PA Conference abstracts

hahahahaha....

So instead of a proper scientific response to published work, a cut and paste standard "debunking" for use in all forums (including this one, apparently) is considered "scientific" enough for the skeptical cohort. OMG! That's too funny, FDRS!

This is my favorite:

"If telepathy is involved why did the child had not always 100 percent?"
 
The abstract gives very little information about the protocols. Not sure anyone should be either "debunking" it or declaring its game changing status until at least reading the full paper!
 
I don't get the credit. That was radicalpolitik.

Linda

Oh, apparently I read the OP as closely as I read the PA abstracts the first time through! I at least owe you a thanks for redundancy , thereby making sure I didn't miss it altogether. ;-) And, thanks for the thread @radicalpolitik !

It looks like a real game-changer.

It definitely sounds impressive! Hell, even Linda thought so :-O
 
Good question. I wonder how much research ends up in published journals? Usually? ... I've no idea...

I don't know of any unpublished journals. I think there's a published journal that, rather than listing the protocols, methods, results etc. for any given study, has childhood biographies and psychiatric evaluations of the respective researchers. I can't remember the name, but just like you they really know how to evaluate evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K9!
A billion to one against chance is fair.

OK.

Alex Tsakiris: Let me interject here. Do you recall what were some of the first instances of that that you bumped into that you really thought, ‘Wow, this is interesting,’ and then you followed it up and found that there weren’t good answers coming back?

Dr. Diane Powell: Yes. The first one happened when I was a teenager. A friend of mine traveled in the circus during the summer and invited me over to his house because the magician that he traveled with was there. He had talked very highly about him. His name was Jay Michelle and he did Houdini-like tricks, but when I met him he wanted to show me some other things that he could do. He had me stand across the room from him, which was about maybe 15 feet away. There was a bookshelf behind me with around 1,000 books. He said, “Pick any book out. Open it up to any page and as you’re reading it I’ll read it to you.”

And he did just that…. for several books and several pages. It blew my mind. When I asked him about it he said, “Oh, that’s just a magic trick. It’s just magic.”

I said, “Okay, okay. I guess it’s just magic.”

I asked my father about it and he said, “Well, there is this controversial topic called telepathy and that’s what it sounds like to me.”

What were the chances of the magician knowing the words on that page?
 
Dr Powell first became intrigued by telepathy after watching a circus magician...

This is just a bs attempt at discrediting her as a person and you know it.

The fact that as a teenager she became interested in telepathy because of a magic trick says nothing about the validity of her research and the conclusions thereof now. When the paper is presented we'll judge it on its merits.

Smh
 
Back
Top