"science has already proven the existence of some forms of ESP and also telekenesis"

No. I remember reading that. I laughed.

-Zeno

It's not even wrong.
Some of what he posts rises to the level of being wrong, but not often enough for this to be surprising. Irritating? not really, it's an illustration of the danger of turning off rationality but not directly threatening so it's at the shrug and a headshake level.

No and no. You?

No and yes, greatly. Scientific illiteracy always bothers me, especially when it's used to prop up pseudoscience.

No and yes. A profoundly ignorant statement.

I find that statement irritating. I do not find it surprising. I find it irritating because presumably the implication is that [science has verified some ESP] = [science proves I'm not delusional when I say I have a psychic bond with certain people, or that magical miracles can and do happen].

I also find it irritating that 2+2 publishes poker advice articles by this person. It reminds me of the fact that 2+2 isn't a grass roots community seeking to learn (and teach) about poker; it is of course a business. It bursts the bubble. It brings me crashing back to capitalism and reality. C'est la vie.

The "already" is the interesting part to me. It implies that other apparent manifestations of "God," the existence of which is considered dubious by believers in Sklanskyanity, will also be "proven."

It's interesting that you think using the power - wait - abusing the power of your position to put my name at the top of a thread will somehow - do what? Am I supposed to faint? Go on life tilt? You do realize that I know this means you read through all of my deathless prose to choose just the right one to post here. Unfortunately for your sycophants, you also chose the one with the links to the unassailable mathematics that proves what I said is factual. This how you get those ancient rocks off, Sklansky? Trying to prove to yourself that you are superior to everyone?

Do you know why they don't follow the links and find out the Truth? Because, like you, they all suffer from such low self-esteem that if they had to face their philosophy being wrong - they are convinced what is left of their egos could not survive.

What you do is simply wrong. Like you, these kids were brainwashed into thinking that only "smart" people are worthwhile people. Like you, most of them are woefully undereducated, and don't know - well - anything really about how science actually works.

Unlike you, they are young. Most of them have little or no power base from which to operate. And you, deus ex foruma, spend all this time propping up your self-image with your never-ending delight in starting the storms - Sklansky as God.

Get the f over yourself and go get the dam PhD and leave these children alone. Then maybe you can stop embarrassing yourself on TV.

David - you're going to live forever. It's time to start dealing with it because you haven't got that much time left. And while you are making jokes about me, your dreams betray you.

wtf are you talking about. you made a ridiculous statement and someone called you out on it. no one is abusing his power to attack your person. I would also love to see a link to a peer reviewed scientific paper confirming your claim.

someone has penis envy or napoleon complex

Get a grip. The thread is meant to generate site traffic, that's all. lol..

Its funny how you degrade peoples beliefs as young and naive at the same time you're protesting your beliefs being degraded.

No and Yes. Especially since this guy claims to be a teacher of science courses.

Que the "I've been teaching evolutionary theory before you were born."

I'm irritated but not suprised that David didn't provide a courtesy link to the post where Praxising made the statement. Praxising provided links to the research group that claimed those results. As far as I could tell, the research group - PEARS or something like that - looked to have some credible credentials. From the site description of the research it sounded like they had reasonable control conditions. I don't recall anyone providing references or links to credible sources refuting the findings of the group. As I recall, most of the critical discussion amounted to shooting down strawman false implications of the findings.

Now, with Sklansky presenting Praxising's statement denuded of his supporting links it's being ridiculed out of hand. Shoddy treatment imo.

PairTheBoard

Nah. If Prax's claimed that the moon had a giant chessboard buried just below the surface links wouldn't help him for much the same reason.
Prax's claims when "proven" will be screaming headlines... praxising won't be needed to alert the world.

luckyme -

Did you ever read DS's post here? I still can't decipher the ratio of backhanded to compliment...

OP -

Praxising doesn't know his way around the grammar of 'prove' IMO.

David likes to be a funny guy and stir the pot. No biggie.

I don't think it's backhanded or a compliment, it's how he thinks things must be if his viewpoint is correct. If his premise is correct then I rather agree with him.

It is all true:

http://www.synchronizeduniverse.com/index.html

http://www.synchronizeduniverse.com/about_author.htm

-Zeno

Here's a link to Praxising's Thread on the topic:

Science Studies Metaphenomena

Praxising provides several supporting links in the OP to what appear to be reputable sources. His lead statement from the PEAR reasearch:

Link to the PEAR website:
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research


Do you know these claims are ridiculous without even investigating them?


PairTheBoard

"Ohh fiction can be fun...but I find the reference section to be a little more enlightening" ~ Ace Ventura

Prax, PTB or me will not be the ones capable of establishing that these claims are established. When they are established we won't have to chase around the internet to find out about them. It would be awesome, on par with relativity.
It's actually quite difficult to find people that don't believe in mysterious forces of some kind, so it won't be resisted when it's established. Not like having to turn over geocentrism.
That they may be established one day is not ridiculous, to claim that they are "proven" today, is. Here is from one of the supporting sites references requesting a "Science of the Subjective" -
Robert G. Jahn and Brenda J. Dunne of the PEAR project.
They want a chance to "prove" their claims using a "new science". That seems a long way from Prax's -

Imbedded in the above PEAR website article are links to the Journal of Scientific Exploration


Here is their website:

http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal.html


Wikipedia article on the JSE:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal...ic_Exploration

From wikipedia article:

'Some observers regard the JSE as a legitimate attempt to explore the frontiers of science, while others view it as a forum for scientifically objectionable or dubious ideas. Some academics have noted that JSE publishes on anomalous issues, topics often on the fringe of science. The journal is not indexed in Web of Science, an indexing service for leading scientific journals, provided by Thomson Reuters.

Of the SSE and JSE, journalist Michael Lemonick writes, "Pretty much anything that might have shown up on The X-Files or in the National Enquirer shows up first here. But what also shows up is a surprising attitude of skepticism."

Kendrick Frazier, Editor of Skeptical Inquirer and CSICOP fellow has criticized JSE and argues that:

"The JSE, while presented as neutral and objective, appears to hold a hidden agenda. They seem to be interested in promoting fringe topics as real mysteries and they tend to ignore most evidence to the contrary. They publish 'scholarly' articles promoting the reality of dowsing, neo-astrology, ESP, and psychokinesis. Most of the prominent and active members are strong believers in the reality of such phenomena." '

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I smell something fishy going on. JSE may promote dubious research cloaked under the legitimacy of a “science journal.” - creation science advocates and societies have adapted this same ingenuous approach to make it appear that genuine and honest research is being conducted by having their own "peer-reviewed journals". But the whole thing is disingenuous and a disguise, and the research shabby and bias based on a pre-concieved agenda.

-Zeno

Yeah I just looked at the society for scientific exploration website for a minute and some of the titles of their speeches made me laugh. "Straightforward and Obvious Disproof of the HIV/AIDS Theory" may be my favorite though.

http://www.scientificexploration.org/

Although I should note that I don't really intend this as an indictment of anyone but the SSE.