Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: A real challenge (Score 2) 386

by arnodelorme (#42741133) Attached to: Interviews: Ask James Randi About Investigating the Truth
Would it be possible to publish a set of criteria that would prove beyond reasonable doubts that an effect is unexplained. As far as I know, nobody has passed the preliminary selection for the challenge and there is no set of rules or document. One set of rule for example. Selection of participants: The phenomena must be repeatable with more than 99% confidence and be demonstrated by at least 3 independent scientists. The work must have been published in peer review journal. Test: The test must be performed on a TV stage with more than 99% confidence with 10 skeptics and/or expert magicians present. Or something similar. There is nothing right now. For me the current challenge is more like propaganda than wanting to actually know the truth. A faculty scientist and radical empiricist at the University of California San Diego

Comment: Re:Leap of faith? (Score 1) 386

by arnodelorme (#42740949) Attached to: Interviews: Ask James Randi About Investigating the Truth
I respectfully disagree with the statement "the scientific method is exactly James Randi and his Challenge are all about". James Randi is not a scientist. Nobody has even passed the preliminary selection for this challenge, which makes you wonder if it is real after all. The criteria for selection are not public. There is, as far as I can tell, nothing scientific behind this challenge. It looks more like propaganda.

Comment: Leap of faith? (Score 1) 386

by arnodelorme (#42738957) Attached to: Interviews: Ask James Randi About Investigating the Truth
There are certainly things we do not understand in physics. New physics is being made every day with quantum processes now appearing to play a role in biological reactions. Or messages can now be passed on using Neutrinos (no electromagnetic spectrum). This would have seem like science fiction 1 decade ago but it is now real. How can you be so sure that all the effect reported by the researcher in parapsychology, some of them published in major peer reviewed journal, are wrong. Henry James, a major philosopher and Harvard professor at the turn of the 20th century, was talking about radical empiricism were unexplained phenomena should be studied with the scientific method. It seems that you are taking a leap of faith that this is not necessary. Am I right?

Badges? We don't need no stinking badges.

Working...