Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site randvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Psychic Warfare - an informed opinio - (nf)
Message-ID: <1649@randvax.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 24-Jan-84 20:31:58 EST
Article-I.D.: randvax.1649
Posted: Tue Jan 24 20:31:58 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Jan-84 12:29:13 EST
References: <5021@uiucdcs.UUCP>, <845@cbosgd.UUCP>
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 24

--------------------------------
I think that all the skeptics are saying is that `extraordinary claims
require extraordinary proof'.  Even in much more mundane areas of
science an unreplicable experiment is never considered proof, no
matter how positive the result.

The history of parapsychology is so fraught with instances of fraud
and cheating that the need for tightly-controlled, replicable
experiments is considerably greater than in other fields, where deceit
has only been a small (though existent) problem.  Unfortunately,
scientists are probably the easiest of groups to fool, as their trust
in a logical and consistant world gives little room for a
consideration of deception.  Thus the skeptic's insistance that an
expert in the art of deception--a professional magician--participate
in the experimental design and be present at the experiment.  Doing
such is no less appropriate than electrical shielding of sensitive
equipment, sealing chemicals against contamination, and other such
routine matters of experimental design.  And practically all
`parapsychologists' resist efforts towards tighter controls in their
experiments, *especially* the participation of a magician.

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall   (UUCP)
		edhall@rand-unix        (ARPA)