Announcement

Collapse

Skeptiko forums moved

The official forums of the Skeptiko podcast have moved to http://skeptiko.com/forum/.
As such, these forums are now closed for posting.
See more
See less

Skeptics ( Unwitting ) dupes?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Skeptics ( Unwitting ) dupes?

    Skeptics ( Unwitting ) dupes?

    I have been pondering why Skeptic organizations are so anti-research. In a bit of synchromicity, I came across this blog
    UFO Magazine - UFO Magazine Blog - CSI is CRaP
    ( H/T: The Daily Grail ) and the referenced book
    Amazon.com: The Missing Times: Terry Hansen: Books

    They propose that Skeptic organizations have been infiltrated by US Government organizations for the purpose of spreading disinformation through the media.

    Any thoughts?

    Rod McKenzie

  • #2
    I've said that skepticism, at least in its extreme forms, is a cult - and, now, it seems, they're dupes as well. And this seems to touch a raw nerve in some of its true believers.

    Comment


    • #3
      Sorry to put a dampener on this idea, but I tend to be very skeptical of conspiracy theories - it always seems to me that so many people would need be in the know that information would leak.

      People always used to think the Bush administration was involved in various conspiracies - whereas they were probably the dumbest administration ever!

      David

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Rod McKenzie View Post
        Skeptics ( Unwitting ) dupes?

        Any thoughts?

        Rod McKenzie
        Hi Rod,

        I came to the same conclusion but by a different route:


        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/362

        There is a big problem in the skeptical community. There is rampant obscuration of the truth by prominent skeptics who have misled masses of people. Skeptics often say that believers in the paranormal have been fooled by charlatans but it is the skeptics who have been fooled by prominent members of their community who seem to be more interested in winning the debate than in illuminating the truth.
        More examples here

        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/10127
        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/10137

        These posts contains examples...


        Richard Dawkins refuses to consider peer reviewed scientific studies in a debunking documentary.

        James Randi who claims mediums routinely use cold reading to fool people fails to demonstrate it that can be done:

        Randi FAQ makes incorrect claims about parapsychology

        Randi forced to retract false statements about paranormal research:

        Michael Prescott discusses rampant innacuracy in a chapter of a book by Randi.

        Martin Gardner making unsupportable statements about skeptical research results.

        Martin Gardner claiming a medium used cold when the sitter wasn't even present in the room with the medium.

        Susan Blackmore iignoring her own successful experiemnts.

        Michael Schermer mischaracterizing NDE research results.

        Multiple instances of Wiseman describing a statistically significant result in a psi experiment as a failure.



        More examples here
        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/16784


        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/648
        Gives a link to examples of skeptics:

        1) refusing to engage with parapsychological investigations on any level as being of no interest, undoubtedly fraudulent, obviously nonsense, etc.
        ...
        2) engaging with [psychical investigations], but explaining them away with all kinds of implausible scenarios which in any other context no one would entertain for a moment
        ...
        3) carrying out experiments in order to prove that, when properly conducted, the effect will not appear, getting an effect, and then explaining it away on the grounds of 'experimental flaws'
        ...
        4) carrying out experiments with psychics on television with a very precisely determined pre-agreed protocol, getting highly significant results, and then refusing to accept the results as valid
        https://forum.mind-energy.net/node/16803
        Skeptics prey on grieving people, and put psychics in mental hospitals.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by David Bailey View Post

          People always used to think the Bush administration was involved in various conspiracies - whereas they were probably the dumbest administration ever!

          David
          Hi David,

          Do you think the mass media does a better job of reporting on politics than they do reporting on psi?
          Last edited by anonymous; February 11th, 2009, 04:49 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by anonymous View Post
            Hi David,

            Do you think the mass media does a better job of reporting on politics than they do reporting on psi?
            Probably about evenly bad!

            I don't deny that many scientists are being fooled by the extreme skeptics - or that the skeptics can be pretty unscrupulous, but I somehow doubt that there is a government organisation behind the process - I would need a lot of persuasion. Skeptics make a pretty good living out of their 'trade', need there be any more motivation?

            David

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by David Bailey View Post
              Probably about evenly bad!

              I don't deny that many scientists are being fooled by the extreme skeptics - or that the skeptics can be pretty unscrupulous, but I somehow doubt that there is a government organisation behind the process - I would need a lot of persuasion. Skeptics make a pretty good living out of their 'trade', need there be any more motivation?

              David
              Hi David,

              I agree with you in principle: never attribute to malevolence what can be accomplished by stupidity. However, Ufo's are a bit different from psi. There are legitimate national security issues involved: invasions of national air space, abductions of citizens, advanced technology with weapons potential (think faster than light missiles which we would not like to encourage other countires to develop). Since the US intelligence communities are responsible for national security and are in the business of conspiracies (at least outside the US), I think it is reasonable to consider that Rod's post is not absurd and may be valid at least with respect to ufo's.

              Many people in the remote viewing community think the government statement that remote viewing was real but not useful is disinformation and that the government continues to use remote viewing. There are also reports of government agents infiltrating ufo believer organizations. I think there is some precedent for Rod's thesis.
              Last edited by anonymous; February 11th, 2009, 06:25 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by anonymous View Post
                Hi David,

                I agree with you in principle: never attribute to malevolence what can be accomplished by stupidity. However, Ufo's are a bit different from psi. There are legitimate national security issues involved: invasions of national air space, abductions of citizens, advanced technology with weapons potential (think faster than light missiles which we would not like to encourage other countires to develop). Since the US intelligence communities are responsible for national security and are in the business of conspiracies (at least outside the US), I think it is reasonable to consider that Rod's post is not absurd and may be valid at least with respect to ufo's.

                Many people in the remote viewing community think the government statement that remote viewing was real but not useful is disinformation and that the government continues to use remote viewing. I think there is some precedent for Rod's thesis.
                I am rather less interested in UFO's and the work of mediums, basically because it is so hard to test experimentally. That is not the same as saying these phenomena are not real.

                I think we can forget faster than light missiles! Perhaps UFO's and other psi phenomena are closely related - something coming through from another reality rather than from another place in this galaxy (or even another one).

                However, a lot of people make an incredibly good living out of military posturing, and I suspect the UFO phenomena scare the military because if people accepted these phenomena as real, they might start to ask awkward questions - such as how could you distinguish UFO's from a real attack?

                The stark truth is that if there is a nuclear exchange, most of the expensive military preparations will be good for nothing

                David

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by David Bailey View Post
                  I am rather less interested in UFO's and the work of mediums, basically because it is so hard to test experimentally. That is not the same as saying these phenomena are not real.
                  I'm not sure what you mean. If the alleged reports about ufo's are right, there is ample evidence but it is in the hands of the government. So it is easy to test because there is physical evidence, but it is hard to test because it is kept from the public.


                  From "The Enduring Enigma of the UFO" by Dean Radin
                  Statements from Astronauts
                  Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell repeatedly has said that
                  high-ranking military officers have privately admitted that for
                  many decades factions of the U.S. government have been
                  aware that UFOs and alien technology are real. Many other
                  astronauts have provided corroborating statements. Mercury
                  astronaut Scott Carpenter photographed a UFO while in orbit
                  on May 24, 1962, later saying, “At no time when the astronauts
                  were in space were they alone. There was a constant
                  surveillance by UFOs.” In 1985, Mercury and Gemini astronaut
                  Gordon Cooper, in an address to the United Nations, said:
                  “I believe that these extraterrestrial vehicles and their crews
                  are visiting this planet from other planets . . . For many years,
                  I have lived with a secret, in a secrecy imposed on all specialists
                  and astronauts. I can now reveal that every day, in the
                  United States, our radar instruments capture objects of form
                  and composition unknown to us. And there are thousands of
                  witness reports and a quantity of documents to prove this,
                  but nobody wants to make them public.” Such statements
                  are not limited to U.S. astronauts. In 1979, Russian cosmonaut
                  Victor Afanasyev commented on a UFO he saw while
                  en route to the Solyut 6 space station: “It followed us during
                  half of our orbit . . . It was an engineered structure, made
                  from some type of metal, approximately 40 meters long with
                  inner hulls.” —DR
                  I think we can forget faster than light missiles!
                  If ufo phenomena is real, as astronauts seem to say, I don't think you can just dismiss this. Why are you so ready to dismiss this when you accept the possibility of psi which is also unexplained by current science.

                  Perhaps UFO's and other psi phenomena are closely related - something coming through from another reality rather than from another place in this galaxy (or even another one).
                  Right! If you are willing to speculate about this why not about faster than light travel.


                  However, a lot of people make an incredibly good living out of military posturing, and I suspect the UFO phenomena scare the military because if people accepted these phenomena as real, they might start to ask awkward questions - such as how could you distinguish UFO's from a real attack?
                  It sounds like you agree there is a reason for the government to conspire to hide the reality of the ufo phenomena. The government doesn't want people to belive in ufo's.

                  The stark truth is that if there is a nuclear exchange, most of the expensive military preparations will be good for nothing

                  David
                  I'm not sure I understand you point. We have nuclear missiles to deter or counter attack a nuclear strike. No one thinks a 2000 lb gps guided bomb will be useful in an nuclear exchange. However just because there is a risk of a nuclear exchange doesn't mean that we will never have a use for a 2000 lb gps guided bomb. There are various threats and each has a different defense and response.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by David Bailey View Post
                    I am rather less interested in UFO's and the work of mediums, basically because it is so hard to test experimentally. That is not the same as saying these phenomena are not real.

                    Which are you saying is hard to test? Mediums or ufo's? If you think mediumship is hard to test, why do you think that? My opinion is that it is hard to test without funding. With funding it is easy to test. There has been a lot of good mediumship research. I've posted about it often. More info is here:

                    http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8p...ry_of_evidence

                    see: proxy sittings, cross correspondences, book tests, newspaper test, individual cases, overviews.
                    Last edited by anonymous; October 17th, 2009, 12:24 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by David Bailey View Post
                      Sorry to put a dampener on this idea, but I tend to be very skeptical of conspiracy theories - it always seems to me that so many people would need be in the know that information would leak.
                      There are techniques like compartmentalization used in intelligence and military organizations.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compart...(intelligence)

                      I agree this alone would not be totally effective .....but it is also true intelligence organizations have employed magicians and psychologists from at least WW1 ... this is not just to help detect deception but to understand 'misdirection' ...

                      For example ... in theory (possibly harder in practise) one way to hide a real conspiracy with be to fake numerous more sensational, false conspiracies ... alien abduction? .... crop circles? .... .. one only needs to dupe witnesses who will report it, this winds up skeptical organizations who debunk it and the machine begins to run by itself by those who know little .... none of it makes sense, perhaps because little of it was intended to make sense.... these are designed to seem implausible?
                      Last edited by Open Mind; February 11th, 2009, 11:23 AM. Reason: fix link

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The psychology of deception, depends on the very opposite of Occams Razor. The tactic involves presenting simplicity and openness to conceal hidden complexities. Magic/conjuring depends on the same principle, the magician does something seemingly simple, a misdirection while actually doing something rather more complex. Also used in war strategies, chess, etc. ...get the rival to assume the simpler, more likely outcome is occurring, while something more complex and unexpected is actually occurring. Also used in computer viruses e.g. the trojan horse.

                        In otherwords, skeptics religiously following Occams Razor, could indeed be easily duped ... they should look very closely at the evidence ... not popular viewpoint.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by David Bailey View Post

                          I think we can forget faster than light missiles! Perhaps UFO's and other psi phenomena are closely related - something coming through from another reality rather than from another place in this galaxy (or even another one).
                          Hi David,

                          If ufo's come here from another reality then why can't we potentially send something starting from point A to the other reality and have it come back here at point B right over ground zero? That is potentially faster than light could travel within this universe.

                          I'm not saying the US or other human counties can do this today. My point is that ufo technology, if verified by the US government, would spur weapons research in other countires. If you know it's possible you are more likely to try it and succeed than if you think it is impossible.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by anonymous View Post
                            Which are you saying is hard to test? Mediums or ufo's? If you think mediumship is hard to test, why do you think that?
                            Both are hard to test, because every event and every seance is different in various ways. That doesn't mean these things are not real - just hard to test.

                            For test purposes, you really want a phenomenon that can be repeated with as little variation as possible. Listening to various sensible-sounding people testify that they have observed various phenomena may be interesting, but I can't see how you can make solid progress with that. People report an enormous number of strange phenomena - some are probably false, but maybe others are true. My guess is that the true ones will ultimately be explained by psi, but before then, it is really hard to know which phenomena to believe in. OK, perhaps it is just my personal preference, but I put a lot more credence on actual experiments, such as those of Sheldrake or Radin.

                            Regarding faster than light craft, you either have to postulate that special/general relativity is wrong, or invoke extremely exotic physics such as wormholes. I don't know much about these theoretical constructs, but I am pretty sure bad things would happen to anyone who got close to such a phenomenon because of the high energies involved!

                            If may well be that UFO's are appearing on radar screens every day, but my guess is that the military are simply highly embarrassed by these events - but obviously I can't prove that.

                            If psi is involved in all this, it is simply not necessary to talk about physical phenomena such as speeds faster than light.

                            I repeat, most military installations are little other than posturing. Why, for example, bother with missile tracking, when you have strategic submarines armed with missiles that could attack back some time later - that indeed was the whole idea of the submarines. The rational for missile interception is even shakier. Suppose, for example, that Iran is hell bent on creating a few nuclear weapons and delivering them to the US. Why would they put them on missiles - that might fail or get shot down - when they could smuggle them into the US on cargo boats? The existence of global world trade makes a great deal of military work pointless - it may be a very slight exaggeration, but anyone with a nuclear bomb could deliver it by DHL with a cheap GPS gadget to determine when it had reached its destination! I think that the military of many nations want to avoid people really thinking about these issues.

                            David

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by David Bailey View Post
                              Both are hard to test, because every event and every seance is different in various ways. That doesn't mean these things are not real - just hard to test.

                              For test purposes, you really want a phenomenon that can be repeated with as little variation as possible. Listening to various sensible-sounding people testify that they have observed various phenomena may be interesting, but I can't see how you can make solid progress with that.
                              I think if you went to a spiritualist church every sunday and saw mediums in action week after week you would have a different opinion about what type of evidence is possible.

                              Also Proxy sittings, cross correspondences, book tests, news paper tests, scole experiemnts, etc etc are not simply anecdotes.

                              People report an enormous number of strange phenomena - some are probably false, but maybe others are true. My guess is that the true ones will ultimately be explained by psi, but before then, it is really hard to know which phenomena to believe in. OK, perhaps it is just my personal preference, but I put a lot more credence on actual experiments, such as those of Sheldrake or Radin.
                              The fact that you are not citing experiments doesn't mean that they don't exist. I still don't understand why you say they are hard to do. You seem to be saying that they are hard to do because they are not done. But in fact they are done.
                              Regarding faster than light craft, you either have to postulate that special/general relativity is wrong, or invoke extremely exotic physics such as wormholes. I don't know much about these theoretical constructs, but I am pretty sure bad things would happen to anyone who got close to such a phenomenon because of the high energies involved!

                              If may well be that UFO's are appearing on radar screens every day, but my guess is that the military are simply highly embarrassed by these events - but obviously I can't prove that.
                              Huh? I don't understand what you are saying. Which events? Do you think ufo's are on the screens and the military is embarrased or not. If not what is embarassing the military?
                              If psi is involved in all this, it is simply not necessary to talk about physical phenomena such as speeds faster than light.

                              I repeat, most military installations are little other than posturing.
                              I think this is beginning to sound like a conspiracy theory. We've seen a lot of military activity in Iraq and the military technology seemed have worked as intended. I think it is hard to test your theory. We don't know what sorts of inimical activity would have occured if we didn't have a formidable military. Are you saying deterence is posturing? It seems to me you are saying military installations are useless and ineffective. I don't see how you get to that conclusion.
                              Why, for example, bother with missile tracking, when you have strategic submarines armed with missiles that could attack back some time later - that indeed was the whole idea of the submarines.
                              You need to know where the missiles are coming from so you can retaliate, if you have time you can get the president and congress to a safe undisclosed location, and maybe evacuate some civilians.
                              The rational for missile interception is even shakier. Suppose, for example, that Iran is hell bent on creating a few nuclear weapons and delivering them to the US. Why would they put them on missiles - that might fail or get shot down - when they could smuggle them into the US on cargo boats?
                              They and other countries are developing missiles so that is the rationale for defending against them. Do you leave you door unlocked because a thief can get in with a crow bar?
                              The existence of global world trade makes a great deal of military work pointless - it may be a very slight exaggeration, but anyone with a nuclear bomb could deliver it by DHL with a cheap GPS gadget to determine when it had reached its destination! I think that the military of many nations want to avoid people really thinking about these issues.

                              David
                              There are radiation detectors at ports of entry. I agree there are a lot of threats that are hard to defend against. You're saying that there are huge gaps in our national defenses and the military doesn't like to have that known? Maybe you are right about that. But wouldn't they rather have a budget increase to cover all those other threats too? I don't think anyone would realistically say we should scrap our missile tracking because someone can bring a nuke in on a commerical ship so it is only in the military's interest to play up these other threats - except where that would encourage enemies to take advantage of those threats. Which brings us back to why the government would want to suppress information about ufo's.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X