Blindness of Debunkers and Radical Skeptics (Podcast)

[Opcnup]

I went to great lengths to generate a response totally blasting your guy out of the water and got nothing in return. The reason so few skeptics do research on their own is because like the scientists performing good science on the parapsychological side they always come up with nothing. Life is too short for people to watse lots of time and money showing conclusively that someone who got no results got no results.

[GaSS PaNiCC]

Originally Posted by Opcnup

I went to great lengths to generate a response totally blasting your guy out of the water and got nothing in return. The reason so few skeptics do research on their own is because like the scientists performing good science on the parapsychological side they always come up with nothing. Life is too short for people to watse lots of time and money showing conclusively that someone who got no results got no results.

What do you mean they come up with nothing? Just because it is a very controversial science does not mean it is not making progress in it's scientific procedure and research. Please do a little research instead of claiming it as such, just because the majority of materialistic community says so . This is to include the numerous experiments conducted by Dean Radin and others where they were able to deduct a significant result based on the data accumulated in their experiment.

For example an experiment conducted from Dean Radin's blog.

Quantum Observation Experiment

Testing nonlocal observation as a source of intuitive knowledge

This study explored the hypothesis that in some cases intuitive knowledge arises from perceptions that are not mediated through the ordinary senses. The possibility of detecting such “nonlocal observation” was investigated in a pilot test based on the effects of observation on a quantum system.

Participants were asked to imagine that they could intuitively perceive a low intensity laser beam in a distant Michelson interferometer. If such observation were possible, it would theoretically perturb the photons’ quantum wave-functions and change the pattern of light produced by the interferometer. The optical apparatus was located inside a light-tight, double steel-walled shielded chamber. Participants sat quietly outside the chamber with eyes closed. The light patterns were recorded by a cooled CCD camera once per second, and average illumination levels of these images were compared in counterbalanced “mental blocking” vs. non-blocking conditions. Interference would produce a lower overall level of illumination, which was predicted to occur during the blocking condition.

Based on a series of planned experimental sessions, the outcome was in accordance with the prediction (z = -2.82, p = 0.002). This result was primarily due to nine sessions involving experienced meditators (combined z = -4.28, p = 9.4 × 10-6); the other nine sessions with non- meditators were not significant (combined z = 0.29, p = 0.61). The same experimental protocol run immediately after 15 of these test sessions, but with no one present, revealed no hardware or protocol artifacts that might have accounted for these results (combined control z = 1.50, p = 0.93). Conventional explanations for these results were considered and judged to be implausible. This pilot study suggests the presence of a nonlocal perturbation effect which is consistent with traditional concepts of intuition as a direct means of gaining knowledge about the world, and with the predicted effects of observation on a quantum system.

Here's the website to

Entangled Minds: Quantum observation experiment

[mcromer]

[quote]The reason so few skeptics do research on their own is because like the scientists performing good science on the parapsychological side they always come up with nothing. Life is too short for people to watse lots of time and money showing conclusively that someone who got no results got no results.[quote]

Talk is cheap.

Provide cites.