Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence

[Rhondazvous]

Science is supposed to be objective. The minute you say that one set of data requires more or less scrutiny than another you inject more subjectivity into the results. Nevertheless the most recent psi studies are very robust something ever critics have acknowledged. The early posts might have been true 20 years ago. Today its a different story.

Being objective doesn't mean having the same standard for every experiment.  That would be absurd.  Some experiments are more susceptible to bias, and the study has to be tailored to that.  

Because that's what objective really means in this context.  It means eliminating bias as much as possible.

Unfortunately for your pet claims, every time corrections are made to eliminate bias, the results disappear.  That's exactly what we would expect from a false claim.

To eliminate biases one must admit that there are biases. That can't be done with information that was supposed to come direct from god without raising the question of why the new information is more from god than the old information. Thus the theist is handicapped by the very nature of his claim.

Not so with the scientists who doesn't claim to have an immutable source of information in the first place.