Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

News Briefs 10-11-2008

It’s beginning to look a lot like… Monday.

Thanks, Perceval.

Quote of the Day:

“It is time for the government to declassify records that are more than 25 years old and to provide scientists with data that will assist in determining the real nature of [the UFO]phenomenon.”

John Podesta

  1. Aaagh! The Great Old Ones cometh!!
    Seriously, is it not deliciously bizarre and synchronicitous that the newsweb has coughed up stories about 1) a mysterious, geologically odd mountain range in the Antarctic interior, and 2) the discovery of a recent Antarctic origin for many octopus species?

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/11/081106-antarctica-mountains.html

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE4A82GL20081109

    Perhaps those clever fellows at the HPLHS have it right after all…

    http://www.cthulhulives.org/radio/atmom.html

    1. Damn!
      I wish I could have come up with that connection myself, groovista. I would have added the link about the octopi then 😉

      —–
      It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
      It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

      Red Pill Junkie

  2. Slippery Ray Hyman
    Hyman’s essay is disingenuous at best, if you do a little investigation and pay attention to his choice of ideas. First of all, I’ve read the papers by Bierman and Kennedy as well as a letter by Kennedy in response to Bierman’s paper. In no case do they deny the REALITY of psi, only the ability of the evidence to be replicated based on consistent decline effects. This is due in great part, Kennedy poses, that we’re not dealing with chemicals or continents but with thinking, complex human beings with a dizzying range of motivations, beliefs and fears. The concept that emerges should be that we still do not know how to study psi with consistency…YET. But of course Hyman jumps right to his preferred conclusion, which is that psi is nonexistent because of this supposed shortcoming.

    Second, we have the cherry picking of experts. What makes Bierman and Kennedy more reliable than Radin and Utts, a professional statistician? Why, they reach the conclusion that support’s Hyman’s pre-existing bias, of course–that psi is non-replicable and therefore must be bunk. This is to say nothing of the other work out there, such as the experiments by Rupert Sheldrake, that show consistent replication. Those are ignored.

    Finally, note how cleverly Hyman jumps to an uncalled for conclusion in order to discredit parapsychology in general. He says that what is implied by the conference is that psi advocates are asking the scientific community to give them a free pass–to set aside experimental rigor for psi as a special case. I have NEVER seen nor heard a parapsychologist express such a thing, just that their work be judged according to the same criteria as other research.

    One can only conclude that this is another Hyman hit piece using selective data and questionable conclusions to preach to the CSICOP (excuse me, CSI) choir.

  3. Synethesia vs. Hypnosis
    “One test to confirm that the participants were truly experiencing synesthesia involved asking those who had been hypnotized to see the numeral “7” as red if they could see the number when it was printed in black against a red background. If the participants were unable to see the digit, the researchers concluded that the hypnotically-induced synesthesia was real.”

    All they proved was that they could hypnotically induce a perception regardless of the sensation. This is a trivial finding in hypnosis studies. The result would simply be a differentiation of highly vs. not highly hypnotizable people. I witnessed a “non-believer” but as it happened highly hypnotizable reporter from Discovery Channel undergo suggestion that the number 5 would be replaced in his mind with “February”. After being brought out of the state, he was shown a flash card with “2+3=” on it. He read it “two plus three equals February.” When the film crew laughed, he asked them what was the matter. Just because the suggestion in the study above matched what would happen under synethesia does not mean synethesia actually occurred, only that the suggested perception, regardless of its nature, occurred.

    No, I am not the brain specialist…..
    YES. Yes I AM the brain specialist.

    1. Hmmm
      But then, what’s the real difference between the suggested perception, and the naturally-ocurrying one?

      And the 5/February example is very interesting, but that is a cognitive disassociation. What these people are trying to discern is if there are ways to temporarily ‘rewire’ the senso-perception mental mechanisms in a ‘normal’ brain

      We obviously know that’s the case, because many people that have ingested hallucinogenic mushrooms have reported states that closely resemble synesthesia.

      —–
      It’s not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me…
      It’s all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

      Red Pill Junkie

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal