Aren’t they just describing “bad luck”?
I always thought the RandomNumberGod just had it in for me…but now I know that I was doing it to myself all this time!
So, many people score ‘far higher’ than chance, many ‘far lower’ and many in middle…that would seem to indicate that probability is working just fine.
So THAT’S why I keep picking losing lottery numbers.
In a sense efforts like these are not describing bad luck so much as they are trying to measure the existence of what they speculate is the “force” of bad luck.
Ontologically, bad luck is even worse than ESP.
Well I don’t get any better results with letting the computer pick them either.
What’s the rule about headlines that are questions?
Your computer clearly has negative ESP. You should keep buying new ones until you get a good one.
So it isn’t when I psychically select the response that will turn out the worst for me?
If so, Glen Runciter from the Prudence Organization has a lucrative employment offer for you.
It seems like a better description would be Extra-Sensory Klutziness.
And that’s why you should always use two-sided t-tests when you’re reducing your parapsychological data!
Its called being blitheringly unaware. Instead of an extra 6th Sense, your current 5 are dulled and you are clueless. I believe Ben Carson suffers from this condition.
Not sure if you’re joking, but just in case you aren’t: Statistics don’t really work that way. It would be totally possible to have an experiment where things regress to a mean but are still highly significant.
I find that testing psychic ability only is effective when it involves arbitrary use of electric shocks.
The 50’s were a great time to be a psychologist, especially if you were a bit sadistic.
I didn’t see that one coming.
Plus all you had to do is have a couple of weird shaped tubes full of bubbling colored liquid in your office and people believed every crackpot idea you said under the guise of doing SCIENCE!!!