Is the parapsychology section about skeptics(answers from skeptics about paranormal events)?

Question

I 'm just trying to figure this out...why there are so many paranormal skeptics on here. Please give sincere,honest answers to this question. Thanks.

PD..Thanks for explaining "where you're coming from".! I wish when you disagree, you 'd give a reason why (instead of just saying"no evidence" or "it's a lie") Please tell what happened to you to convince you it's not true.I'd be interested in that. I'm not here to "promote" paranormal things..but to get understanding about them.Thanks.

Ditto to Kim's answer!

I can understand why skeptics would be "skeptical" of psychics who charge for services etc...but when "mystical" things happen to regular people &they're looking for explanations about it,..I don't understand why the skeptics make fun of them. If skeptics really have proof that these things don't happen, why don't they tell their "proof"?Ex: if they believe a rainbow doesn't exist, give the scientific answer for what "appears" to be a rainbow.

Eagle..Thank you Thank you Thank you!!!! I want to leave your answer on here awhile for others to read.

koko..where has our TC been??? We've been needing your help !! psiexp has had to fill in for you!!

Answer 1

No the parapsychology section is not about skeptics. It is supposed to be about providing answers and information concerning questions that people have about parapsychology.
I attempt to do that with all my answers that frequently are the only answers providing actual information and links and this earns me multiple thumbs down from those that prefer vague answers like "there is no evidence"

I welcome skeptics that are both informative and helpful (I have seen none on here). Ray Hyman for instance is an earlier member if not founder of CSICOP that is a die hard skeptic. However, he helped write the current protocols for the AutoGanzfeld experiments with Charles Honorton (who created the first Ganzfeld experiments for ESP). He offers mostly credible critiques of experiments and has even acknowledged positive results that can't be explained due to bad statistics or poor methodology. Yet he firmly does not believe in ESP. That is a skeptic.

Those that yell that there is no evidence and it should be demonstrated in front of a magician to prove it's real (and yet complain that parapsychology is listed in the science & mathematics section) are debunkers. By which I mean people that blindly defend their faith that certain phenomena (even meeting the criteria of all social/behavioral sciences and medicine) can't be real.
They offer nothing to the advancement of science.

When an answer is both not helpful and insulting I encourage you and others to use the report it button with no apologies or hesitation.

Answer 2

Well lady, when it comes to promotion, you don't have to look far to see who is benefiting from paranormal claims. The skeptics I am aware of (i.e. Michael Shermer) are making little to nothing in that area. The same can't be said for people like Sylvia Browne, et al. Also, the mere presence of the skeptics on those TV programs are nothing more than the fulfillment of the illusion of a balanced report. All such programs, be they on UFOs, ghosts, psychics, Nostradamus, etc.--follow the same formula: 1.) Introduce claim as fact, but with a weak disclaimer. For example, "Nostradamus predicted everything from the Rise of Hitler to the 9/11 terrorist attack--or did he?" 2.) Build up the claims with dubious, incomplete or inaccurate information. 3.) in the interest of balanced reporting, give a token skeptic 5% of the program time. This usually occurs after the entire case in favor of the claim has been laid out. This 90 seconds is cut from a much longer interview, so what you see of the skeptics is exactly what the producers want you to see. 4.) Reach a tenuous conclusion. "There is plenty of evidence Nostradamus saw into the future, but not all believe. Could it be true?" The reason these programs follow this formula is simple. The truth isn't as dramatic as fiction. Who wants to hear about a high altitude baloon and manequins when you can weave a story involving ET aliens and a crashed flying saucer? Making a program in support of paranormal claims gains more viewers and it's also much easier. Why spend time and money confirming facts when you can make wild suppositions? Such programs are made for believers. With very few exceptions they make no effort to actually explore the claim. They are just there to preach to the choir.

Answer 3

I believe that psychic phenomena exist. I'm also glad there are skeptics. We need skeptics if we are going to be objective. Besides, there are some con artists out there trying to make money. If the skeptics save a few people from being cheated out of their money or making bad decisions, that's good for people legitimately interested in parapsychology. Overall, they're a pretty good group of people who just see things differently.
On the other hand, I think we can assure them that we are aware of The Amazing Randi Challenge and there is no need for further mention of it!

Answer 4

There are millions of skeptics all over the place. The reason I am an active skeptic here is because I used to be a true believer. I do not want people who are unsure and don't know any better being convinced (as I once was) that paranormal phenomena exist when there is no reason or evidence that they do. If we no longer come here then it's just the true believers. This gives the public impression that paranormal events are fact and that one should just take their existence for granted. That is just not right. I want people to embrace science and leave behind all of the Middle Ages superstition and magical thinking.

Answer 5

Skepticism is an important part of science, but true skepticism involves the suspension of belief, not the refusal of belief. Many of the people you describe on this site are not actually skeptics, but dogmatists.

The experimental evidence for telepathy, clairvoyance, etc, (collectively called psi phenomena, pronounced “sigh”) is overwhelming, with odds against chance - in many cases - of millions to one. And then of course there are thousands of reports from all cultures throughout history.

There is also nothing in modern science that would be compromised by the existence of psi. And several surveys have shown that most scientists believe that psi is either an established fact or a likely possibility.

As for returning to the mysticism of the dark ages: remember that chemistry has its roots in alchemy, and astronomy in astrology. Medicine was also nourished in a hotbed of superstition. Parapsychology is not so lonely in having its roots in witchcraft and superstition. It is the scientific study of anomolous mental phenomena.

There is a recent book out, titled Parapsychology and the Skeptics, by Chris Carter that deals with all of this and much more. The book’s website can be found by entering the title and author into a good search engine.

Addition:

Since I first posted, a few people have posted some questions and insults. I will ignore the insults and answer the questions.

Regarding surveys of scientists, this is from Carter's book:

"Two surveys of over 500 scientists in one case and over 1,000 in another were made in the 1970’s. Both surveys found that the majority of respondents considered ESP “an established fact” or “a likely possibility”: 56% in one and 67% in the other." (Sources are listed in back)

Regarding Randi's million dollar challenge: Carter deals with this in great depth, showing how it is really just a publicity hoax. Randi has never actually tested anyone, and has backed down or ignored several serious challengers. It is Randi who acts as policeman, jury, and judge, and given his financial stake in the debunking movement, and his reputation, he is hardly an objective participant.

There is also serious doubt that the money actually exists. At any rate, this is not how serious science operates, and Randi is not a scientist.

Answer 6

No, it's not about skeptics or non-skeptics, but it is about questions and answers regarding parapsychology from the scientific perspective. It is from the scientific perspective because Parapsychology has been placed as a sub-category within Science & Math, just like biology or engineering are sub-categories within Science & Math.

I'm here because I was of the habit of clicking on the Science & Mathematics category and answering the questions that come up. Imagine my surprise when I started seeing questions on ghosts and telekinesis right there in the top-level Science & Math category! That's how it works with Yahoo. All the questions appearing in the sub-categories also appear in their parent categories. So anybody browsing Science & Mathematics looking for general scientific questions would also see questions on astral projection and spirit guides. That's pretty silly, you have to admit.

So that piqued my interest, and since I've always been interested in the lore of the supernatural anyway, I decided to participate specifically in the Paranormal/Parapsychology categories to help people. Specifically, I want to help people understand what is science and what is not, and how to think critically and rationally. It would be a shame for kids to poke around and see ghost questions in the Science category and become confused and disillusioned about science. We don't want a return to the scientific illiteracy and mysticism of the Dark Ages. Let's move forward, not back.

Answer 7

to everybody. I magine what was once considered crackpot theories have become accepted scientific fact. How many of todays scientific facts were once rediculed as nothing more than wishful thinking, fanciful theories, and insane ideas. think about it. until technologies arrived to push the ideas from dark back rooms to mainstream science almost everything was once considered insanity. A round earth, the earth revolving around the sun, black holes dark matter radio waves, astriods killing off life on earth, and millions of other theories were once laughed at much like your doing right now. so the technology doesnt exist right now to prove ghosts or the afterlife, but can you say it wont exist in ten or twenty years???????

Answer 8

I am not a skeptic. I am a true disbeliever. I hold a B.S. in Psychology and have investigated several claims of paranormal events. In not one case was there any evidence of an event occurring as it was claimed. Furthermore, in some cases there was evidence that the alleged event was a deception.

I only come to this category to see if people are still as gullible now as they have been in the past. I have found that they are worse.

I usually only read in this category but you seemed sincere in your wanting to know about skeptics.

Answer 9

It's a forum for questions and answers.Parapsychology is a controversial subject.Many,myself included don't think it belongs in a Science section.Most of the questions belong in Mythology and Folklore.I'm sure there are far less skeptics over there.I can't let a discussion of ghosts or psychics go one sided.It's important people know there is no scientific evidence for any of it.Most scientists think it's nonsense.I want to make sure that gets out.

Answer 10

I'd say it's because nobody likes being lied to, and we all want to know what's really going on in the world. It doesn't take much observation to figure out that the vast majority of people who claim to have paranormal powers are just liars who use tricks to separate a fool from his money. From there, you have to wonder if there really are any legitimate paranormal powers, and if so why can't they demonstrate these powers in a way that can be measured and studied so we can figure it out?

I could say the same thing about belief in god. The difference is, it's easier to disbelieve in the paranormal because no one claims you will be punished for your disbelief.