The man who destroyed skepticism

[cepheus42]

Yep, the problem with parapsychology is that, if it existed, it would have proven its existence already. At which point, we’d study it to determine HOW it’s working. You’re not going to run around studying “rocks for evidence that they sprout wings and fly,” you’re going to see a rock flying and think “shit, I better figure out the fuck that happened, in case they start falling on people.” We study gravity because we know it exists, we just don’t know how it works yet.

Someone mentioned SETI and the search for alien life on other words. And that’s an interesting point, because we literally have no proof life exists elsewhere at this point in our history. But there ARE some factors that explain why its not entirely a dumb thing to think about and look for:

• our sun is one of many, many stars in the universe
• those stars often contain planets
• and on the only planet we’ve so far been able to examine closely, intelligent life HAS evolved, through mechanisms we understand pretty well now.

Ergo, it’s not a big leap to conclude that other stars, with other worlds, would seem likely to have other forms of intelligent life just as our own does based on all the evidence we have.

Now, please show me someone moving something with their mind. No? How about someone reading someone else’s mind. No? Well surely someone can astral project and walk into that locked room over there and tell me what it contains. No?

Give me ANY evidence that ANY of thus stuff is real, and we’ll be throwing the money at you in bank bags. You’ll be buried in the stuff. We have almost 200 years of research now, research that continues in many places including a few respected universities, and zero to show for it. Nothing that folks claim they can do can be proven, or it turns out to be straight up fraud.

Like I said, I would LOVE for this stuff to be real. One of my favorite books of the last couple of years was Spoonbenders, by Daryl Gregory (seriously, if you like sci-fi and fantasy, and stories about broken families, read it, it’s wonderful0. I grew up in the era when mystical powers were going to be ours at any moment. But wanting it to be real doesn’t make it so, and I know better than to allow desire to replace cold, hard science and the facts. And in the light of cold, hard science… it all goes poof.

[L0ki]

@Anselm

or the stock market instead.

Just so:

• “In December 1980 an Apple will arise no man can eat. Invest thy money in Master Jobbes’s machine and good fortune will tend thy days.”

Do Notte Buye Betamacks

[megguspee]

And we’re still making advancements in understanding, quantum physics, and technology every year. Saying it shouldn’t be studied at all is chilling and reveals bias from the commenter.

Reasonable people would say there’s no evidence of the phenomenon, not that it doesn’t exist at all. Because that’s how the scientific method works.

[tekk]

@megguspee

Reasonable people would say there’s no evidence of the phenomenon, not that it doesn’t exist at all. Because that’s how the scientific method works.

We’ve been searching for 200 years and we’ve found no evidence, in addition research into related fields has either provided no evidence or contradicts what would be required for ESP to be a real thing. It’s impossible to prove a negative so I don’t think it’s totally out of the question to say that when we’ve spent 200 years and found nothing but evidence which would contradict it, we can probably say that it doesn’t exist. We’re not still looking for evidence of the geocentric model, the homunculus theory of reproduction, or a group of pleisiosaurs which somehow survived undetected for tens of millions of years in a lake in Scotland, are we?

[L0ki]

@tekk

, or a group of pleisiosaurs which somehow survived undetected for tens of millions of years in a lake in Scotland, are we?

Possibly not the best example since people do still keep looking for poor auld Nessie.

[Poiman]

Of course creating emotional responses with art doesn’t count as evidence for the paranormal. What is important is that Hogwarts is not the only frame for understanding what magic was and is. Treating magic as paranormal or non-physical is common, but it is not the only way to look at it. If we look to the renaissance literature where “natural magic” was dealt with philosophically, it had nothing to do with broom sticks and Hogwarts.

[Elmer]

@megguspee

And we’re still making advancements in understanding, quantum physics, and technology every year.

All of which take us farther and farther from any indication that the phenomena that you would have scientists waste resources “studying” actually exist. You might as well perform studies on how Santa Claus’s reindeer achieve flight.

@megguspee

Reasonable people would say there’s no evidence of the phenomenon, not that it doesn’t exist at all. Because that’s how the scientific method works.

No. If a phenomenon a) has failed every single test designed to demonstrate its existence and b) its existence would conflict with everything we know about how the universe works, a reasonable person infers that it in fact does not exist. The “scientific method” is not prescriptive, it is descriptive. It’s not some holy scripture to be slavishly adhered to - it’s a collection of loose rules-of-thumb used to guide scientific inquiry. Don’t confuse some oversimplified Platonic ideal of scientific research and understanding with its real-world application.

[Brainspore]

@Poiman

Treating magic as paranormal or non-physical is common, but it is not the only way to look at it.

Then you seem to be promoting a definition of “magic” that has nothing to do with this topic. James Randi never sought to debunk “wonder” or “awe“ or “love.“

[tekk]

That was something of an intentional pick: people can and do still look for Nessie, but we’re not giving them university grants to do so (as far as I know)

If you wanna flip cards all day to look for ESP you still can. It’s not like the article author implied where it’s not possible to do, you’re just not getting funding for it without any evidence at this point.

[smulder]

@megguspee

Reasonable people would say there’s no evidence of the phenomenon

[anon52120741]

"Phenomena - a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

‘glaciers are unique and interesting natural phenomena’"

[prooftheory]

@megguspee

Reasonable people would say there’s no evidence of the phenomenon, not that it doesn’t exist at all. Because that’s how the scientific method works.

Should we study all hypothetical phenomena for which there is no evidence that it exists? Or just the ones that scam artists claim exists in order to steal people’s money?

[L0ki]

@tekk

but we’re not giving them university grants to do so (as far as I know)

Alas…

Findings of Loch Ness study to be revealed

Although to be fair that seems more to be a case of “I can get funding to do real science if I link it to Nessie because I could DNA sample any random lake but no one would care apart from me and my three colleagues. Maybe my mum.”

[Anselm]

@L0ki

Although to be fair that seems more to be a case of “I can get funding to do real science if I link it to Nessie because I could DNA sample any random lake but no one would care apart from me and my three colleagues. Maybe my mum.”

Especially since even if they do find DNA they don’t know what to do with, that doesn’t prove that the DNA in question is from Nessie, or that Nessie is a plesiosaur. It’s not as if we had any plesiosaur DNA to compare. The DNA could be from an unknown species of little fish, or for that matter an unknown species of bacteria, the existence of either of which in Loch Ness is orders of magnitude more likely than the existence of a group of large monsters that is at the same time numerous enough to maintain a viable gene pool for centuries (or vastly longer periods of time if you go with the plesiosaur hypothesis) and small enough that specimens aren’t spotted by someone a dozen times every day (let alone found by dedicated search efforts).

This is basically like claiming UFOs must be alien spacecraft when in fact all they are is things that are flying around that we don’t immediately know what they are.

[Wanderfound]

@Otherbrother

Of course, some governments have already wasted their money on that and unfortunately will probably continue to do so despite Mr. Randi

[mscibing]

@Anselm

It’s not as if we had any plesiosaur DNA to compare.

Well no, but we do have bird, crocodile, turata, turtle and lizard DNA to compare against. If DNA from some unknown clade related to birds & crocodiles or to turata & lizards shows up … well it’s probably not from something the size of a plesiosaur for the reasons you state, but it would be of intense interest.

[L0ki]

Here we go - report of the results:

And yes, it’s “We wanted the publicity. Now here’s the science.”

Loch Ness monster could be a giant eel, say scientists

ETA: No, they don’t say it could be a giant eel. Or only for very specific, limited values of ‘could be’.

[Mausium]

I do love that he’s such a bete noire for generations of charismatic carnies (and the kayfarbe-loving fans) that even after he’s dead he will still be blamed for the entire field of parapsychology not having a shred of empirical, non-anecdotal evidence in the history of humankind.

I’m stirred up on this because i just watched the two NXIVM documentaries and didn’t notice what was bugging me about the HBO series until i realized it was cobbled together by the director of “What the Bleep?!” to cover up and provide a shred of legitimacy to his serial abuse of women.

He, like Keith, like Scientology and all the other woo-peddlers get away with monstrous behavior because of the “human potential movement” that relies on these underpinnings.

[JonS]

@mscibing

turata

Tuatara?

[Ratel]

@JonS

@mscibing

turata

Tuatara?

You rang?