Dean Radin
Less there than appears. See, for example:
The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin - Book Review - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
Radin has made a nice career out of outlandish (but entertaining) claims that fall apart under examination. His "paper" on memory effects in water is a classic.
Less there than appears. See, for example:
The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin - Book Review - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
Radin has made a nice career out of outlandish (but entertaining) claims that fall apart under examination. His "paper" on memory effects in water is a classic.
All this talk about what is audible (in this thread and others) got me thinking that maybe there was a different type of test that could be performed.
Hook up a brainwave monitor to the subjects doing the test
It should be possible to get a baseline using known audible variations. It would then be very interesting to see what part of the brain reacted when listening to things that may or may not be considered to be beyond the threshold of audibility.
Even more interesting would be to do the same for Double blind and sighted tests
Tony.
Hook up a brainwave monitor to the subjects doing the test
It should be possible to get a baseline using known audible variations. It would then be very interesting to see what part of the brain reacted when listening to things that may or may not be considered to be beyond the threshold of audibility.
Even more interesting would be to do the same for Double blind and sighted tests
Tony.
I agree with Tony and am on record several times on this forum saying the same thing.
No idea what would be found, but we really should be able to electrically measure human reactions to sound.
I agree with Tony and am on record several times on this forum saying the same thing.
No idea what would be found, but we really should be able to electrically measure human reactions to sound.
OT, thanks for the link, SY (or should I call you Psi?) Nice review. Have not read Radin's book, but from what Radin says here - Radin Google Talk - it seems the review misses the mark in a few places. But overall very nice.
For those interested in the info Waveborn was mentioned, you'll find it about 40 minutes in.
No idea what would be found, but we really should be able to electrically measure human reactions to sound.
I agree with Tony and am on record several times on this forum saying the same thing.
No idea what would be found, but we really should be able to electrically measure human reactions to sound.
OT, thanks for the link, SY (or should I call you Psi?) Nice review. Have not read Radin's book, but from what Radin says here - Radin Google Talk - it seems the review misses the mark in a few places. But overall very nice.
For those interested in the info Waveborn was mentioned, you'll find it about 40 minutes in.
Nice understatement
I didn't go down the whole 13 parts - no need as sloppy thinking quite evident in part1. As one example, he misquotes the Jung quote and shows his grasp of metaphysics to be distinctly shaky by making a textbook category error. That's just in one short paragraph.
What does Radin himself have to say about this piece?
Carroll's website is interesting but several of the topics I looked at seemed to have incomplete analyses. The crystal skull article for example leaves out the well known fact that most if not all of the older skulls are the product of a regional industry in 19th century Austria. Also, on "global warming" he leaves out any reference to serious problems with the AGW hypothesis. Skeptic magazine is a better source for debunking articles. Interestingly, James Randi reversed his stance on AGW.
John
Well, since AGW "science" is mostly financially and politically motivated these days, I like a little input from people who are a bit more cynical and understand human nature better than myself.
Back to the chalk problem, there is an order of magnitude error that most journalist types make when they try to make science more accessible to people who are really not interested in science, but want to read about an amazing "fact". NPR does a really good job of mixing up units of measure, like the C-5A with a payload of 100,000 tons, for one.
John
Back to the chalk problem, there is an order of magnitude error that most journalist types make when they try to make science more accessible to people who are really not interested in science, but want to read about an amazing "fact". NPR does a really good job of mixing up units of measure, like the C-5A with a payload of 100,000 tons, for one.
John
Psychic Prediction based on a lot of wasted time in the past: The more you probe to find out who did the experiments, what they were, and the controls, the less there will be. Authors selling books about oogity boogity and woo tend to be credulous- or trust that their prospective readers will be.
That's the organization started by Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell. It involves the study of new-age, "spiritual" stuff, and their (claimed) use of the scientific method doesn't seem very scientific at all.
I've found Susan Blackmore's writings to be good reading in this area. Her first book "Searching For The Light/Adventures of a Parapsychologist" is fascinating. Her failure to find psychic phenomena and her finding faults with others' experiments got her labeled psi-negative, an attribute apparently originating with her scientific rigor.
After decades she quit looking for such phenomena, as she explains here:
Dr. Susan Blackmore
Thanks for the link. For me the best part of it is the following paragraph:
"I had started this study with the opinion that someone somewhere was maliciously and greedily making false claims to take money from vulnerable people. I ended up with quite a different view - that well-meaning people were selling a product they genuinely believed in to people who also believed in it and felt better, even though the specific claims are false." Susan Blackmore.
That seems to be the case with some much of this, audio or otherwise.
"I had started this study with the opinion that someone somewhere was maliciously and greedily making false claims to take money from vulnerable people. I ended up with quite a different view - that well-meaning people were selling a product they genuinely believed in to people who also believed in it and felt better, even though the specific claims are false." Susan Blackmore.
That seems to be the case with some much of this, audio or otherwise.
Nothing exists, you, me everything in the universe including the universe itself does not exist. Heres why: Jean Paul Sartre asked the question: "Why do things exist? Why isn't there just nothing?" and concluded that there was no answer and therefore life was absurd. I take it one step further and conclude that nothing exists, because that question can't be answered.
Well, since AGW "science" is mostly financially and politically motivated these days, I like a little input from people who are a bit more cynical and understand human nature better than myself.
Irony indeed
Is any "science" not at least partially financially and politically motivated these days btw?
Agreed, that is interesting - Susan Blackmore being cured of her cynicism. James Randi seems as though he's yet to experience that particular revelation, based on the evidence of his recent TED talk on YouTube.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.