Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site iddic.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!orca!iddic!rick
From: rick@iddic.UUCP (Rick Coates)
Newsgroups: net.crypt,net.sci
Subject: Re: Chuq's comments about ESP
Message-ID: <1844@iddic.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Nov-84 17:17:11 EST
Article-I.D.: iddic.1844
Posted: Fri Nov  2 17:17:11 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Nov-84 21:49:27 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 27

<>

I know that this (net.crypt) is not the correct newsgroup, so I am also
posting to net.sci.

Chuq writes:

> I agree, there is no scientifically hard evidence for ESP
> these days, but the lack of evidence doesn't prove the lack of the ability.

I do not want to get into a heated controversy (Chuq seems like a good guy);
but the lack of evidence is, indeed, the only possible proof of a lack of
ability.  I can prove the existence in a variety of ways, but the only 
proof of non-existence is a lack of evidence.  The lack may be very thorough
(as in the case of psi phenomena), but it is still a lack of evidence.

This is not a nit-picking issue -- the nature of the proof is important in
evaluating how valid a claim is.

The periodical "Free Inquiry" has a very good article about the nature of
scientific proofs in the current issue. 

"The Skeptical Inquirer" is an excellent source of information on
paranormal phenomena.

Rick Coates
...!tektronix!iddic!rick