Why has this forum become so slow?

I am extremely concerned that this forum has become so very quiet. I saw this as a place set to replace Skeptiko as it has drifted off-topic in recent years under Alex's control.

I am happy to accept the greater control applied here to exclude off topic subjects - but where is everybody?

Obviously there are a lot of interesting threads here, but I find it useful to swap ideas with people - not just read books on the subject of psi in its most general sense.

Sci seems to tempt people into discussions - and his contributions are invariably interesting - and yet sometimes nobody replies to him, or the conversation rapidly peters out.

I hope this didn't start when I arrived (yes I know a few people dislike me strongly) but my only reason for being here is the same as most of you - a recognition that the materialist worldview simply does not make sense.

People change over time and their interests and attitudes alter and they might lose interest in forums where they previously posted a lot.

I think that for a forum to thrive, it needs a constant source of new members. Skeptiko had new people coming in via the podcast. Blogs with active comment sections work the same way, new people find the blog and then are drawn into commenting.

In my opinion if you want to revive the forums you have to find a way to bring in new people.

One of my friends, who is particularly interested in apparitions, is up for contributing to a twitter space (if we can get the timing right). So that's one extra person 

Is timing a concern? You can have have an ongoing group message on Twitter.

I worry about the idea of putting it out on social media etc.  If that is necessary to keep the forum going then I shall back out gracefully.  I don't want this forum to become heavily biased according to trendy paranormal beliefs, I would like it to remain fairly pragmatic, neutral and intelligent.  For example, I don't want people being members here if they are going to state as given fact, their personal beliefs instead of discussing the evidence itself from a neutral point of view.  The forum already hints at that from time to time but we have, in my opinion, managed to keep things largely factual and down to earth.  I worry about it being advertised on emotion-based media like Twitter.  What next?  Tik-Tok?  If it is necessary then go for it, I just hope it isn't.

People change over time and their interests and attitudes alter and they might lose interest in forums where they previously posted a lot.

I think that for a forum to thrive, it needs a constant source of new members. Skeptiko had new people coming in via the podcast. Blogs with active comment sections work the same way, new people find the blog and then are drawn into commenting.

In my opinion if you want to revive the forums you have to find a way to bring in new people.

Maybe. Though the question arises, what subject matter and points of view might they have to contribute? Maybe at least a few of us have been around the block several times discussing the same topics. We should welcome sceptics here, but it doesn't seem to work out very well. I call myself a sceptic - I find it hard to believe most claimed photos of paranormal happenings. At best I leave some of them open-ended, no conclusion. But often  sceptics are just so tethered to existing beliefs that there is no way to find common ground. As for those who do accept some psi or spiritual aspects of things, even then it often struggles to raise much interest if it's just something already familiar-sounding.

Really, what got me into this forum, and skeptiko before it, was the possibility of new evidence. Experimental findings. That's where the interest is. But how often does something appear which represents a significant kind of progress?

Maybe. Though the question arises, what subject matter and points of view might they have to contribute? Maybe at least a few of us have been around the block several times discussing the same topics. We should welcome sceptics here, but it doesn't seem to work out very well. I call myself a sceptic - I find it hard to believe most claimed photos of paranormal happenings. At best I leave some of them open-ended, no conclusion. But often  sceptics are just so tethered to existing beliefs that there is no way to find common ground. As for those who do accept some psi or spiritual aspects of things, even then it often struggles to raise much interest if it's just something already familiar-sounding.

Really, what got me into this forum, and skeptiko before it, was the possibility of new evidence. Experimental findings. That's where the interest is. But how often does something appear which represents a significant kind of progress?

I think you nailed it. I'm still waiting on Parnia's aware studies. It seems like horror films and ghost tv shows are how the paranormal gets represented in the general population which I wouldn't consider progress.

I think you nailed it. I'm still waiting on Parnia's aware studies. It seems like horror films and ghost tv shows are how the paranormal gets represented in the general population which I wouldn't consider progress.

I really think that Parnia's aware studies are almost redundant. I mean the evidence from people who have NDEs in which they can describe details from operations is very compelling to me - particularly since these are typically viewed from above.

I think it might have been better to resist the push back claiming that people might still be listening to what is going on or viewing it in some way. When you think about it, that is absurd. How much of the process of filling a tooth is one aware of while it is going on - for example, could you recognise the tools used? In this case you are typically wide awake with only one tooth frozen down, and eyes open.

I think at least some skeptics aren't interested in getting at the truth, but merely in 'winning'. One way to win, is to force the proponents into ever more convoluted studies that get nowhere. In particular, I can imagine that during an NDE, an individual's mind is tightly focused on what is going on that is relevant to them - not irrelevancies such as drawings on top of cupboards, etc.

Even if they did see some of the pictures, I can imagine a next line of attack might be to ask just how reflective the ceiling might be!

Really, what got me into this forum, and skeptiko before it, was the possibility of new evidence. Experimental findings. That's where the interest is. But how often does something appear which represents a significant kind of progress?

I'm of similar mind.  Its why I found the study from an Israeli team of scientists on directed evolution interesting and posted it on these forums.  It seemed to really challenge the bedrock of random mutation which, to my understanding, is foundational to modern scientific evolutionary theory.

I didn't get a ton of traction with it, so my breakthrough sense of the study was likely misplaced.  Still, its that type of experimental finding that really interests me.

I really think that Parnia's aware studies are almost redundant. I mean the evidence from people who have NDEs in which they can describe details from operations is very compelling to me - particularly since these are typically viewed from above.

I think it might have been better to resist the push back claiming that people might still be listening to what is going on or viewing it in some way. When you think about it, that is absurd. How much of the process of filling a tooth is one aware of while it is going on - for example, could you recognise the tools used? In this case you are typically wide awake with only one tooth frozen down, and eyes open.

I think at least some skeptics aren't interested in getting at the truth, but merely in 'winning'. One way to win, is to force the proponents into ever more convoluted studies that get nowhere. In particular, I can imagine that during an NDE, an individual's mind is tightly focused on what is going on that is relevant to them - not irrelevancies such as drawings on top of cupboards, etc.

Even if they did see some of the pictures, I can imagine a next line of attack might be to ask just how reflective the ceiling might be!

I am aware of how compelling much of the nde evidence is. Of course even if Parnias visual experiment had been successful many of the skeptics would have scoffed, but IMO it would have taken the conversation to a different level which the anecdotal reports (however compelling) fail to do. 
On another note, I was suprised  that Radin in his recent interview gave so much credence to the gamma ray presence in the epileptic as possibly explaining nde's. Any thoughts?

I am aware of how compelling much of the nde evidence is. Of course even if Parnias visual experiment had been successful many of the skeptics would have scoffed, but IMO it would have taken the conversation to a different level which the anecdotal reports (however compelling) fail to do. 
On another note, I was suprised  that Radin in his recent interview gave so much credence to the gamma ray presence in the epileptic as possibly explaining nde's. Any thoughts?

I feel Radin has some weird skepticism about NDEs going back for years...it's sorta like how Braude is very into Psi but very skeptical about the afterlife.*

*Caveat being Braude does lean toward the afterlife in Immortal Remains.

I feel Radin has some weird skepticism about NDEs going back for years...it's sorta like how Braude is very into Psi but very skeptical about the afterlife.*

*Caveat being Braude does lean toward the afterlife in Immortal Remains.

Radin did a recent podcast on Skeptiko which was rather weird. Most of the interview was good, but then Alex moved on to discuss his new company, Cognigenics, which is looking for ways to enhance a person's psychic potential by genetic manipulation!

He also showed uncritical support for m-RNA vaccines! Since he isn't a geneticist, this seemed like a rather wild leap.