2 ms·
Can you say or link to more about the metaanalysis problem? I haven't heard this before, and am not putting together the pieces myself. One of the results of t
by jrochkind1 4y ago
Can you say or link to more about the metaanalysis problem? I haven't heard this before, and am not putting together the pieces myself.
One of the results of the lack of the "big debunking bang" is that nobody seems to have learned from it, and the identical thing could happen again, as someone else pointed out in this thread, with Daryl Bem more recently, who is probably the "ESP guy" the OP actually meant (I hadn't heard of him before).
(I think both Bem and Rhine were not intentionally fraudulent, but well-intentioned... the lessons of how good intentions can lead to accidental statistical manipulation were not learned, and probably still happen all over, not just in disrepuptable areas like ESP)
[I can't seem to find it now, but I recall reading something from someone writing in the 30s, someone who is still considered a reputable scientist today, on the lines of "I didn't want to believe in esp, but I am forced to recognize it scientifically on the strength of Rhine's research." But I can't recall who!]
- buescher 4y agoI'm a bit out on a limb there that I haven't climbed on in years. Look at the ganzfeld debate from the mid-eighties, early nineties. On the acceptance of Rhine's results,I recall seeing something similar recently, possibly here on HN, but I don't recall details either.