The Global Consciousness Project

I don't get your comment about new age mumbo-jumbo. 

I've got a news flash for you: everything we talk about here is new age mumbo-jumbo!

Nah, that' s too extreme.
Distinctions need to be made, if you can't see the difference between a Sheldrake's book (or research) and one by Chopra I think you need your eyes checked (multiple times!)

No offense

Nah, that' s too extreme.
Distinctions need to be made, if you can't see the difference between a Sheldrake's book (or research) and one by Chopra I think you need your eyes checked (multiple times!)

No offense

I still say- minor details aside, everything we talk about here is what most "normal" people would call weird. At least most people I know.

Agree with your second point but my experience of the new age is a bunch of unquestioning folk, mainly hippies and old housewives, who, entranced by every whim and fancy of the paranormal very much merit the stereotypes people make of them.  I for one would rather not be seen in that light these days.  (I admit shamefully I was once one of them!)

OK. I see the distinction. I'll buy that. 

Does anyone ever comment on your Avatar? Scares the crap out of me... OK maybe I'm being a sissy,,,, but still...

I hadn't seen this before, and found it quite interesting. Robert Jahn, the founder of the PEAR lab, died on 15 November. The Global Consciousness Project was in a sense a continuation of the work done there on random number generators. The GCP data were analysed for the 24 hours following his death. It's not stated clearly, but it sounds as though they prespecified the standard GCP hypothesis before looking at any data. The result was striking, and represented a p value of 0.001 and a Z value of 3.096:
http://global-mind.org/events/bob.jahn.html

One reason I think this is interesting is that Peter Bancel's analysis of the GCP data led him to the conclusion that they reflected an experimenter psi effect based on clairvoyant/precognitive selection of the time periods of the events, rather than a kind of micro-psychokinetic effect of global consciousness.

On the one hand, it's certainly plausible that the death of Robert Jahn would have a much stronger effect on the experimenter, Roger Nelson, as a former colleague, than on the world at large.

But on the other, the starting point of the time period in this case is fixed by the time of death (which was apparently known, as the commentary says he died "surrounded by family and loved ones"), so there doesn't seem to be any scope for experimenter choice there. However, it could be argued that the length of the time period was still a matter of choice by the experimenter. It was chosen to be 24 hours, which seems a natural enough choice. But a glance at the table of previous events shows that while the time period after the death of a public figure was sometimes 24 hours, it was also sometimes shorter. Perhaps it would be interesting to calculate the probability that the Z value would rise by chance to 3.096 at some point in a 24 hour period.

One reason I think this is interesting is that Peter Bancel's analysis of the GCP data led him to the conclusion that they reflected an experimenter psi effect based on clairvoyant/precognitive selection of the time periods of the events, rather than a kind of micro-psychokinetic effect of global consciousness.

An interesting point mentioned in the recent podcast interview with Garret Moddel (http://www.originsofconsciousness.com/or...-abilities) was that in 2009 Helmut Schmidt [at the age of 81, 16 years after his retirement] wrote to the Journal of Scientific Exploration, suggesting that the psi effect seen in the Global Consciousness Project was a goal-oriented pychokinetic experimenter effect. Roger Nelson and Peter Bancel responded, arguing on the basis of other correlations seen in the data, in addition to the pre-specified test statistic, that the effect didn't seem to be goal-oriented in origin. (Peter Bancel has since come round to the idea that it is goal-oriented, though through a rather different mechanism.)

The exchange can be read on pages 507-516 of volume 23 of the journal:
https://www.scientificexploration.org/jo...ber-4-2009

Thanks for this, chris. Stephen Brade has ably pointed out that that drawing any assumptions about the motive force of psi. Is tricky at best.

Thanks for this, chris. Stephen Brade has ably pointed out that drawing any assumptions about the motive force of psi. Is tricky at best.