Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Boy  The Ganzfeld studies that used the original protocol, but with improved controls (auto-ganzfeld) showed a hit rate of around 33%, when chance was 25%. Wiseman and Milton's meta-analysis showing near-chance results included a lot of studies experimenting with new targets (such as music instead of pictures), and it was these that produced chance results, thereby lowering the average in the meta-analysis.
Now, since when is a hit rate of 33% "barely (if at all) discernible from chance" when chance is 25%? |
Even at 33% the effect is still not large enough that one person could have come up with the idea that they could telepathically communicate on the basis of this effect.
Psi proponents have also failed to improve the Ganzfield experiments. Real science builds upon past experiments and the effects become clearer and clearer over time. The results from individual Ganzfeld experiments are still all over the place. Some are negative and some are positive and there is no clear pattern.
Quote:
|
There were no huge bodies of science to predict quantum mechanics or relativity theory, either. There were just some tiny little anomalies, which most scientists seemed to think were going to be accounted for by small revisions in current theory. If you like, you can see psi as an anomaly in today's theoretical paradigm.
|
Both quantum mechanics and relativity were developed from existing well established science. The scientists who were instrumental in both fields didn't simply pull ideas out of the ether. Special Relativity came out of Maxwell's Equations. You can't say the same for "psi" which has no connection to any known science.