Evidence of Supernatural Ability

by GromitSK 74 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Xanthippe

  Cofty said of Charles Tart

  'I assume it means that he has failed to publish a scientific paper in a peer reviewed journal.'

  Information Transmission Under Conditions of Sensory Shielding, Charles T. Tart, Harold E Puthoff, Nature, 18.10.74

  Information Transmission in Remote Viewing Experiments, Charles T. Tart, Harold E Puthoff, Russell Tara, , Nature, 13.3.80

  Marijuana Intoxication : Common Experiences, Charles T.Tart, Nature, 23.5.70

  More on Extrasensory Induction of Brain Waves , Charles T Tart, Science, 7.1.66

  ESP Research, Charles T Tart, Science, 15.12.78

  Is the Paranormal "Normal"?, Charles T Tart, Science,15.2.80

  There are more on the websites for the Nature and Science journals. I just am too tired to type any more out. Just put Caharles Tart in the search box.
• 

  cofty

  If Tart published a paper in '74 showing verifiable evidence for telepathy and another one in '80 about remote viewing - what happened?

  Do you think maybe the paper didn't stack up?
• 

  Xanthippe

  What do you mean what happened Cofty? Are you referring to the article you quoted yesterday from Wikipedia that was negative about him? Seriously, Wikipedia?
• 

  cofty

  Xan - You quoted Tart as if his research had shown that the paranormal had scientific foundation.

  I did a 10 second search and found criticism of his work quoted on Wiki and suggested there may be grounds for skepticism of his assertions. That was a reasonable use of Wiki. I had neither the time nor interest to research any further.

  I know nothing about his work but I do know that Randi's $1m remains unclaimed. If Tart or anybody else has published papers establishing proof of the paranormal I am guessing we would have heard.

  I'm not the one making extraordinary claims.
• 

  cofty

  Here is an article about Tart you may want to take into consideration...

  As for Tart's claim about the significance of ESP and ESP research, I can only call them self-serving claims of an incompetent egoist or naive claims of a deluded psychologist.