Evidence for Emergence vs Filtration

If anecdotal data is of no scientific significance, we would have to throw out all medications, vaccinations and mental health therapies. The safety, side effect information, effectiveness results of all of these are based off of questionnaire data. Especially in mental health therapies where physical observations generally show no ailments, and we rely on the person's subjective description of their experience eg with anxiety and OCD.

I guess the symptoms and cures in the example above are measurable, though. I don't think many scientists deny that patients have NDE's and they can 'measure' some effects of that (personality changes etc) but when they (also) report that they have been out of their bodies, it's not measurable (Parnia is trying to measure that) 

If there was no out of body experience involved with NDE's, then it probably wouldn't be that much of a problem for science. As to the large collection of verified OBE/NDE's, they of course should be accepted as persuasive evidence. The only reason why they are not (accepted) by mainstream science is that they don't have to ! 

As long as there is even the remotest possibility that the report didn't actually happen that way (wriggle room), then they will insist on dismissing them, even if privately they may realise that something extraordinary is going on. 

I'm sure you're well aware of this, anyway. As Fenwick said, at the level we have to have it (evidence), we don't have it yet.

As Fenwick said, at the level we have to have it (evidence), we don't have it yet.

I’m not any kind of an expert on scientific papers, but isn’t there consensus among proponents that their is lots of very good evidence for lots of psi, in the form of scientific papers. People like Dean Raden, Jeffrey Mishlove and other very intelligent and reasonable people are of that opinion. 

So I’m left wondering if the evidence that you suggest is required is unattainable for the majority. Maybe it’s a case of those sceptics dying off and another generation with perhaps more advanced consciousness talking their place, as Max Plank suggested many years ago. 

After all, looking at the covid event, we have seen how people are unconvinced by very high level science, when they are convinced of another path. Alex at Skeptiko learned this and shared it with us years ago.

I’m not any kind of an expert on scientific papers, but isn’t there consensus among proponents that their is lots of very good evidence for lots of psi, in the form of scientific papers. People like Dean Raden, Jeffrey Mishlove and other very intelligent and reasonable people are of that opinion. 

So I’m left wondering if the evidence that you suggest is required is unattainable for the majority. Maybe it’s a case of those sceptics dying off and another generation with perhaps more advanced consciousness talking their place, as Max Plank suggested many years ago. 

After all, looking at the covid event, we have seen how people are unconvinced by very high level science, when they are convinced of another path. Alex at Skeptiko learned this and shared it with us years ago.

I'm (also) no expert, Stan so I'm basing my thoughts on this simply on what we can deduce from 46 years (now) of research. It's been largely ignored by mainstream science but those that have addressed it, such as French and Blackmore for instance (are they scientists?) are unwilling to accept case reports, even if they are verified. 

Parnia went to see Blackmore, some years back to get her approval. They have both stated that if Parnia gets hits and he's done the experiment correctly, they'll accept it. But they won't change their minds just on case reports alone.

Radin has joined that fringe group of scientists brave enough to stick their necks out. But science as a whole (mainstream) doesn't really pay much attention to him, unless I've missed something? Maybe I have.

I think Eben Alexander thought he might be enough of a 'big fish' to really shake science up, but all that's happened there is that they've done their damnedest to discredit him. As you point out, sceptics die. Maybe that's all that's necessary. 

One real highlight is Parnia's new research. First the study of hypothermic standstill and now terminal lucidity. I suspect it will be much easier to get a double blind hit in the former, than it is in chasing cardiac arrests, because they have full control of the time and circumstances.

Alex at Skeptiko learned this and shared it with us

Hrm.  Still hard for me to square this with what he's "teaching" these days.

I feel like there's certainly interest, but that interest is tempered by the inherent weirdness of PSI research and just culture of the time. We're around in the aftermath of the extreme skepticism of the 80s, 90s and 2000s, there's still a lot of fresh stuff there, not to mention the woo-y nature parapsychology has tied to it which makes it a target for atheism too. But you can see softening with Bem's studies, Cardena's meta analysis ect and the poor responses to them, especially the latter. Skeptics had their big push and now what do they talk about? Homeopathy and creationism? Yeah really doing the world a service.

I don't like to put too much weight on the whole next generation thing though, cause sure the old diehard skeptics will be gone, but then so will OUR researchers, and there's not as many crazy enthusiastic young people getting into parapsychology.

I feel like researchers who are there, interacting with this shit every day have their own ideas of its reality, but I don't think many of them would come out there and go "We've got it proved without shadow of a doubt.". They may think its robust enough for them personally who have seen and experienced it but much like Cardena's big paper, would publically be more along the lines of "is suggestive enough to warrant further research".

I feel like there's certainly interest, but that interest is tempered by the inherent weirdness of PSI research and just culture of the time. 

not to mention the woo-y nature parapsychology has tied to it 

OUR researchers, and there's not as many crazy enthusiastic young people getting into parapsychology.

I feel like researchers who are there, interacting with this shit every day have their own ideas of its reality, but I don't think many of them would come out there and go "We've got it proved without shadow of a doubt.". 

I strongly assert this is bull shit.

Science research has two phases:, data gathering, with an eye to pattern matching; and then data analysis and (hopefully) logical conclusions.  The date gathering - no matter what targets are observed - is the bedrock of science.  The conclusions are where some (both good and poor) get tenure and sell books.

There is NOTHING inherently weird or woo-y in the targets of PSI research or abnormal about the natural data from observation.  Trained scientific observers, whether young or old, are not "crazy enthusiasts".  

I don't have any idea what you think is "it" (Paranormal Events) --- but to the world full of people who have had an anomalous experience should be offended.     

I strongly assert this is bull shit.

Science research has two phases:, data gathering, with an eye to pattern matching; and then data analysis and (hopefully) logical conclusions.  The date gathering - no matter what targets are observed - is the bedrock of science.  The conclusions are where some (both good and poor) get tenure and sell books.

There is NOTHING inherently weird or woo-y in the targets of PSI research or abnormal about the natural data from observation.  Trained scientific observers, whether young or old, are not "crazy enthusiasts".  

I don't have any idea what you think is "it" (Paranormal Events) --- but to the world full of people who have had an anomalous experience should be offended.     

No no I came off the wrong way. I meant more, when a random person thinks of parapsychology they don't think of the like 5 level blinding mediumship studies or books like The Self Does Not Die and Bruce Greyson or Dean Radin ect ect, they think of shitty fake mediums, christians selling books about proof of god, Deepak going around and saying anything and ghost hunters and shit. There isn't any actual relation of course, but a layperson doesn't know or care cause that's all they think it is or what it might represent, so what do they look for? Cheap debunking or skeptical comeback articles. They won't look into the studies themselves, read rebuttals back by authors, just yup it's silly like I thought move on. 

And when I said crazy enthusiastic scientists I meant more like, how you see people going into chemistry and they're like "Fuck yes I love chemistry!". You don't see that in parapsychology, you see young people just very gently dipping their toes in because they're afraid of being associated. We don't have as huge an influx of new fresh enthusiastic researchers as what we might like, so sure once all the old skeptics are gone they'll be gone, but so will be some of our best (and oldest) alongside them.