Chris
2017-08-19, 06:06 PM
I thought it might be interesting to discuss this paper from 2004, in which Kittenis, Caryl and Stevens exposed a "sender" to flashes of light while recording the EEG of a "receiver" in a different room:
https://koestlerunit.files.wordpress.com...l-2004.pdf
I saw this figure illustrating the average spatial distributions of their EEG measurements in the SPR's "Paranormal Review" last year, and was quite amazed by it. The top sequence is an average over 39 subjects viewing the flashes directly (as the "senders" did in the study) and the bottom sequence is an average over 18 receivers. Time runs from left to right, and the bar in the middle starting at 0ms marks the period of the flashes.
[Image: KittenisColourFig.jpg]
My initial reaction was that it was a very clear demonstration of telepathy, and I couldn't imagine how a sceptic could refuse to accept it. (Robert Charman, the author of the article in "Paranormal Review", was more interested in the appearance of precognition in the bottom sequence.)
Now, having thought about it more, I find it nowhere near as convincing. I was going to explain why, but I think maybe I'll just invite comments for now, and see what - if anything - people come up with.
https://koestlerunit.files.wordpress.com...l-2004.pdf
I saw this figure illustrating the average spatial distributions of their EEG measurements in the SPR's "Paranormal Review" last year, and was quite amazed by it. The top sequence is an average over 39 subjects viewing the flashes directly (as the "senders" did in the study) and the bottom sequence is an average over 18 receivers. Time runs from left to right, and the bar in the middle starting at 0ms marks the period of the flashes.
[Image: KittenisColourFig.jpg]
My initial reaction was that it was a very clear demonstration of telepathy, and I couldn't imagine how a sceptic could refuse to accept it. (Robert Charman, the author of the article in "Paranormal Review", was more interested in the appearance of precognition in the bottom sequence.)
Now, having thought about it more, I find it nowhere near as convincing. I was going to explain why, but I think maybe I'll just invite comments for now, and see what - if anything - people come up with.