(2017-09-17, 10:14 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]Of course, shield the devices from all sources that can affect them, and control the experiments properly...
Which is what they did, Radin and Guerrer both told you this - why still say the experiments are 'junk'? It's strange, do you think if you pretend you haven't been disproven then people will forget this happened?
(2017-09-17, 11:08 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]This is an example of well designed, well controlled, double-blinded study...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication...T_at_30_Hz
It's results are way way more solid, controversial, puzzling and therefore interesting to me, than any of Radin's studies. It's like good healthy food. Where as Radin's studies are like 'junk' food, satisfying to consume until you look a little deeper...
I think it is perhaps the fact that it is studying a specific material phenomenon -electro-mag fields- , that makes it so appealing. It is relatively easy to design an experiment around "material" things that we sort of understand how to create and measure.
No?
(2017-09-17, 11:08 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]This is an example of well designed, well controlled, double-blinded study...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication...T_at_30_Hz
It's results are way way more solid, controversial, puzzling and therefore interesting to me, than any of Radin's studies I've read. It's like good healthy food. Where as Radin's studies are like 'junk' food, satisfying to consume until you look a little deeper... as one learns more, one learns to reduce the amount of junk food one consumes.
Interesting that you skirted around what I said beforehand. You keep saying Radin's work is junk, yet he stated that he controlled for your 'concerns' about his double slit studies etc. Why are you still saying his work is junk?
(2017-09-17, 10:05 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]But Chris, it's so wide open... what is such a wide open study supposed to tell us...?
My point is that no one has been able to suggest, even in general terms, how the departure of the RNGs from ideal behaviour could produce correlations between the outputs of two different devices - and still less why this should be observed only during periods of global events (which, we're told, were defined before anyone examined the data).
(2017-09-17, 10:11 AM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not sure how these results are supposed to be psi-like. How would they be connected to reincarnation, for example?
As far as I know, no one has suggested they are connected to reincarnation.
I must say I find your question very surprising. Do you know anything at all about the Global Consciousness Project?
(2017-09-17, 11:25 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]It was in response to Chris's post.
That doesn't answer my question or have much to do with anything. You had specific concerns about Radin's experiments, Radin told you he controlled for your concerns, why still claim his experiments are 'junk'? Extremely disingenuous and makes clear your concerns are not genuine. And you responded to my post...
(2017-09-17, 11:24 AM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]My point is that no one has been able to suggest, even in general terms, how the departure of the RNGs from ideal behaviour could produce correlations between the outputs of two different devices - and still less why this should be observed only during periods of global events (which, we're told, were defined before anyone examined the data).
No one has suggested a reason why because they can't, to some people psi is impossible and all these results must be down to something other then an anomalous transfer of information, the mind affecting anything physical etc. It's the extreme nature of some people's statements about Parapsychology, or outright lying/misleading statements (I've called FLS out on this before in terms of misrepresenting the views of two people I know personally) that's helped pushed me to being a psi proponent.
(2017-09-17, 11:39 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]Oh, for exactly the reasons I've already stated elsewhere... were you under the assumption that Radin had satisfied my concerns? Then I can set you straight... he didn't.
That's your personal issue then, not his. For example you in desperation claimed that meditators did better then non meditators because of chanting, Radin told you they weren't allowed to chant or make noise - was that not satisfying enough for you?
I have a lot of time for reasonable, constructive criticisms of Parapsychology, not false claims of research being 'junk'. You also seem to think that your personal concerns are very important - why should they be?
(2017-09-17, 11:33 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]As I said, most people are probably not very interested... because there are so many ways such an effect could be observed.
It's fair enough if you're not interested.
But otherwise, if you're claiming the effect can be produced by normal means, you need to explain how. I have never seen anyone explain how.
(2017-09-17, 11:51 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]But the results are produced by normal means...? Unless you're saying they are not, and then you need to explain how?
By "normal", I mean "non-psi".