The Science Delusion (By Rupert Sheldrake)

[Thought2Much]

Will the skepticism of the scientists ruin the experiments, as Sheldrake claims? Such a fragile thing, telepathy. I guess it can only be studied by people who already believe it's real.

[Thought2Much]

 

Will the skepticism of the scientists ruin the experiments, as Sheldrake claims? Such a fragile thing, telepathy. I guess it can only be studied by people who already believe it's real.

 

The Soviets deemed it important enough back in the cold war to give serious study to it.  

 

 

So did the CIA. Apparently not enough came out of it to continue with it. If they could point to real results, then I wouldn't be debating this right now.

[Thought2Much]

And why has no one outside of the CIA or the KGB figured out how to use psychic powers, or even been able to confirm they exist? Remember, this was taken quite seriously by a large number of people involved in "real" science since the beginning of the last century. People have wanted to believe that these psychic abilities exist for quite a while. And yet all we get is some studies that show very strong results until you scrutinize the methodology more closely, and then the results go right back to random.

 

By the way, the link goes to an independent test of one of Sheldrake's own suggested experiments. I linked to it much earlier in this thread but it was ignored, probably because it didn't glowingly confirm what Sheldrake says. When numbers were properly randomized, they got no statistically relevant result. Oh, and they purposely selected people who believed in the staring effect already, so the only ones skeptical were those running the test. Or is that enough to ruin the delicate telepathic mojo? Does Sheldrake know of a way to build a Faraday cage that blocks out skepticism? Now that would be a useful thing to come out of psychic studies.

[Thought2Much]

What does the establishment gain by not studying psychic phenomena? I'm sure someone could figure out a way to monetize their findings (if only from speaking on the science lecture circuit) if they could prove something like telepathy exists. Scientists could even get funding for the studies by saying they just want to try to prove the effect doesn't exist, and that they just want to run proper experiments with accountable methodology. Any weird results that couldn't be pinned on poor methodology would be retested by someone else to try to account for it. If the weird results continued, someone else would try to figure out why, and repeat the experiment, and so on, until an actual effect could be teased from the data. The fact that this doesn't happen means it's more than likely it doesn't exist.

 

Also note that tests like Sheldrake's staring experiment aren't like running drug trials that cost in the millions of dollars to perform, requiring huge sample sizes and huge numbers of support staff. The cost of doing these experiments is next to nothing (you can pay participants a minimal fee), and can be done by virtually any college science department or even just a few grad students with little to no specialized equipment. The fact that we don't see a pattern of consistent positive results emerging from these tests also means that this particular phenomenon likely doesn't exist.

[SciWalker]

I have heard something about the techniques for remote viewing. Anyone - particularly those of an artistic disposition - can do it, but it's not without its dangers. The remote viewer will take their mind up past a kind of membrane, known as limen, and beyond that psychic threshold there are signals, figments of mental representation, that float around and are either received or are not. A good hit rate for a remote viewer - for example, in solving where the body of a murder victim lies (and remote viewers are used in this capacity by the police) is 28 per cent accuracy, as measured by the expressing of details that can't have been known by other means.

 

However, with each remote viewing episode, the limen weakens, and becomes leaky to the extent that the viewer will be subject to sporadic intrusions, at unexpected times, of the psychic realm into their mind. They tend to be unpleasant, as it's the unpleasant emotions that tend to linger above the limen. So it's an exercise whose peculiarities are to be respected and it's not a good idea to abuse the gift.

 

I have only looked very briefly at this but it seems to say a lot about the concepts and/or theories behind it:

http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/answers/crvmanual/crvmanual-03.html

[Thought2Much]

Leaky... limens.

 

Leaky limens?

 

Leaky limens.

 

Unpleasant emotions lingering (perhaps even lurking) above the leaky limens.

 

LOL (Laughing Over Limens)

[Thought2Much]

Would it help if the limens were lubed? Or maybe lacquered? Or licked?

[Thought2Much]

Maybe the limens just need to be laundered. A freshly laundered limen would be luxurious and lift away the lingering listlessness.

[Thought2Much]

If you lick a limen, is it lemon flavored? Or lime flavored? Ooooh wait... it's gotta be limon (lemon AND lime). Limon limens. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[Deva]

And why has no one outside of the CIA or the KGB figured out how to use psychic powers, or even been able to confirm they exist? Remember, this was taken quite seriously by a large number of people involved in "real" science since the beginning of the last century. People have wanted to believe that these psychic abilities exist for quite a while. And yet all we get is some studies that show very strong results until you scrutinize the methodology more closely, and then the results go right back to random.

 

By the way, the link goes to an independent test of one of Sheldrake's own suggested experiments. I linked to it much earlier in this thread but it was ignored, probably because it didn't glowingly confirm what Sheldrake says. When numbers were properly randomized, they got no statistically relevant result. Oh, and they purposely selected people who believed in the staring effect already, so the only ones skeptical were those running the test. Or is that enough to ruin the delicate telepathic mojo? Does Sheldrake know of a way to build a Faraday cage that blocks out skepticism? Now that would be a useful thing to come out of psychic studies.

 

The methodology is never going to be good enough for the Skeptical Inquirer bunch. They are so biased toward their own materialistic ideal and so distorted in their criticism that I wouldn't waste much time reading it.  The fact is that telepathy of one kind or another exists, and is not a rare phenomenon.

 

Sheldrake has answered all of these criticisms.

 

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_staring_effect

[Thought2Much]

 

And why has no one outside of the CIA or the KGB figured out how to use psychic powers, or even been able to confirm they exist? Remember, this was taken quite seriously by a large number of people involved in "real" science since the beginning of the last century. People have wanted to believe that these psychic abilities exist for quite a while. And yet all we get is some studies that show very strong results until you scrutinize the methodology more closely, and then the results go right back to random.

 

By the way, the link goes to an independent test of one of Sheldrake's own suggested experiments. I linked to it much earlier in this thread but it was ignored, probably because it didn't glowingly confirm what Sheldrake says. When numbers were properly randomized, they got no statistically relevant result. Oh, and they purposely selected people who believed in the staring effect already, so the only ones skeptical were those running the test. Or is that enough to ruin the delicate telepathic mojo? Does Sheldrake know of a way to build a Faraday cage that blocks out skepticism? Now that would be a useful thing to come out of psychic studies.

 

The methodology is never going to be good enough for the Skeptical Inquirer bunch. They are so biased toward their own materialistic ideal and so distorted in their criticism that I wouldn't waste much time reading it.  The fact is that telepathy of one kind or another exists, and is not a rare phenomenon.

 

Sheldrake has answered all of these criticisms.

 

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_staring_effect

 

 

It's not a rare phenomenon, but you just can't prove to anyone who doesn't already believe that it exists. And neither can anyone else, apparently.

 

If it can't be studied, it's just woo, but you can't admit to yourself that you've fallen for woo, so you maintain your belief in whatever it is that you think it is that can't be measured or quantified or proven.

 

I love how you use the word "materialistic" as a curse word as you type your posts on a computer that doesn't run on morphic resonance, but whose parts were developed by "materialistic" scientists who figured out the electromagnetic and chemical configurations that allow computing to take place.

[Thought2Much]

For those who didn't read the study that I linked that was done by evil "materialists" and nasty "skeptics," the initial run of the study actually came up with positive results as Sheldrake suggested they should. However, once the numbers were randomized a little differently and the subjects not given feedback about whether they were correct in their guesses about being stared at, then the results went away. This suggests that the subjects were able to detect patterns in the numbers being generated based upon the feedback of whether they were right or wrong. If there were an actual staring effect, then it should have showed up regardless of the feedback or number sequence.

 

Or did the telepathy just run away because it was being observed? Or do truly random numbers break telepathy? Does it get confused, the poor little thing? Does it get shy? Poor telepathy just can't catch a break from the mean, mean materialists poking at it.

[RankStranger]

Jesus T2M... I'm right there with you in the materialist camp. But there's no need to be a dick about it.

[Thought2Much]

So again, we have the contradiction. Someone did a study on this, just like you wanted, and according to Sheldrake's protocols, and they couldn't find the effect. Because the results weren't what you want to hear, you claim that it was the "wrong" people doing the test, and that no evidence will be good enough for "those" people or anyone else like them. This is like saying that you don't believe a quasar is billions of light years away because the wrong people looked in the telescope. Please explain why the test didn't work when feedback mechanisms were removed from the study and the random numbers were generated differently, because if the staring effect were real, this should have had no effect on the results.

[Thought2Much]

Jesus T2M... I'm right there with you in the materialist camp. But there's no need to be a dick about it.

 

I'm tired of being talked about as if I'm a lesser person for wanting evidence, and as if being a "materialist" is somehow a less advanced state than being a "believer."

[TrueFreedom]

I'm not suggesting that these prove anything, but if anyone is in the mood to read a few psychic anecdotes, these are pretty cool.  I've had several people tell me about knowing when loved ones were hurt or dying, but twins tend to have more frequent experiences:

http://paranormal.about.com/od/espandtelepathy/a/Twin-Telepathy-Best-Evidence.htm

[RankStranger]

 

Jesus T2M... I'm right there with you in the materialist camp. But there's no need to be a dick about it.

 

 

I'm tired of being talked about as if I'm a lesser person for wanting evidence, and as if being a "materialist" is somehow a less advanced state than being a "believer."

Sure, but at some point you just have to let it go - unless you're gonna Jihad against the whole goddamn world in the name of Holy Science. People believe different things. Ours is a pretty easily defensible position on the matter - no need to be an evangelist about it.

 

I honestly wish I could believe in 'paranormal' stuff. I WISH there was something like that out there. And in a sense I envy people who can believe it - or at least entertain the idea. Our own worldview is damn effective when it comes to problem solving and working out verifiable, repeatable 'truths'. Not everybody's mind works that way - and so long as they're not pushing destructive bullshit like Christianity, that's not a BAD thing. I mean, if we were talking YEC or something, I'd be right there with you ridiculing them. But Deva here is just saying she thinks some of this stuff is possible and not to be dismissed outright. I'm not sure I agree - but that's not unreasonable. And it's not the same thing as Young Earth Creationism for instance.

[florduh]

...some of this stuff is possible and not to be dismissed outright.

 

Nothing should be dismissed outright, but I think we all have different cutoff points where we can draw a final conclusion. I have investigated certain phenomena for years and concluded there's nothing to it and I eventually shut the door. I have friends who agree that though there is still an inconclusive result, some day we may be able to prove it's real so we must persevere. How many decades of a record no better than chance does it take? For me, it was about three, for some it never ends. Since so many claims have no observable effect and are unfalsifiable, the search continues. Not all brains work the same way, and I almost wish mine was capable of believing certain things despite the evidence.

[SciWalker]

Would it help if the limens were lubed? Or maybe lacquered? Or licked?

 

Certain hallucinogenic drugs do that.

[Deva]

 

 

And why has no one outside of the CIA or the KGB figured out how to use psychic powers, or even been able to confirm they exist? Remember, this was taken quite seriously by a large number of people involved in "real" science since the beginning of the last century. People have wanted to believe that these psychic abilities exist for quite a while. And yet all we get is some studies that show very strong results until you scrutinize the methodology more closely, and then the results go right back to random.

 

By the way, the link goes to an independent test of one of Sheldrake's own suggested experiments. I linked to it much earlier in this thread but it was ignored, probably because it didn't glowingly confirm what Sheldrake says. When numbers were properly randomized, they got no statistically relevant result. Oh, and they purposely selected people who believed in the staring effect already, so the only ones skeptical were those running the test. Or is that enough to ruin the delicate telepathic mojo? Does Sheldrake know of a way to build a Faraday cage that blocks out skepticism? Now that would be a useful thing to come out of psychic studies.

 

The methodology is never going to be good enough for the Skeptical Inquirer bunch. They are so biased toward their own materialistic ideal and so distorted in their criticism that I wouldn't waste much time reading it.  The fact is that telepathy of one kind or another exists, and is not a rare phenomenon.

 

Sheldrake has answered all of these criticisms.

 

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_staring_effect

 

 

It's not a rare phenomenon, but you just can't prove to anyone who doesn't already believe that it exists. And neither can anyone else, apparently.

 

If it can't be studied, it's just woo, but you can't admit to yourself that you've fallen for woo, so you maintain your belief in whatever it is that you think it is that can't be measured or quantified or proven.

 

I love how you use the word "materialistic" as a curse word as you type your posts on a computer that doesn't run on morphic resonance, but whose parts were developed by "materialistic" scientists who figured out the electromagnetic and chemical configurations that allow computing to take place.

 

I see desperation in this type of reply.  If it can't be studied, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, apparently, since statistically there is proof it does.

 

I do see materialism as a limited world view. But if I have used it as a "curse word" I didn't intend to do so.  I wasn't the one that started this by calling Shedrake a "moron". I don't believe it was you either, but that is what got me going. The wholesale condemnation of the man. I just won't stand for it.

[Deva]

 

 

Jesus T2M... I'm right there with you in the materialist camp. But there's no need to be a dick about it.

 

I'm tired of being talked about as if I'm a lesser person for wanting evidence, and as if being a "materialist" is somehow a less advanced state than being a "believer."

Sure, but at some point you just have to let it go - unless you're gonna Jihad against the whole goddamn world in the name of Holy Science. People believe different things. Ours is a pretty easily defensible position on the matter - no need to be an evangelist about it.

 

I honestly wish I could believe in 'paranormal' stuff. I WISH there was something like that out there. And in a sense I envy people who can believe it - or at least entertain the idea. Our own worldview is damn effective when it comes to problem solving and working out verifiable, repeatable 'truths'. Not everybody's mind works that way - and so long as they're not pushing destructive bullshit like Christianity, that's not a BAD thing. I mean, if we were talking YEC or something, I'd be right there with you ridiculing them. But Deva here is just saying she thinks some of this stuff is possible and not to be dismissed outright. I'm not sure I agree - but that's not unreasonable. And it's not the same thing as Young Earth Creationism for instance.

 

Rank Stranger:  That's right. Why should some possible powers of human and animal consciousness go unstudied? I am not talking creationism, I am not talking aliens or the Bermuda Triangle. I am talking about human consciousness and possible powers such as telepathy that work against the materialist point of view. I am sorry I am continually having to use the word "materialist" but I just don't know of anything else that is such a block against free inquiry in this area.  My position is that it needs continued study - is that wrong? There have been suggestive results.  A person who studies both sides of this issue must see that, in my opinion. And I was not always an advocate of paranormal study, but Sheldrake's experiments are really clever and they are well done - to this layman.

 

Again, I am just not going to stand for someone of Sheldrake's position and credentials to be called a moron and his experiments and books to be dismissed as "woo" and other names just because he is doing experiments in an area that seems to be forbidden by establishment science.

[hoosier]

Wow, we really need some xtians to show up ready to argue! I hate seeing ex-c's going after each other like this, this is not the forum I remember from back in '08.

 

That said, I am genuinely curious, Deva, what kind of arguments does a non materialist person like yourself use when arguing with xtians? For example, I can't see you criticizing them for using a god of the gaps fallacy. Perhaps I am mistaken but I don't see that one working very well for a non materialist as the xtain could fling it right back at them. 

[Deva]

Wow, we really need some xtians to show up ready to argue! I hate seeing ex-c's going after each other like this, this is not the forum I remember from back in '08.

 

That said, I am genuinely curious, Deva, what kind of arguments does a non materialist person like yourself use when arguing with xtians? For example, I can't see you criticizing them for using a god of the gaps fallacy. Perhaps I am mistaken but I don't see that one working very well for a non materialist as the xtain could fling it right back at them. 

Thank you for your interest hoosier, but I would rather keep this thread on track with Sheldrake and the video posted in the OP.  I have not dragged Christianity into this, have I? Nor do I intend to.

[skepticalme]

 

The fact is that telepathy of one kind or another exists, and is not a rare phenomenon.

 

Now that is dogma if I have ever heard it.  Just substitute telepathy for Jesus.  No evidence will convince you no matter how unreproducable it is.   A hundred years ago Radio would have been in the same camp.  Radio is reproducable and now ten billion machines use it.  Your TV, your phone, your music, your internet revolve around.  One is real the other is not.  But go ahead and keep believing in magic, it will get you just as far as religion.

[Deva]

 

 

The fact is that telepathy of one kind or another exists, and is not a rare phenomenon.

 

Now that is dogma if I have ever heard it.  Just substitute telepathy for Jesus.  No evidence will convince you no matter how unreproducable it is.   A hundred years ago Radio would have been in the same camp.  Radio is reproducable and now ten billion machines use it.  Your TV, your phone, your music, your internet revolve around.  One is real the other is not.  But go ahead and keep believing in magic, it will get you just as far as religion.

 

You think I am being dogmatic? Just look what you have dragged into this - religion. There is statistical evidence whether you like it or not or whether that type of evidence appeals to you or not.   You are so desperate - that's why you must drag Jesus into this, as well as magic, and we are not discussing either of those topics. 

 

Those reading this thread will see this is at least the second time Jesus and Christianity has been mentioned, and not by me.

 

Its very tempting to drag this discussion into other areas, but I am talking about powers of human and animal consciousness.  Powers that are natural, but unexplained as yet by science. I am also talking about the unwillingness of science to continue with experiments such as Sheldrake has done, and the vehement opposition to these types of experiments.

 

"..it will get you just far as religion" - I have no idea what you mean by that.