Parapsychology forums

[fls]

Originally Posted by cj.23

Just popping by - LEXSCIEN would be the ideal resource. Lexscien : Library of Exploratory Science
If you join one of the affiliate associations you get reduced cost (or in the case of the SPR free access to the SPR stuff) of subscription. It's not cheap I know, but it makes a huge number of paper freely available to you all.

Secondly the EJP archive for volumes 19 to 25 at time of writing is now freely available online here - European Journal of Parapsychology and the plan is to make the rest available.

Dunno is either useful?

cj x

We need to stick to free stuff, so there aren't barriers for anyone to participate, I think.

Linda

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by fls

It isn't anything mysterious or salacious.

How disappointing No.6..... so you still aren't going to tell us why you resigned or escaped JREF

Open Mind (The new No.2)

[Open Mind]

I also recommend Lexscien if people don't mind paying for it ..... people should do their own research and Lexscien is a good source to help find the original material ... books tend to bias things by missing impotant stuff out and most books are probably copies of prior opinions given in other books. The worst source for repeating only one side of the story (often an inaccuate account) is the Skeptics Dictionary.

[Arouet]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

How disappointing No.6..... so you still aren't going to tell us why you resigned or escaped JREF

Open Mind (The new No.2)

She posted at the time (can't quote since it's locked but its post 11 in http://forum.mind-energy.net/skeptik...ost58903.html?)

Hi, I'm new here. I heard about this place through the JREF forum (where I use the same user name). I'm here at the moment because I'm a bit annoyed at some of the dicks which populate that place.

Anyway, this post is very interesting. I haven't been able to find this article online. I think you mean Skeptical Inquirer, rather than Skeptic. Can you direct me to a source for this article?

Linda

[cj.23]

The EJP is free, so worth considering. Quite a lot of interest in those 6 volumes I linked.

cj x

[EthanT]

Hi, I'm new here. I heard about this place through the JREF forum (where I use the same user name). I'm here at the moment because I'm a bit annoyed at some of the dicks which populate that place.

What do JREF folks think about this place, in general? I can't imagine it's terribly complimentary, lol.

[Nemo85]

Originally Posted by cj.23

Nicola J Holt, Christine Simmonds-Moore, David Luke and Christopher C. French,(2012) Anomalistic Psychology; Palgrave Macmillan,, Basingstoke, 2012,. 361 pp, £9.99 (paper) ISBN 978-0-230-30150-4

I agree, this is a good introductory book (despite its title).

Originally Posted by cj.23

Jinks, T. (2012) An Introduction to the Psychology of Paranormal Belief and Experience, McFarland & Company, Inc; London,

In my opinion this book is not as good, but still not bad. People who think parapsychologists focus is far too narrow in particular may like it. Jinks is however not a parapsychologist, and I recall that my background check did not reveal any articles that concern parapsychological research, nor does he cite any of the articles he claims to have written (in the preface). I have only read sections of it, but I still remember that he was unaware of the Rasch-scaled version of the Paranormal Belief Scale

Originally Posted by cj.23

Cardena, E., Lynn S, Krippner, S; (2000) Varieties of Anomalous Experience; American Psychological Association; Washington, DC, USA.

This one is good, if one has already read a introductory book or two. The same can be said about the anthology Psi Wars which covers the Ganzfeld, ESP dream studies, false memories, the experimenter effect and also includes chapters by sceptics (e.g., Peter Brugger)


That said I believe we should focus on using free online material, but perhaps Irwin and Watts' book will be necessary. I am not aware of review articles that cover all its topics.

Originally Posted by cj.23

Still a democratic open and friendly discussion group works just as well if not better.

I believe this is good enough for this forum.

Originally Posted by cj.23

I just happen to have been a uni lecturer in my dim and dubious past, and think in terms of structure.

[Nemo85]

Originally Posted by fls

That's a better idea - include the background reading with the article. It will give us an opportunity to advise/be advised as to the best reviews. I think this should include the relevant references from the article (as much as they can be made available). The Wackermann article is more of a review. Should we pick an article on a specific experiment, to go along with a review?

I think the discussion should focus on a specific experiment or correlational study, but the participants read background material as well (prior to contributing!). Although max 80 pages perhaps given that everyone here is not a member of PHD Comics: Geeks Anonymous and may complain about lack of time, burnt out brain cells etc.

[Nemo85]

Originally Posted by cj.23

Just popping by - LEXSCIEN would be the ideal resource. Lexscien : Library of Exploratory Science
If you join one of the affiliate associations you get reduced cost (or in the case of the SPR free access to the SPR stuff) of subscription. It's not cheap I know, but it makes a huge number of paper freely available to you all.

Lexscien is great, but this is really for the hardcore fans. Given that many issues of Journal of Scientific Exploration and Journal of Parapsychology are freely available nowadays I believe joining the SPR is the best option for the hardcore fans, as CJ knows one may then get up to eight issues of the JSPR (I joined in Jan, 2011 and got eight issues prior to paying for 2012) plus issues of the Paranormal Review that often includes historical articles by Carlos Alvarado.

Originally Posted by Open Mind

I also recommend Lexscien if people don't mind paying for it ..... people should do their own research and Lexscien is a good source to help find the original material ... books tend to bias things by missing impotant stuff out and most books are probably copies of prior opinions given in other books. The worst source for repeating only one side of the story (often an inaccuate account) is the Skeptics Dictionary.

Indeed, but it is for the hardcore fans, especially researchers.

Originally Posted by cj.23

The EJP is free, so worth considering. Quite a lot of interest in those 6 volumes I linked.

Indeed , I am sure that we can use a couple of EJP-articles.

Originally Posted by Open Mind

How disappointing No.6..... so you still aren't going to tell us why you resigned or escaped JREF

Open Mind (The new No.2)

I imaigne that she heard rumours that we were nice here, noticed that the rumours were wrong but decided to stay nevertheless.

I say let's leave the past behind for a while and give the study circle a shot.

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by Nemo85

I imaigne that she heard rumours that we were nice here, noticed that the rumours were wrong but decided to stay nevertheless.

I'm trying to be nice to Fls ... a bit of a challenge at times for people on opposite sides of the debate ... for I do think Fls is very firmly on skeptic movements side.

(Incidentally 'No.6', why someone resigned, escaping and 'No2.' is a reference to the the old 1970 British TV series 'The Prisoner' made into a hollywood film a few years ago ... it was intended as a joke ... just in case some of the non-British or younger readers are unfamiliar with it. )