Home Discussion Forum Who here believes in the parapsychology research?

Who here believes in the parapsychology research?

I do.
Please no rude answers. And I’ve heard all the debunking theories, so please don’t leave links, sources, or whatnot, unless they are worth my time. Skepdic is a stupid website, I’ve been on it before.
Later gator………
Well. What a peach.
I don’t CARE if nobody understands my wording. Please don’t put words into my mouth.


  1. I’m not sure what you mean by believe in. It is clearly there (it exist) for everyone to see. Parapsychology research undergoes the same scientific reviews and evaluations by scientist working in the field (peer review) as any other science. The methods and evaluations used are those widely accepted in any social and/or experimental science.
    Perhaps the only difference is the number of non peers (both scientist and non scientist not working in the field) that choose to publicly (in non peer reviewed non science magazines) criticize the research in a manner outside of the field (because they are either unqualified to or their arguments don’t merit serious consideration by actual science journals).
    In this parapsychology is unique as that very seldom do you see any publication (never in science journals) where a physics experiment is critiqued in detail by a professor of history. In fact it was so unique that a publishing group “Prometheus Books” had to be created in order to create an opportunity for such publications.

  2. I have to agree with psi that the words “believe in” are kind of unclear. However, I’m going to rephrase the question you asked, and then answer that one (and feel free to tell me I’m wrong).
    The question I’m answering in is: “Who believes that parapsychology research is valid?”
    I believe that it’s valid. The reason for this is that most parapsychology researchers are busily trying to arrive at the truth, rather than focusing on either debunking or supporting the belief in the paranormal. It’s the job of parapsychologists to find out what’s actually happening, rather than merely dismissing something as a hoax on the grounds that it might be superstition. Empirical proof is still forthcoming, as we have much to learn about what people call “the paranormal”, but there is actually some credible evidence to support the idea that some people actually can predict what’s happening minutes or even seconds ahead of it happening. This also supports John Walker’s idea of “quantum navigation” (link in “sources”).
    Even if I am, in fact, wrong, then the study of the unexplained is still valid in that seeking the truth in all things helps us to understand our universe and what makes it work (in addition to helping us understand what makes our perceptions and our society work). Ghosts are dismissed as superstition, but superstitions can’t be recorded or filmed. Superstitions can be faked, but where there isn’t conclusive evidence of fakery (and plenty of reason to believe that a significant amount of the evidence submitted is not intentionally faked), no explanation can be readily admitted. It is therefore merely “unexplained”.
    Skeptics who are irrationally skeptical typically cite that a burden of proof is necessary, but irrationally reject any evidence which might be offered as reason to suspend judgment. I find this practice just as bad as blind acceptance, and the likes of James Randi tend to try to change all of the variables about how things are said to work in order to actively prevent something being proved true… skepticism as a religion, rather than rational skepticism, which allows for a suspension of judgment until evidence has been proved true or false. The burden of proof is only used for statements of truth, and is not valid in the context of trying to negate a false. There are more options than “true” and “false” in the universe.
    Is there anything that can actually invalidate the search for truth, even to validate that something is a superstition or not?

  3. “I’ve heard all the debunking theories, so please don’t leave links, sources, or whatnot, unless they are worth my time.”
    So you don’t want any evidence that contradicts your predetermined conclusion. This is one of those “please agree with me so I can feel good about myself” questions.
    I’m starting to get the sense that paranormal believers are some of the most closed-minded people on the planet. As a semi-skeptic myself, there is plenty of evidence that could be presented to make me believe in the paranormal. I have yet to be wowed.
    Thumbs down if you want, I’ll speak rationally and take my two points.
    EDIT: No, this isn’t a poll question. You’re asking for a show of hands and requesting no voice of dissent. Therefore, this is one of those “please agree with me so I can feel good about myself” questions.
    I want to know, what evidence could someone present that would make you change your mind about parapsychology? If your answer is “nothing” or “I don’t know”, then you’re a closed-minded individual.
    JasiusGGOG: You’ve got my vote for best answer.

  4. I believe in parapsychology research. I have reason to be convinced that psychic phenomena occur, and I’d sure like to know how it works and exactly what it can do. The links are about one very good theory and some other interesting observations.

  5. Even though parapsychology is out of bounce of main sciences, because my experience and others I believe it as valid depending on the result of the experiments conducted.

  6. You have every right to believe in the validity of their research and conclusions. Part of life is deciding where to place your trust and who to believe in. I, for my part, place my trust in the overwhelming majority of scientists who don’t accept their research. There are major issues with the complaint that those scientists who question the validity of parapsychological research aren’t trained in the discipline:
    1) the scientific method doesn’t change, and someone who knows even a little about science can recognize bad methodology
    2) science and scientists are supposed to be objective, but people who call themselves “parapsychologists” are biased, they start out believing and are looking for things to justify these beliefs, thus instead of looking at the big picture, they focus on those few points that agree with them whether they are the best and most accurate information or not
    I equate these people with those who think that science validates the bible. They start with their beliefs and look for justification. These people will tell you the earth is only 5,000 years old. They can point you to many websites that will back up their claims. Do I have to be a geologist to disagree?

  7. I belive it exists and I believe it is of value.
    I figure perhapse you are getting rude answers because you are not asking the question the right way.
    You are wording it like ”do you believe in Santa Clause”
    You need to write it like this.
    Who here believe that paraspychology research is of value and necessary?
    I am not being rude hon, just helping you word it right.

  8. The truth is the truth is the truth….whether the scientists agree with it or not. Even if believers believe something…it might not be right…because it might not be the truth.We’re all looking for the truth…but I’m not sure that the skeptics are. I think REAL scientists would want the truth…even if it means eating crow.

  9. Sure, I believe it exists. There are people who do parapsychology research.
    If you’re asking whether it is of value, I think any research done well has value, and certainly more value to those to take an interest in that specific field. As for my analysis, it looks to me like the field of parapsychological research does suffer from some problems in methodology and statistical analysis. If parapsychologists could do away with meta-analysis and support their hypotheses with studies that stand on their own like all other areas of science do, that would change things considerably.
    Edit: Deenie, being a skeptic or a scientist is all about looking for the truth. I love how you get some things so backwards 🙂 Believers look for truth too, but may use very different methods than what a scientist or skeptic would.

  10. Science is about the discovery of truth, and has a very rigid process for deciding what is true or not. Parapsychological research has yet to prove itself by this process, but my hope and belief is that someday it will. Shalom.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here