Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Noble 
A real effect does not mean that there is a paranormal explanation. It is an error to assume that the explanation must be "morphic resonance" or "telepathy". There are many possible natural explanations. The lack of interest in natural explanations on the part of "psi" proponents is very revealling.
The hypothesis that humans inadvertently give the dog clues about when the owner is coming home can be tested.
|
Many possible natural explanations ...... well if you say so!
Of course, the best way to test if other humans are passing knowledge on to the dogs is to ensure that nobody in the house knows when the owner is coming home. If, as Alex thinks, dogs are less inclined to anticipate a return without humans present, it would not be good science to control for knowledge being passed on by removing other humans from the experiment - you want to attenuate extraneous signals - not the one you are looking for.
I would imagine Alex is busy trying to make his experiment as watertight as possible - just as Rupert Sheldrake did if you actually read his papers. My impression is that skeptics are so sure these experiments are phoney, they take it for granted that the experimenter has done something crazy like not keeping the return time secret, or constantly changing the criterion for the 'dog waiting' condition - so they don't feel the need to read the actual papers (Peter Atkins actually admitted to Rupert Sheldrake on radio that he had come to criticise his work without reading the papers). Alex hasn't got to the publishing phase yet, but even so, you assume (for no obvious reason) that he has made all sorts of mistakes.
David