The difference is no more dramatic than would be expected comparing two people performing any given task, one well practiced and one novice. 'Altered State' is also overdramatising it.
I tell you who really has to be impressed - people who review her work.
So far, everything I've read about this study leaves me slightly horrified that anyone would take it seriously. But I'll wait and reserve my final judgement until I see some peer reviews.
I don't know what horrifies you.
You keep saying stuff like that but I haven't seen you make one valid complaint about her protocol.
Ok found the time she says or rather mumbles 3 vaguely similar names but she possibly[/] gave information to the programme of who she wanted to contact.
But what amazing message did Granny have when she imparted her name? A load of mumbo jumbo about life choices
Egghead you can't just say she possibly gave information to the program, without evidence she did that, and be credible.
She doesn't have that opportunity in Beischel's study anyway.
Thes are just quibbles, a psychic isn't doing the things you think a psychic should do. A psychic just has to gain information that cannot have been known to them through the normal sensory ways and can't reasonably be explained as barnum statemments or lucky guesses or fraud.
You are right but it doesn't seem that the thread skeptics accept that.
They will soon be back to asking for 100% accuracy.
So is there an assumption that only the mentally ill channel their own thoughts?
No that's not what was said. I said that some mediums could be channeling their own unconscious thoughts but that isn't going to have much external validity.
To add, if someone who isn't getting external validity keeps doing readings they would probably be a little ill.
Comments
It's not really an altered state but a semi altered state and it is different from someone consciously using a technique to fool people.
Whether someone who unconsciously is performing an act would show on brain imaging, I can't say.
But for sure the deluded one isn't going to get far on objective tests.
Out of interest why does she need to if the experimental controls are good?
That sounds not very scientific.
You would have to find flaws in her protocol to convince me it's not sour grapes.
Just like Randi does. Except you had a massive problem with that.
Edit: Should probably add a
That's before they are chosen.
Why would she want to spend time and research money putting people into the study who were just channeling their own thoughts.
Why would it be sour grapes?
No, Randi uses mentally ill as his get out card.
So he's not "weeding out time wasters?"
edit: "people who are just channelling their own thoughts?"
I don't know what horrifies you.
You keep saying stuff like that but I haven't seen you make one valid complaint about her protocol.
Ok found the time she says or rather mumbles 3 vaguely similar names but she possibly gave information to the programme of who she wanted to contact.
But what amazing message did Granny have when she imparted her name? A load of mumbo jumbo about life choices
No he can use it as his excuse at any time, at the end.
If anything he seems to specialize in the mentally ill and foster them as a way of mocking psi.
The serious challenges he wriggled out of.
Egghead you can't just say she possibly gave information to the program, without evidence she did that, and be credible.
She doesn't have that opportunity in Beischel's study anyway.
So it's a moot point.
Brilliant !!
Let's start with those strict criteria for selecting the mediums. What information do you have on that?
I can say possibly because it is a possibility. If I had made a definitive statement Id have to prove it.
You are right but it doesn't seem that the thread skeptics accept that.
They will soon be back to asking for 100% accuracy.
Good point. She was extremely chatty.
Okay as long as you accept it isn't evidence and you realize that she isn't able to do hot reading during the Beischel experiments.
Listening to a radio show is not the same.
Look back over the thread.
She said it is a daunting 8 phase process of blind testing, interviews.
The mediums have to pass the blind testing before proceeding to the study.
They have to give accurate information about a discarnate while only having the first name.
They have to have high accuracy on determining whether a person is living or dead.
So is there an assumption that only the mentally ill channel their own thoughts?
Yes. Let's have a look at some of that for a start. It makes it sound like she found some genuine mediums. Got any links?
No that's not what was said. I said that some mediums could be channeling their own unconscious thoughts but that isn't going to have much external validity.
To add, if someone who isn't getting external validity keeps doing readings they would probably be a little ill.
Why do you need links? They will find you.
Nope. I don't want to encourage skeptic posters to email the mediums as I have no idea what some posters are like in RL.
However they can find the names themselves from Julie Beischel.
I'm conscious that you're getting flak from all corners here, so feel free to leave this here: I think they're the same thing. You don't, that's fine.