Skeptiko forums moved

The official forums of the Skeptiko podcast have moved to
As such, these forums are now closed for posting.
See more
See less

Is telekinesis a real phenomenon?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is telekinesis a real phenomenon?

    Is telekinesis a real phenomenon?
    Don't know, but leaning towards "yes"
    Don't know, but leaning towards "no"

  • #2
    I'm always on the hunt for best evidence. If you have studies that you think add weight to the discussion in either direction, I'd love to read them.

    I found this meta-analysis from 2006 - "Examining Psychokinesis: The Interaction of Human Intention With Random Number Generators – A Meta-Analysis by Holger Bösch, Fiona Steinkamp, and Emil Boller" (link and excerpt from conclusion below):

    "The statistical significance of the overall database provides no directive as to whether the phenomenon is genuine or not. The difference between the two statistical models used (FEM and REM), and the dependency of the results on three very large studies, demonstrates the difficulties regarding these data. If the striking heterogeneity and the small-study effect are taken into account, one must ask whether the findings are artifactual or whether all these findings are indicative of a genuine effect.

    Publication bias appears to be the easiest and most encompassing explanation for the primary findings of the meta-analysis. The fit achieved by the Monte Carlo simulation was fairly good and clearly underpinned the hypothesis that the findings presented here are a result of publication bias. No other explanation accounted for all major findings (i.e., a striking variability of effect size, and the clearly visible small-study effect). Although the number of studies which have to be unpublished is considerable (N=1500), Bierman’s thought experiment does make this number appear to be more than possible...

    ...The effect in general, even if incredibly small, is of great fundamental importance--if genuine. However, this unique experimental approach will
    gain scientific recognition only when we know with certainty what an unbiased funnel plot (i.e. a funnel plot that includes all studies that have been undertaken) looks like. If the time comes when the funnel indicates a systematic effect, a model to explain the effect will be more than crucial. Until that time, Girden’s verdict of “not proven” (1962b, p. 530), which he mooted more than 40 years ago in the same journal in respect of dice experiments, also holds for human intentionality on RNGs."