MOST STUBBORN CLOSED-MINDED SKEPTICS ADMIT TELEPATHY HAS BEEN PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY!
Victor Zammit reports here.
A real shock to the system! We have on record some of the world's most stubborn skeptics accepting that telepathy has now been scientifically proven. These are the same ones who regularly attack mediums and the paranormal. Now widely published Skeptic Watcher, Chris Carter points out in an article, in the EPOCH TIMES that leading hard-line skeptical psychologists, Richard Wiseman and Chris French, have admitted that the evidence for telepathy is so good that by the standards of any other area of science, telepathy has been proven . Not only that, he claims that "two surveys of over 500 scientists in one case and over 1,000 in another both found that the majority of respondents considered ESP ?an established fact? or ?a likely possibility? of 56 percent in one and 67 percent in the other."
Professional investigators of the afterlife- scientists, lawyers, biologists and others who investigated will tell you that the essence of mediumship is TELEPATHY between a spirit and a medium. Some scientists these days have already accepted that mediumship has been proven through scientific testing. Guaranteed in the relatively near future, we will see even the most stubborn closed minded skeptics coming to the same conclusion. Clearly it's only a matter of time.
Now for average people, Telepathy is no big deal. Most of us are mildly psychic. Just today I was watching two women in earnest conversation about dresses and fashion and jewellery, when one of them suddenly said something completely out of context, specifically about her husband. And 15 seconds later her mobile phone in her pocket rang, and it was her husband who had literally broken into her thought train, so much, it derailed that ladies conversation. Before the phone rang.
This is confirmed as Telephone Telepathy in very large formal studies in call centres. It is known to be the commonest form of telepathy. Practised by millions of people and even animals. I did it myself in call centres for years.
So, these public domain denialists, these pseudoskeptics, what is their problem ?
The Chris Frenches and the Richard Wisemans and the Susan Black-mores ?
Skeptic watcher, Chris Carter, now goes on to reveal this groups
attitude toward the truth
to other science areas
In the Epoch times,
he writes, ----
We might even be more surprised to learn that back in 1951 psychologist (pseudoskeptic) Donald Hebb wrote this:
Why do we not accept ESP, [extrasensory perception] as a psychological fact? The Rhine Research Center, has offered enough evidence to have convinced us on almost any other issue. Personally , I do not accept ESP for a moment, because it does not make sense. My external criteria, both of physics and of physiology, say that ESP is not a fact despite the behavioral evidence that has been reported. I cannot see what other basis my colleagues have for rejecting it Rhine may still turn out to be right, improbable as I think that is, and my own rejection of his view, is, in the literal sense prejudice.
Four years later, 1955, (pseudoskeptic) George Price, then a research associate at the Department of Medicine at the University of Minnesota, published an article in the prestigious journal Science that began:
Believers in psychic phenomena appear to have won a decisive victory and virtually silenced opposition. This victory is the result of careful experimentation and intelligent argumentation. Dozens of experimenters have obtained positive results in ESP experiments, and the mathematical procedures have been approved by leading statisticians. Against all this evidence, almost the only defense remaining to the (pseudo) skeptical scientist, is ignorance. (the year was 1955)
But Price then argued, ESP is incompatible with current scientific theory, and asked:
If, then, parapsychology and modern science are incompatible, why not reject parapsychology? The choice is between believing in something 'truly revolutionary' and 'radically contradictory to contemporary thought' and believing in the occurrence of fraud and self-delusion. Which is more reasonable?
So, says Chris Carter, here we have two (pseudo) -skeptics in effect admitting that if this were any other field of inquiry then the experimental data would have carried the day by 1950.
Like Price and Hebb before them, both Wiseman and French hold that the claim of telepathy is so extraordinary that we need a greater level of evidence than we normally demand. Why should this be so? Most people believe in the reality of telepathy, based on their own experiences, and are puzzled by the description of telepathy as extraordinary.
It is even more puzzling when surveys show that a large proportion of scientists, accept the possibility that telepathy exists. Two surveys of over 500 scientists in one case and over 1,000 in another both found that the majority of respondents considered ESP an established fact or a likely possibility 56 percent in one and 67 percent in the other.
Polls such as this suggest that most scientists are curious and open-minded about psi.
This, however, does not seem to be the case in one field: Psychology. In the former study, only 3 percent of natural scientists considered ESP an impossibility, compared to 34 percent of psychologists.
So here we have laid bare, the revelation that the ranks of Psychologists are 10 times more likely to be resistive to the truth of ESP, than average scientists. Quite a mini discovery.
It raises the question, Are psychologists mentally equipped to adjudicate ESP evidence? It seems their admitted excessive unscientific prejudice disqualifies them. Their opinions have no value. Should not be heeded. And could quite seriously be described, as some kind of mendacious dysfunction.
And their rationale, for their 'prejudice', Chris Carter here describes, turns out to be a slight of hand. A false argument. They are secretly arguing off point again, as usual, using a different meaning for the word 'science', to the rest of us.
Chris Carter goes on to say , in fact, the most prominent skeptics of psychic abilities today such as Wiseman, French, James Alcock, Susan Black-more, and Ray Hyman, are all psychologists. An exception is biologist Richard Dawkins, but like Wiseman and French, he is also on record as saying that the existence of telepathy would turn the laws of physics upside down.
But as mentioned earlier,
adherence to an outmoded metaphysics of science seems much more prevalent among psychologists than physicists
. Skeptics such as psychologist Susan Black-more, are fond of saying that the existence of psi is incompatible ?with our scientific worldview?-but with which scientific worldview?
Psi is certainly incompatible with the old scientific worldview, based on Newtonian mechanics and behaviorist psychology. (That is, 19th century Victorian Materialism) It is not incompatible with the emerging scientific worldview based on quantum mechanics, the neurosciences, and cognitive psychology.
But even before quantum mechanics began to supersede classical mechanics in the 1920s, many physicists were much more open to investigating psi phenomena than most psychologists seem today. An astonishing number of the most prominent physicists of the 19th century expressed interest in psychic research, including William Crookes, inventor of the cathode ray tube, used today in televisions and computer monitors; J.J. Thomson, who won the Nobel Prize in 1906 for the discovery of the electron; and Lord Rayleigh, considered one of the greatest physicists of the late 19th century, and winner of the Nobel Prize in physics in 1904.
But modern physics is very different from the classical physics of the 19th century, and it is time the skeptical psychologists realized this. The great psychologist Gardner Murphy, president of the American Psychological Association and later of the American Society for Psychical Research, urged his fellow psychologists to become better acquainted with modern physics .
Murphy wrote in 1968: the difficulty is at the level of physics, not at the level of psychology. Psychologists may be a little bewildered (??) when they encounter modern physicists who take these phenomena in stride, in fact, take them much more seriously than psychologists do, saying, as physicists, that they are no longer bound by the types of Newtonian energy distribution, inverse square laws, etc., with which scientists used to regard themselves as tightly bound.? psychologists probably will witness a period of slow, but definite, erosion of the blandly exclusive attitude that has offered itself as the only appropriate scientific attitude in this field. The data from parapsychology will be almost certainly in harmony with general psychological principles and will be assimilated rather easily within the systematic framework of psychology as a science when once the imagined appropriateness of Newtonian physics is put aside, and modern physics replaces it.?
Gardner Murphy and Chris Carter's explanation here is that pseudoskeptic psychologists like Wiseman and French, are bewildered, stunned, into mental dysfunction, concerning modern physics, and thus secretly carry simple 19th Century Victorian materialist physics around in their heads, while posing as modern scientists.
Which means these skeptic psychologists are lying, practising dishonesty and deception, verbal sleight of hand, when they say ESP violates the laws of physics to the general public. Their secret attitude toward the truth is that there can be two 'takes' on the truth ! There is the take of the modern general public, let them have it whatever they want to think, and their own personal internal 'take' that is distinctly 19th century, half science. Their dishonesty is great, and lifelong, and its covering up their woeful mental dysfunction, when in fact they should be disqualified from public commentary on these matters, because they are forever, secretly, talking off point.
And how do so many people, with no grasp of science, become psychologists?
They are near academic failures at Uni, unable to get into demanding courses like Medicine, Engineering or Law, because of low marks, and do the psychology course, because its easy to get into. LOL. Its all due to their academic underfunction at Uni, that we have to endure these pseudo-skeptics, for their entire lives, perennially lying into the public domain, Should we laugh or cry ?
I did a three years full time major in psychology. The good thing I got from psychology is that we had to do three years of Scientific Method as am adjunct subject (again, that is NOT psychology, but SCIENCE) – but then I knew there was no real science in it – and switched to Law.
These psychologists are really NOT scientists. They tell the world they are scientists – but strictly speaking, they are NOT scientists!!!!!!
Chris Carter did a fine job reporting that!!