> You're one of the dudes online - never forget that.
I never made any outlandish claims and therefore the onus isn't on me to prove anything.
> Examining something != believing it
But parapschyology has been examined and tested by scientists, and none of it has been verified in independent and controlled conditions. Unlike what the other commenter claimed, there are zero documents indicating RV works. Many of its practitioners have been shown to be frauds, pranksters or cranks (Puthoff thought Uri Geller was a psychic and was fooled by sleight of hand). What new evidence is there? RV isn't a new claim; it's an old debunked claim. Have they won the Amazing Randi prize yet? They could have, if RV was real!
> If all you have to contribute to the discussion is thrashing around, maybe stay out of it?
I'm reminding participants about how the scientific method works, which is important when discussing outlandish claims.
I never made any outlandish claims and therefore the onus isn't on me to prove anything.
> Examining something != believing it
But parapschyology has been examined and tested by scientists, and none of it has been verified in independent and controlled conditions. Unlike what the other commenter claimed, there are zero documents indicating RV works. Many of its practitioners have been shown to be frauds, pranksters or cranks (Puthoff thought Uri Geller was a psychic and was fooled by sleight of hand). What new evidence is there? RV isn't a new claim; it's an old debunked claim. Have they won the Amazing Randi prize yet? They could have, if RV was real!
> If all you have to contribute to the discussion is thrashing around, maybe stay out of it?
I'm reminding participants about how the scientific method works, which is important when discussing outlandish claims.
> Maybe stay out of it
???