The odds are against extra-sensory perception

First of all there is nothing in the realm of modern science that forbids the possibility of psychic phonomina. It is always possible for an effect to be too subtle for our current science to deal with: Newton didn't even suspect the existence of Quantum Mechanics even though, as we now know, it's effects were all around him.

The scorn that is regularly heaped by many in the science community on anything that threatens a comfortable faith in Materialism is not science but crude Scientism.

Rouder and Morey conclude that the skeptics odds are appropriate: "We remain unconvinced of the viability of ESP. There is no plausible mechanism for it, and it seems contradicted by well-substantiated theories in both physics and biology.

Am I the only one that sees the irony here? The same things can be said for the life itself that is skeptical of ESP. Is there a plausible mechanism for life? Which theories of physics and biology predict life and show how it can be created in the laboratory? The skeptics would be more skeptical of their own existence than ESP if it wasn't for the first hand experience of being alive. Life is improbable and inexplicable, who can say ESP isn't real too?

Moebius: Actually, the major mechanisms for life are understood fairly well. Craig Venter's team created a fully functional living organism from non-living materials. Also evidence of something is related to, but very different than understanding its mechanisms. We have lots of evidence of life (your last statement is not true as the probability of life existing is 1.0) and have been studying its mechanisms for hundreds of years. We have no known mechanism that allows for prediction of the future and there is no real evidence that it even happens. Bem's study is the best, most convincing evidence, but as this and several other papers point out, Bayesian inference leads to a different conclusion than null-hypothesis testing. Few scientist would say it is 100% impossible, but with no evidence and no understood mechanism to produce it, few scientists would belief humans can accurately predict the future.

"They find there is some evidence for ESP people should update their beliefs by a factor of 40."

ok, updating....

...update completed. Please stand by for reboot.

@ cogsci

We have no known mechanism that allows for prediction of the future and there is no real evidence that it even happens.

Maybe this is just semantics, but I can prove your statement wrong by a simple experiment. Stand perfectly still, facing a partner who is at least 20 yards away. Have your partner pitch a softball at your head. If you get hit in the face and are surprised by this, congratulations: you are correct in that you have no method to predict the future. If, however, you dodge or at least recognize that you have an option to dodge, block or catch the ball, or if you react before even thinking about it and avoid getting hit in the face by the softball, then you have just proven you have a mechanism by which you have predicted the future that without direct intervention that ball will hit you.

The problem with precognition is that it is difficult or impossible to design an experiment where a subject will be able to predict the future on demand. There is certainly evidence that people have seen the future with clarity and detail, but such activity does not seem to be subject to demand (otherwise, anyone capable of precognition would rack up on the lottery).

Some things are not subject to experimental validation, but evidence remains evidence even when experiment cannot verify.

As a person of some integrity who also possesses 'psychic powers' I must say that psychic abilities are most decidedly real. I am a businessman and I don't tell others about my abilities though, Occasionally, I have allowed some things to slip. I approached one of my coworkers and asked him when his wife was getting out of the hospital. He told me she wasn't in the hospital. I knew that I had simply seen something that was about to happen. Two weeks later - you guessed it. That's just one example.

It's worth noting in the fight against exploring the plausibility of precognition and other ESP abilities, that we all live "in the past" and therefore technically all of our actions and reactions are based on "predictions of the future." That is, regardless of which of the five senses is being stimulated, a certain amount of time passes between stimulus to that sense and the point at which the electrochemical signal reaches the brain; similarly, there is a certain amount of time the brain needs to send signals elsewhere in the body to form a reaction. Even though this amount of time is miniscule and negligible in a practical sense, it is pertinent to the notion that information might travel faster in some people than in others.

Additionally, with the functionality of the brain only weakly understood, we have a long way to go before science can truly answer the question of whether any humans have the capability to "sense the future" or to receive information outside the five senses.

I don't believe in the term "psychic" per se, but I know I'ver personally experiencced what I can only describe as "revelation" or "premonition" from God on several occasions, usually in exact increments of 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 1 season, or 1 year ahead of time.

How this could be possible physically or naturalistically I haven't the foggiest, and I do not know ahead of time if it is real, until it actually happens, which makes it useless for predicting anything, at least as far as I have ever experienced, but comforting to know God knows.

I also know of a co-worker 6 years ago who was injured at work with some minor burns. Some time later, he was driving down the street, and what he describes as a "voice" spoke to him, apparently audibly, and told him he had better go to the hospital. When he got there they discovered he had severe infections and would have lost his arm had he delayed any longer.

I realize this experience violate laws of physics, but I make no apologies.

"Useless" above was a poor word choice. I should say, "unreliable".

There have been times when I actually did "know" with a degree of certainty that the dream I had was definitely the future and it would definitely come to pass exactly as dreamed, as in the case of the exact landfall location of Hurricane Rita, which I dreamed before it ever formed.

At first, I did not know "which" storm it would be, only that "A storm" would hit at the Texas/Louisiana border, which I told people a day or so ahead of time after the storm formed and I recognized it from the dream about the time it crossed Katrina's path in the Gulf, as had happened in the dream. I had seen, in a dream, a hurricane tracking map with the track of Katrina plotted out, and then another storm crossing that path and hitting on the border.

I have experienced this perhaps a half dozen or so "major" events in this manner, but not with confidence in interpretation to publicly say so ahead of time, unfortunately.

At any rate, "something" in the form of futuristic knowledge does exist.

I cannot "prove" it to someone else by experiment, or at least as of yet have not had a situation of high enough confidence ahead of time to do so. As stated, I usually don't know for sure that it's "real," instead of just a normal dream, until it's too late to matter anyway.

I am confident that it is communication from God in the form of the "Revelation gifts," according to the Bible.

Any other explanation would defy causality and undermine any notion of our existing concept of order.

It would also be alarming to the point of insanity to consider someone or something other than God knowing the future with that degree of precision and accuracy for all events and all time, as would be necessary for some of the dreams I have had which came to pass, including the content and events of non-generic conversations word for word, and written text I'd never seen word for word...

"Psychic readings" and divination in the sense of what you see people on television or in that ad on the right side of the page are expressly forbidden by God in the Bible.

They are not the same thing as divine revelation, even if they claim to be.

Divine revelation is not a "guess" nor a probability.

In the Bible, divine revelation of the future comes in two basic forms:

1) Absolute prophetic dreams
Examples are Joseph's two dreams that he told his brothers, and the dreams of the Pharoah and his servants, and of course, the dreams in the Book of Daniel, which spelled out the history of the world before it happened. This is given as an absolute which WILL happen.

2) Forked prophetic dreams or statements
these are given a choice of typically two or three possibilities, and both (or three) outcomes are described.

Examples are, generally speaking, of the form, "If you do good, this will happen, if you do evil, something else will happen."

It is possible to test these dreams experimentally for the validity, and truthfullness, and to determine whether they are "Revelations" from God, or whether they are ordinary, but it requires a double-blind experiment which is still not useful ahead of time, except as a matter of conscience.

I have never done this, but what I could do is, if I suspect a dream of being a Revelation from God, write it down or type it, sign it and date it, and put it inside a sealed envelope. Then give it to a friend or family member, and ask them never to open it unless I say so.

Then I would wait for the event to happen, and if it does happen, then by Biblical restraint, it must have been from God, with the only exception being the promoting of some false god or false religion, as per Deuteronomy 13:1-3. Which says, even if a dream comes to pass, if it promotes a "god" other than Jehovah, then it is NOT from God, and the devil has somehow deceived the person.

At least with the sealed envelope, I could have that person open the envelope, which was never again in my possession, and read it, and then I'd have a second witness who would know I wasn't crazy or making it up, which I'm definitely neither.

At least in theory this should work.

But it might be considered cheating or somehow tempting God.

If there is ESP, no-one has ever demonstrated an ability to utilise it. Those who claim prediction fail to count their failures. This bias is common eg whenever something good happens, attribute it to god. What people don't realise is that such attribution works equally well for 'luck', the casting of spells, the manifestation of pure willpower, leprechauns, astrology, numerology etc etc, yet all of them only work reliably retrospect despite claiming prescience.

If there is ESP, no-one has ever demonstrated an ability to utilise it.

But people do demonstrate such abilities. The inability to perform on demand makes it difficult to study these abilities but does not invalidate them.

First of all there is nothing in the realm of modern science that forbids the possibility of psychic phonomina. It is always possible for an effect to be too subtle for our current science to deal with: Newton didn't even suspect the existence of Quantum Mechanics even though, as we now know, it's effects were all around him.

It's effects manifest on larger scales.

The scorn that is regularly heaped by many in the science community on anything that threatens a comfortable faith in Materialism is not science but crude Scientism.

No, anyhting that claims ESP while not actually showing it is scorned, because it is pseudoscience.

No, anything that claims ESP while not actually showing it is scorned because it is pseudoscience.

It is not pseudoscience. Anything which cannot be tested experimentally is not science at all. It may still be valid.

Anything which cannot be tested experimentally is not science at all. It may still be valid.

I'm curious... An example?

I'm curious... An example?

Did you read the article and comments? Precognition is an example of something for which there is considerable evidence but cannot be produced on demand and is therefore not suitable for scientific experimentation.

Of course I read the article and comments; the latter, at least, evidenced by the fact that I queoted and replied to your comment.

But perhaps I should have made myself clearer. I meant an example other than ESP, of something that cannot be verified/falsified by science, but which is nonetheless 'valid'.

I meant an example other than ESP, of something that cannot be verified/falsified by science, but which is nonetheless 'valid'.

God. Lots of evidence but not subject to scientific experimentation.

God. Lots of evidence but not subject to scientific experimentation.

There is no evidence of a god or gods. There is plenty of evidence that the notion of god is a manmade thing, which of course, it is.

There is no evidence of a god or gods.

There is lots of evidence, but you are free to reject it.

Smart humans have the ability to estimate what may happen in the future with a fair amount of accuracy. To know what will happen in the future would require that we are in playback mode and that we are doing it all over again. The Cyclic Universe theory may have a leg up on this precognition idea. Anyone who says humans or anyone else can predict the future of 'REAL TIME' with 100% accuracy is an absolute fool.

The emergent understanding in the world of modern psychic phenomena, is that this 'fabric of reality' is a 'consensus reality system'. Older systems of understanding pegged things that way, in so many words.

The more open minded go further in the fields of true theoretical physics. Scientific dogmatism is just as much a fact as is any religion. Stones and glass houses.

Also, the really 'virulently denying' of ESP and psychic phenomena, such people so nasty..that they embarrass most good theoreticians.

As well, in the depths of what is the top of science, ie the creators of all the basic components of modern science, those people were intelligent enough to see plausibility in such considerations.

There is probably a good 1000 or more quality scientifically executed studies on psychic phenomena. Lynn McTaggart wrote an excellent Meta View, called, 'The Field", on the whole subject area. That is an excellent place to start.

Leave your ignorance at home -and you'll be fine.

KBK:
Very cute, now explain how you think someone can predict the future or explain what kind of world we live in that explains how someone can predict the future?

If there is ESP, no-one has ever demonstrated an ability to utilise it. Those who claim prediction fail to count their failures. This bias is common eg whenever something good happens, attribute it to god. What people don't realise is that such attribution works equally well for 'luck', the casting of spells, the manifestation of pure willpower, leprechauns, astrology, numerology etc etc, yet all of them only work reliably retrospect despite claiming prescience.

This is where I differ with anyone else. I am always thinking about just what you say.

In the Bible, to my knowledge, there are actually more predictions about negative things than there are positive.

Even as a Christian, I often find myself in humor about how people thank God for good things, and not the bad. In the book of Job, he worships God with little or no question, even in the middle of the worst disasters.

Very cute, now explain how you think someone can predict the future or explain what kind of world we live in that explains how someone can predict the future?

One does not have to understand the mechanics of a phenomena to recognize its existence.

Smart humans have the ability to estimate what may happen in the future with a fair amount of accuracy. To know what will happen in the future would require that we are in playback mode and that we are doing it all over again. The Cyclic Universe theory may have a leg up on this precognition idea. Anyone who says humans or anyone else can predict the future of 'REAL TIME' with 100% accuracy is an absolute fool.

God is eternal, i.e. outside of time and space, and knows everything. Therefore he can tell someone, any thing, any time, and any place.

He spoke the universe into existence. Speaking a few brainwaves into someone's consciousness is peanuts compared to that.

God is not some pathetic olympian or a sky fairy, like atheists seem to think.

The greek false gods were some pathetic humanoids created by cosmic accidents. It was actually a pagan soap opera.

The one true God is eternal in every respect: Bigger and beyond and before anyone or anything else.

This article is about precognition ESP. The title of this article "The odds are against extra-sensory perception" is a misleading title. ESP has other categories besides precognition, such as: mind reading, mind over matter, astral projection, etc..

@Spectator:

Here are four Questions:

(1): Can God or anyone else predict the future of Real Time? If yes, then please explain how in physics terms.
(2): Where did God come from?
(3): Can God make himself, everything about him and everything else eternally around him disappear forever?

If any of those answers are NO, then God is not perfect because he will not be able to do everything.

If God is not perfect, then what is he?

(1): Can God or anyone else predict the future of Real Time? If yes, then please explain how in physics terms.

Yes, God can and has, as seen many times in the Bible, and he even directly says so, as if the prophecies weren't enough evidence.

Isaiah 46,9, ...for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

10Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

(2): Where did God come from?

There is no answer, nor does it matter. He simply always existed.

(3): Can God make himself, everything about him and everything else eternally around him disappear forever?

If any of those answers are NO, then God is not perfect because he will not be able to do everything.

If God is not perfect, then what is he?

You are attempting to create a logical paradox, and then claim because God doesn't do something then he isn't Go

Your logic is flawed. If you start with nonsense for an axiom, you will get nonsense for an answer, or in this case a paradox.

God CAN'T cease to exist, because He is eternal. This does not make God "less than perfect" nor does it make Him "less than omnipotent". It's just that, by definition, eternal means He exists without a personal beginning or ending.

Similarly, God cannot lie. That doesn't make Him less than perfect. It makes Him honest.

He can and WILL make the entire universe disappear at the end of time, and make a new heaven and new earth.

Rev. 21,1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

The first statemnt under point 3 is a valid question, but has as it's answer "No, because he is eternal."

The 2nd statement is a fallacy because it places an illogical condition on the usage of the word "perfect".

The 3rd statement is illogical because it refers to statement as basis.

(1): Can God or anyone else predict the future of Real Time? If yes, then please explain how in physics terms.

All space, time, matter, energy, constants, laws, formula, and everything else was created by God and has as it's origin, God and God alone.

There is no "physics" of how God does anything, because physics is created by God.

God is not a time traveller, nor is he an olympian sitting on some mountain or cloud somewhere. In Bible prophecy, He is not sending a "message" back in time.

God is a completely seperate ontological entity outside of space, time and any other dimensions that may or may not exist; who created space, time, and everything else.

Asking someone to explain God or something God does in terms of physics is an illogical question, because the laws of physics do not and cannot apply to God.

Maybe physic phenomena can be explained by the Holographic Reality theory: http://www.global...ographic

Explain Edgar Cayce.

Yes, God can and has, as seen many times in the Bible, and he even directly says so, as if the prophecies weren't enough evidence.

How odd to see a variation of "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" on a science site. It is one thing to allow for the possibility of the unproven and/or unprovable, but it is another thing entirely to insist on having special knowledge of reality and of a creator simply because of faith or because the bible says so. To many people, including myself, quoting the bible as proof of something in an discussion on science is meaningless at best.