Best scientific evidence for Psi?

[ProfWag]

[Craig Browning]

[Arouet]

I understood it, and I'm brand new...

In any event, an online test for psi, while perhaps fun, is not exactly rigourous scientific protocol!

[ProfWag]

[NinjaPuppy]

[Craig Browning]

It's been years since I've played with all that stuff but I will see if I can track down the articles around the CSICOP situation.

Memory serving me right, the situation happened in the late 1970s and had something to do with Astrology but don't hold me to that.

[Arouet]

So what, no proponent has a scientific study supporting psi they want to discuss? Isn't this what you want skeptics to do? Look at the evidence for psi? Isn't that one of the reasons for this site?

[ProfWag]

[really?]

I miss Daz h/s was so much fun

[Paradox]

The only reason I'm willing to believe psi is a real phenomenon is from my own personal experiences. I generally don't believe internet stories or what other people tell me. I definitely have faith in my own sanity and senses at least. I've mentioned personal experiences on other forums (mistakenly) and when the materialist religionists couldn't provide an explaination for what I've experienced they resorted to some extremely viscious personal attacks or the 'nicer' "sceptics" would resort to trying to twist my own words around or by actually trying to get me to 'admit' I was lying or confused (something I'm sure many innocent defendants being accussed of a crime they know they didn't commit while having investigators pounding on them to admit their guilt would understand).

I'm sorry, no Internet links from me here at this time. I've mentioned a few minor incidents on this site and I'm welcome to a sceptical analysis of those experiences I've mentioned in a respectful way. I'm not making any money off of selling any books here from talking about these issues like many other people who've claimed they experienced ndes and other experiences have done. I've responded to questions asked by 'sceptics' on other forums (I'm not referring to anything on this site) that wanted people to talk about any 'paranormal' experiences they thought the user had or some similarly phrased question. Then when I would answer and my experiences couldn't be debunked by their 'more rational reasons' then the ancedotal evidence not holding any weight stuff or the James Randi/Michael Shermer lovefest party would start up. This would bring me to this response then: Why the heck would you ask such a question then?

I will try to find the link about a lifelong blind individual who had surgery done where that blind person was able to decribe some basic things when I get time and post it here.

[Arouet]

While I'll of course read any personal stories that you post, I usually try and avoid commenting on personal anecdotes. They are extremely difficult to assess and asking someone for an explanation is hardly a fair request given the limited ability of the person to investigate. The best you'll get are generalities - how could it be otherwise?

Yes, blind people have been known to have NDE's and to see in them. The issue of NDE's is very interesting and the subject of much exploration right now. A big study called the AWARE study is currently underway where they are looking very closely at what happens when we die, and particularly focusing on NDEs and whether they see things that could not have been sensed by ordinary means. Will be interesting to see the results.

[Paradox]

It was through multiple personal experiences that convinced me. I've seen too many critiques on the Scole Report for no infrared cameras being allowed to take any pictures so I won't use that one. Here is a link about experiments/results done in a laboratory setting involving mediumship:
http://www.windbridge.org/papers/Beisch ... 07vol3.pdf mediumship. Here is one about electronic communications with spirits: http://www.worlditc.org/ . Here is an interesting article written about Ian Stevenson being interviewed about his study/methods on reincarnation involving children: http://www.worlditc.org/ . That link is probally the best link that you can get about Stevenson's research WITHOUT purchasing his book on the subject.

Hard evidence? I'm not sure but it's something. I still believe Stevenson's research on reincarnation is the most convincing evidence for anything paranormal outside of maybe a handful of ndes/obes that I've read about. Maybe Ian Stevenson didn't directly prove reincarnation but from reading his book it does show that Occum's Razor actually favors reincarnation over any other possible explaination. You have to read the book.

[Paradox]

I screwed up there. Here is the link to the interview with Ian Stevenson: http://reluctant-messenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm .

[Arouet]

I've looked at some of Stevenson's stuff. I'm not sold. There is too much interpretation that needs to be done. Most of the time he's getting there years after the stories are all mapped out. And I think there is a great deal of wishful thinking going on - or at least no easy way to determine that its not going on. I don't doubt a lot of these people believe it - some might be making it up - but children are so suggestive that it is hard to separate out truth from wish fulfillment.