1) You aren't changing the minds of the scientific comunity, if you are changing the minds of anyone its the lay comunity. But you aren't being skeptical in the sense that skeptics claim, or the sense that critics of skeptics claim that skeptics follow. Also, Creation science picked up its name because they want to redirect public oppinon, that doesn't make what they do any more attractive to scientists or any less of a misnomer, you are from what I hear an honest guy, don't play by their playbook, its beneath you.
2) I will listen to the raiden interview, but based on what he said in the clips he has zero credibility, he admited to doing something that is a huge scientific no-no.
3) I've heard some criticism of sheldrake, but I haven't really followed the issue. Just because other skeptics have not criticised him much doesn't mean that you shouldn't be more critical.
4) I disagree, its just that real research holds up to skepticism, just because you feel that it is real research doesn't mean you can give it a free ride and still claim that you are being skeptical of it.
GP It doesn't have to be bunk, however if you want to claim to be a skeptic you have to put research that has not been put to the test to the test. There are major components of psi research that are absolutely bunk and you would be lyeing if you disagreed with me on that issue, in science, real science, the burden of proof is on the unestablished notions, parapsychoilogy is unestablished to the default oppinion has to be that it is false for science to take place, then it needs to be proven that it is true, and you cannot prove anything without testing the studies, since they don't go to other scientists and instead go straight to the public skeptics have got to step in to stop them from running wild and keep them doing science, Alex isn't stoping them and grilling them, ergo he isn't being a skeptic, ergo Skeptiko is a misnomer; QED.  |