|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic, alt.paranormal
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
From: war...@worlds.com (Warren Burstein)
Date: 20 Aug 91 23:13:11 GMT
Local: Tues, Aug 20 1991 6:13 pm
Subject: Re: definition of parapsychology
sdb%hotmo...@uunet.uu.net (Scott Ballantyne) writes: Well put. In fact, psi researchers should prevent skeptics from >In article <1991Aug16.115459.2...@verifone.com> ed...@verifone.com >writes: > In any case, more scientific research, and more _careful and > thoughtful_ scientific research is needed. >So the `care' in the scientific research is the need to eliminate >doubters from the loop? Probably a good idea to eliminate any serious >criticisms of experimental protocols too, since such criticisms `have >been shown to interfere' with PSI? reading their papers, as this has been shown to produce flaws in their expermental method. Paranormal means will not suffice, as these don't work on skeptics (Next time Randi is on TV, invite a skeptic over and your spoons will stay unbent). Do you think we could shut down faith healers if we all watch their TV shows and doubt hard enough? Or does the lack of effect from the presence of skeptics in the audience demonstrate that it is not a paranormal effect that is being observed? I'll leave you with this signature You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||