Comment by Yizahi
3 months ago
So, to explain one invisible and unprovable thing for which there is zero evidence, you have invented a completely different invisible and unprovable thing for which there is also zero evidence. Great job :)
3 months ago
So, to explain one invisible and unprovable thing for which there is zero evidence, you have invented a completely different invisible and unprovable thing for which there is also zero evidence. Great job :)
There are many "invisible" things that exist. "Telepathy" isn't "unprovable". The "Telepathy Tapes" are evidence in favor of telepathy (It appears, you confuse "evidence" with "proof"). The explanation I suggested is neither "invisible" nor "unprovable". There actually is evidence for it as well (again, your idea of evidence is wrong).
In other words, your assessment is entirely counter-factual and simply false.
Noting the absurd down-votes on my comment in conjunction with the lack of comments providing any rational argument is actually evidence in favor of the hypothesis presented there.
Telepathy in principle could be easily tested in well controlled experiments. However, so far every time that it has been tested with rigorous controls (e.g. James Randi type of scepticism as regular scientists can be easily fooled) it has disappeared. Now, that's not proof that it doesn't exist, but it is very strong evidence that it doesn't exist and it means that you cannot meaningfully say anything about the behaviour of telepathy except that there's no reason to think that it exists.
> The "Telepathy Tapes" are evidence in favor of telepathy (It appears, you confuse "evidence" with "proof").
To the degree that "E.T." is evidence in favor of alien life, yes.
You are deeply confused. TT is not an evidence of telepathy. It is an evidence of someone talking about telepathy. So yes, it is evidence per dictionary definition. But it is completely and utterly useless in regards to a question if telepathy is real. Spoiler alert: it is not.
But don't you see? My two invisible things with no evidence support each other, giving each other evidence! Hey, what are you doing... put down that razor!
The problem with science approaching telepathy tapes is that a parent will say:
My kid knows when another kid is sick.
Scientist: We have to apply scientific rigor, so let's ask him for tomorrow's lotto numbers.
Parents: Yeah, we said he can tell you when another kid is sick and it's 100% correct every time.
Scientist: That proves this is all bullshit.
The problem with claims of telepathy is that they disappear when actually tested with sufficient controls to disallow cheating. Have a look at James Randi's Paranormal Challenge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_...
Your "scientist" seems to be somewhat of an idiot - that particular telepathy claim could be fairly well tested with a supply of sick and well kids and sufficient barriers to prevent sound/sight/smell from providing clues to the kid being tested. It's the kind of double-blind test that has been used to test if dogs can diagnose disorders e.g. Parkinson's.
Interestingly, there's a woman who can detect Parkinson's through smell alone. When she was initially tested (double-blind sniffing of t-shirts that had been worn overnight) she identified all the diagnosed Parkinson's sufferers correctly, but also diagnosed one other person. However, a few months later, that participant was also diagnosed with Parkinson's which means that there should be chemical markers (that produce the scent) that could lead to early diagnosis.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/23/8202745...
We can do the test with sick kids, or broken machinery, or whatever parents would claim. Should be easy enough to set up in proper way, organizer would get his once in a lifetime Nature publication. Parents and a kid would get a million dollars award for performing real magic, and kid would become an instant celebrity for life. Like meeting with Presidents level celebrity. Everyone wins, right?
Except parents lie of course, and if pressed to participate it would become apparent that 100% is actually 50%, that their kid must meet a test subject kid in person in advance (so an attentive person can spot elevated temperature of a test subject kid, or sweat, or maybe odor (there are a few proven unicums who could do this) etc.). Basically reducing telepathy claim to either complete fabrication or cases of hyper attentiveness.