Comments on: The Reality of ESP: A Physicist’s Proof of Psychic Abilities

By: Bri

Bri — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:21:08 +0000

I don’t see how his comments are rude. You knew that I would likely respond to your post. At some point you will see the truth. I know you’ll rebuff my post. It doesn’t matter. It’s your opinion against mine. Every single day I get ample proof of the reslity of psi phenomena. In not so long a period of time you’ll see exactly what I mean. Till then your words will be wasted energy. I’m sorry and I apologize, I don’t mean to be rude. You are sadly mistaken. You have no idea what I do and unfortunately at this time I can’t be forthcoming. What I will demonstrate will settle this debate decisively and permanently. Till then i bid you a good day.

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:20:04 +0000

@Scott Four things:
First: All you seem to have on your side are appeals to authority (a type of logical fallacy).It seems this is truly all you can say, while being rude and betraying your lack of manners at the same time. You believers can stay sheeples if you want but please refrain from urging others to do likewise.Or, at least, be polite about it.

Besides, no credential (which is a human invention) in the world will change “the laws of reality” by force of it’s authority.You can have tons of credentials and work within a domain, if you say sth that’s obviously incorrect, it is still incorrect.

Second: There is no such thing as Old World science.And despite what people like you, with only little knowledge of the big, wide world think… the fact remains that the “Old World” that you so much despise contributes at least as much to scientific progress as the new world and is more highly developed in general.

Third: You just believe what you want to belief.History shows that’s a bad guide… this should (usually) go without saying.

Fourth:If you can show the existence of such phenomena sceptics would believe in them.The way you use the word it is such a label for believers in order to avoid grappling with the inconvinient truths that may be inside the words of those who chose to be thinking for themselves and paying the prices you have to pay if you value truth and the solution of problems over sugarcoating reality.

But while showing sth to be true/likely you must adhere to some standards.Some easy thinking should show you why, and it would not harm you to do it yourself (instead of relying on others and a feeling of what you want to be true, nobody cares about these things anyway).

Ps:
There is no such thing as proper science, “improper science” is no science at all.That’s what makes science so different and effective.Necromancers like you should stick within the realm of their competencies.

By: Scott Bryson

Scott Bryson — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:12:06 +0000

As usual the knee-jerk skeptics are ready to criticize without even looking into the background of the story. This man has impeccable credentials and work as a physicist besides his Stanford ESP research.

All you all so ignorant that you think you know more than Stanford Research Institute, the CIA and DOD, who dropped $25M on this work? If nothing this is a perfect demonstration of how ignorant skeptics can be of proper science that refutes their desperate grip on Old World science.

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:55:59 +0000

It’s been awhile since I’ve come to this blog. Someone new is in charge. First you post something from prisonplanet, now this. Seriously? Will I see books on the latest science in communicating with aliens next? This baloney has nothing to do with Kurzweil’s work and the reason people are subscribed to this blog… Or am I wrong?

By: Critic

Critic — Mon, 28 May 2012 20:36:49 +0000

Stuff like this shouldnt be posted on KurzweilAI.

By: silentrage

silentrage — Sat, 26 May 2012 07:57:27 +0000

Ridiculous comments like yours makes me question the capability of people to investigate and think for their goddam selves instead of just believing whatever they’re told.

By: Dylan

Dylan — Tue, 22 May 2012 16:53:09 +0000

Ridiculous content such as this makes me question the credibility of this website as a source for science and technology news.

By: Ben S.

Ben S. — Tue, 22 May 2012 15:53:34 +0000

I foresee a day in my mind’s eye, in the not too distant future, when this book will be available for the Kindle.

By: /:set\AI

/:set\AI — Tue, 22 May 2012 15:38:29 +0000

those who still think Psi is ‘woo’ need to examine their
lives and their thinking- this is now mainstream science
with a huge body of peer-reviewed evidence that has
been more thoroughly vetted and checked than any
other set of experiments- so the last hold-outs who
questioned the experiments have to cease and desist-

why hold on to an irrational position against these
phenomena? there are no more arguments- we are
maturing past classical materialist mechanism to the
network dynamics of quantum information- this is
happening is ALL the sciences-

By: None

None — Tue, 22 May 2012 07:11:45 +0000

Why is this on Kurzweil AI?

By: silentrage

silentrage — Tue, 22 May 2012 06:01:58 +0000

I agree with some of what you say, but you may also have to keep in mind that many experiments which are done very professionally as to deserve being published never do because of the sheer number of buttons they push in the science community.

By: Titus Nachbauer

Titus Nachbauer — Mon, 21 May 2012 21:14:21 +0000

I must say I am very dissapointed you would publish an article like this. If the scientist mentioned did indeed publish any results from controled and repeatable experiments in a respectable peer reviewed journal, then point us to that article, but not to a book with mentions of individual positive (and therefore by definition cherry picked) cases. At least your summary makes it look like that.