4 ms·

The records show that this was transferred to the CIA in 1995 and discontinued. If they secretly continued it, they sure did a great job in the run-up to 9/11.

The records show that this was transferred to the CIA in 1995 and discontinued. If they secretly continued it, they sure did a great job in the run-up to 9/11. If these guys are open with their data, it will be rather straightforward to identify the error that they committed that led to these results. If not, a few other people will try to replicate their results and fail. At least some things in their field of study are always consistent. Also, I'm a scientist, not an engineer. Oh, also, let's be clear here. If what these fellows propose is true, then they will have simultaneously discovered both of the following: 1) Reverse causality 2) Evidence for biological receptors for the mediator of reverse causality It's basically hilarious, except for the fact that the money that funds this could be spent more productively on literally anything else. In general, parapsychology consists of the practice of accidentally or willfully misunderstanding the scientific method.

Alex3917 16y ago
"If what these fellows propose is true, then they will have simultaneously discovered 1) Reverse causality 2) Evidence for biological receptors for the mediator of reverse causality" If either is true, then history suggests that we'll later look back and realize that we already had a ton of evidence for both of these hypotheses, but that it was all being used instead as evidence that the old paradigm was correct. "If these guys are open with their data, it will be rather straightforward to identify the error that they committed that led to these results." Maybe. With a lot of these studies it hasn't been obvious if there has been an error or if so what it was, which is why the field keeps going. "Parapsychology consists of the practice of accidentally or willfully misunderstanding the scientific method." The hypotheses put forward by parapsychology might well be false, but that's no reason to trash talk the researchers. I don't think there's any reason to think they're less intelligent, competent, or ethical than any other researchers, and a lot of them are highly respected, e.g. Stan Grof.
- carbocation 16y ago
  Time and again, researchers in this field have shown that they cannot or choose not to conduct reproducible science. In its decades of existence, parapsychology has never had a reproducible finding that cannot be explained by common physics or psychology. J Archibald Wheeler was right to try to eject parapsychology from the AAAS. Why do you say that Stan Grof is associated with parapsychology? I had only heard of him in connection to psychedelic research previously, which is something else entirely.
  - Alex3917 16y ago
    He co-founded the field of transpersonal psychology, which is very similar. His research in this area was highly regarded even by Carl Sagan, who was probably the most famous skeptic of his day. He was especially interested in birth memories, memories of past lives, and also syncronicities.
    - carbocation 16y ago
      Interesting. I wasn't familiar with transpersonal psychology before, but the wikipedia article on the topic specifically cautions against conflating parapsychology with transpersonal psychology. Consequently, I don't think that what I've said could reasonably be interpreted as an attack on people who you say are reputable, like Stan Grof. Transpersonal psychology sounds harmless: a soft science that makes soft claims. Unless they barge onto the scene and start claiming that spirituality has a physical basis that (only) they can perceive, I'm probably not going to have any concerns with what they do. In contrast, parapsychology makes claims about the physical world that would have real impact if true, but in the end what they claim is never true. If they've simply been suffering from "bad luck" for the past several decades, I think that real scientists can be forgiven for having a hard time distinguishing that run of bad luck from from incompetence or fraud. One thing is true: on HN, you and I always seem to get into very interesting discussions (from my perspective, at least). I hope that my stern words for the field of parapsychology don't cloud the fact that I wish you well.
      - Alex3917 16y ago
        Yeah good discussion, I wish you well also. Anyway time for bed, but definitely go check out some of Grof's work. He seems to be really interested in reincarnation, which to me seems a step beyond psi in terms of plausibility. You almost couldn't have reincarnation without psi, or at least whatever underlying mechanism was powering it.

Alex3917 16y ago

"If what these fellows propose is true, then they will have simultaneously discovered 1) Reverse causality 2) Evidence for biological receptors for the mediator of reverse causality" If either is true, then history suggests that we'll later look back and realize that we already had a ton of evidence for both of these hypotheses, but that it was all being used instead as evidence that the old paradigm was correct. "If these guys are open with their data, it will be rather straightforward to identify the error that they committed that led to these results." Maybe. With a lot of these studies it hasn't been obvious if there has been an error or if so what it was, which is why the field keeps going. "Parapsychology consists of the practice of accidentally or willfully misunderstanding the scientific method." The hypotheses put forward by parapsychology might well be false, but that's no reason to trash talk the researchers. I don't think there's any reason to think they're less intelligent, competent, or ethical than any other researchers, and a lot of them are highly respected, e.g. Stan Grof.

carbocation 16y ago
Time and again, researchers in this field have shown that they cannot or choose not to conduct reproducible science. In its decades of existence, parapsychology has never had a reproducible finding that cannot be explained by common physics or psychology. J Archibald Wheeler was right to try to eject parapsychology from the AAAS. Why do you say that Stan Grof is associated with parapsychology? I had only heard of him in connection to psychedelic research previously, which is something else entirely.
- Alex3917 16y ago
  He co-founded the field of transpersonal psychology, which is very similar. His research in this area was highly regarded even by Carl Sagan, who was probably the most famous skeptic of his day. He was especially interested in birth memories, memories of past lives, and also syncronicities.
  - carbocation 16y ago
    Interesting. I wasn't familiar with transpersonal psychology before, but the wikipedia article on the topic specifically cautions against conflating parapsychology with transpersonal psychology. Consequently, I don't think that what I've said could reasonably be interpreted as an attack on people who you say are reputable, like Stan Grof. Transpersonal psychology sounds harmless: a soft science that makes soft claims. Unless they barge onto the scene and start claiming that spirituality has a physical basis that (only) they can perceive, I'm probably not going to have any concerns with what they do. In contrast, parapsychology makes claims about the physical world that would have real impact if true, but in the end what they claim is never true. If they've simply been suffering from "bad luck" for the past several decades, I think that real scientists can be forgiven for having a hard time distinguishing that run of bad luck from from incompetence or fraud. One thing is true: on HN, you and I always seem to get into very interesting discussions (from my perspective, at least). I hope that my stern words for the field of parapsychology don't cloud the fact that I wish you well.
    - Alex3917 16y ago
      Yeah good discussion, I wish you well also. Anyway time for bed, but definitely go check out some of Grof's work. He seems to be really interested in reincarnation, which to me seems a step beyond psi in terms of plausibility. You almost couldn't have reincarnation without psi, or at least whatever underlying mechanism was powering it.