Skeptics might be jumping to conclusions

[Simon Moon]

Again, we're not here to validate your beliefs.  We're also not here to do the basic legwork a productive member of society should do.  Remaining lazy and gullible is your prerogative, but don't blame us for not wanting to fill in the gaps you currently have simply due to laziness.

And, we're talking middle school levels of scientific awareness (what the scientific method is and is not, mostly) here.  Certainly nothing so dramatic as "devoting your life" to it.

But surely Dean Radin is already aware of this as well which means he knows how the method works.  If this is your argument for dismissing the paranormal research as being woo, then it is a dishonest argument.

Dean Radin...

Your reliance of Radin is exactly why we are all pointing at your lack of critical thinking skills.


[Mathematician] I.J. Good discovered flaws in Radin's method for evaluating the file-drawer effect.[2] According to Victor Stenger:

“”Radin is aware of the file-drawer effect, in which only positive results tend to get reported and negative ones are left in the filing cabinet. This obviously can greatly bias any analysis of combined results and Radin cannot ignore this as blithely as he ignores other possible, non-paranormal explanations of the data. Even the most fervent parapsychologists recognize this problem. Meta-analysis incorporates a procedure for taking the file-drawer effect into account. Radin says it shows that more than 3,300 unpublished, unsuccessful reports would be needed for each published report in order to “nullify” the statistical significance of psi. In his review of Radin's book for the journal Nature, statistics professor I.J. Good disputes this calculation, calling it "a gross overestimate." He estimates that the number of unpublished, unsuccessful reports needed to account for the results by the file drawer effect should be reduced to fifteen or less. How could two meta-analyses result in such a wide discrepancy? Somebody is doing something wrong, and in this case it is clearly Radin. He has not performed the file-drawer analysis correctly"

Radin has written the results from psi research are as consistent by the same standards as any other scientific discipline but according to Ray Hyman many parapsychologists such as Dick Bierman, Walter Lucadou, J.E. Kennedy, and Robert Jahn, openly admit the evidence for psi is "inconsistent, irreproducible, and fails to meet acceptable scientific standards". Radin has written that fraudulent mediums were genuine and ignores skeptical literature on the subject. He mentioned the Fox sisters in his publications but did not mention that they publicly confessed their spirit communications were fraudulent.

Radin's bad statistics -

https://www.csicop.org/si/show/when_big_...upernormal