Xref: utzoo sci.bio:1371 sci.misc:2174
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!lamaster
From: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.misc
Subject: Re: Strange results in Nature article (fallout...)
Keywords: skepticism debunking
Message-ID: <12470@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 28 Jul 88 15:05:37 GMT
References: <1911@aecom.YU.EDU> <6445@megaron.arizona.edu> <492@metapsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 28

In article <492@metapsy.UUCP> sarge@metapsy.UUCP (Sarge Gerbode) writes:
>I found the data on the Amazing Randi's investigation of the Nature article
>unfortunate and unsurprising.

>Randi already "knows" that nothing unusual could ever happen.  He is no
>scientist, nor does he have the spirit of the true scientific investigator, in
>my opinion, which is a committment to discover the truth, whatever it be.

>Sarge Gerbode -- UUCP:  pyramid!thirdi!metapsy!sarge
>Institute for Research in Metapsychology
>950 Guinda St.  Palo Alto, CA 94301

Well, I have seen Randi speak, and the first thing he pointed out was that
he is not a scientist, he is a magician.  The next thing he pointed out
was that being a magician is more useful training for uncovering many of
the more common ways of faking supernatural phenomena than being a scientist,
because magicians learn all the tricks, whereas scientists, by and large,
expect people to have honest intentions.  Randi has been kept busy just
uncovering such frauds, and the pervasiveness of them puts an extra burden
on anyone doing legitimate research into such areas.  That isn't Randi's
fault, however, but the fault of those who uncritically accept such claims,
and those who exploit them.


-- 
  Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9,  UUCP ames!lamaster
  NASA Ames Research Center  ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov
  Moffett Field, CA 94035     
  Phone:  (415)694-6117