paranormal sciences are no different. As long as they are using proper scientific methdology
in order to their research, they are proper science and their results are just as valid as any
other scientific investigation. Remote viewing has been proven by the standards of science.
Move on and embrace it.
A blue elephant is no more extraordinary than a grey elephant. That is like the
argument all swans are white, simply because we have only ever seen white swans,
until we see a black a swan and it goes against the rule. The existence of a blue
elephant requires as much evidence as the existence of a grey elephant requires
to be established.
The scientific method is neutral to all claims. There are no value judgements in it
of "ordinary" and "extraordinary" You collect data(method) and you analyse the results(results),
and then you explain the results with the best hypothesis(conclusion). In the remote viewing
experiments the same method is used. You collect data, in this case remote viewers attempting
to identify a target by giving information on the target (blue, underwater, metal, machine, cold, oblong = submarine)
You analyse the results and show that the statistical liklihood of you getting the target correct, say 1 in a million
and you come up with the best hypothesis to explain it: the target was identified through ESP.
And there you go. You're done. You've proven ESP exists and you can move on. These experiments are decades
old now and if we were living in a proper rational world, ESP should have been mainstream fact today. I mean
seriously move on. Accept ESP exists .
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests