(precognition), as well as other "supernatural" or paranormal
have, in recent years, and unbeknownced to the multitudes, become well-documented
problem in the past in nailing these things down has been the lack of control
have over them. While we would record highly significant results on
one trial, we'd record
totally insignificant results on the next -- stuff like that. But
then, along came the technology for
accessing mega (mountains of) data and doing meta-analysis. Now, we
can sift out the 'noise'
and catch the sneaky little critters of the paranormal red-handed. See
www.princeton.edu/~pear/2.html and www.newtimes.org/issue/9710/97-10-scipsych.html.
2. In addition, quantum mechanics is providing a scientific basis
for this alleged
and space, simply, are not what we thought they were. What used to
be magic, or
"supernatural," in a scientific context, is now seen as part of
the natural, albeit normally hidden
from us, universe. Science has proven that Hamlet was right.
Look up "Bell's
on your search engines. Einstein called
this stuff "spooky."
And remember, all we need do here is establish the scientific plausibility
prophesy, so that we can move on to judge the OT claims of prophesy on their
Science has derived reliable rules,
or laws, regarding how things work. Claims of
supernatural phenomena are inconsistent with these rules.
science has missed some of the rules. Perhaps, there are whole other
there that science has not been able to identify or explore. Perhaps
science has missed these
rules because these rules are seldom applicable to a measurable extent.
Such would not be
unprecented -- science has been wrong before.
On the other hand, quantum mechanics is going where no man has gone before
and is turning up
what appear to be 'supernatural' events. For good examples, use your
search engines to look up
"Bell's Theorem" and "quantum nonlocality." Einstein
called some of the predicted (and now
proven) dynamics of quantum mechanics, "spooky."
The alleged supernatural phenomena has not been replicable.
of the alleged supernatural phenomena are,
indeed, replicable -- see
There has been a long history of fraud in regard to this alleged phenomena.
There are a number of awards available to anyone who can prove paranormal
as far as I know, have yet to be claimed. Pick up any issue of "Skeptic"
or "The Skeptical
Inquirer" for more.
Mr. Savage, Thank you for your recent inquiry and for your interest
in our program. We
have no interest in any of the so-called "awards" for convincing
demonstration of "paranormal"
ability because 1) we do not study "paranormal" phenomena; we
regard any phenomenon that
can be demonstrated under controlled laboratory conditions as normal, even
if we do not yet
understand how it works (we do not yet understand how combustion works either!);
and 2) most
of them are scams, designed to humiliate people who disagree with the dogmatic
of the "skeptics" who offer them. It is also worth observing
that a skeptic, according to one
dictionary definition, is "someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs."
The defenders of
accepted belief who constitute CSICOP are technically not "skeptics,"
but zealots. Nor have
they ever investigated anything scientifically, to the best of my knowledge."
PEAR Laboratory Manager, see#2 above and #6 below]
I emailed CSICOP regarding the PEAR Laboratory research back on 8/30/03,
and at this point,
9/27/03, they haven't answered me.
We humans tend to want to believe in supernatural phenomena and consequently
them where they don't exist.
skeptical "zealots," described above, have the same problem, just
in the opposite direction.
6. For every "well documented" paranormal act of precognition,
one could probably find
numerous well documented debunkings as well. James Randi and others have
made careers out
of disproving psychic claims.
many well documented acts of precognition as there are well-documented
debunkings, the pro-precognition side is winning -- the side trying to prove
a negative is always at
In addition, in reality, the number of 'well-documented' debunkings of precognition
near the number of 'well-documented' acts of precognition. Serious
psychic research has been
going on since at least 1882 and is currently being treated very seriously
at very serious
universities. For instance, by 1997 a certain type of rigorous telepathy
experiment had been
conducted in 15 different universities around the world (including Cornell
University in New
york, Edinburgh University in Scotland, Goetburg University in Sweden and
the University of
Amsterdam in the Netherlands) some 2500 times, with the odds against chance
of getting the
overall results they did being over a billion to one. See
And, according to http://www.p-i-a.com/Magazine/Issue3/Intuition_3.htm,
confirmational studies (have been) critical for demonstrating the reality
of precognition. The
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) group, one of Princeton
engineering groups, conducted a series of such studies. Robert
Jahn established PEAR in 1979
when he was the Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science at
University. Since that time, this group has been working to
better understand "the role of
consciousness in the establishment of physical reality." Their
results confirm that 20 years ago
many of the phenomena that were referred to as "anomalies" are
a normal part of the way the