Dean Radin

#2
Does anyone know why he has stopped posting on his blog?
There has been nothing new from Penny Sartori for quite a while as well. Overall where I look on the internet the interest for the paranomal seems decimated the last couple of years.
 
#5
I've noticed he has stepped out of the limelight also.

He isn't keeping up with his blog, but then again he is getting older and perhaps his interests in the subject aren't as intense as they used to be.

Or, maybe it's the opposite. Maybe he is so involved in something he enjoys that he can't be bothered to waste time arguing for/against subjects anymore.

It must be tiring to be in his shoes and have people from both sides emailing you and asking you questions pro and con about the subjects he talks about, ie., physicists arguing against his entanglement/psi arguments, pro-parapsychology nuts seeing him as the holy grail of the cross between science/mysticism. His book Supernatural was a bit... out there but I enjoyed it, but the comments on Amazon show that he is both admired by believers, of interest to people on the fence, and annoying to the skeptics. So, that has got to be exhausting. He just might not be the type to want to keep up with it. In his video lectures he looks a bit awkward and shy.

But, who knows right now, maybe he is just in a deep meditation and will be back soon
 
#7
Maybe you can point me towards the action. I still read Michael Prescott's blog regulary but otherwise everywhere I used to go seems to be in hibernation.
Because parapsychology is a science, and scientists usually don't have blogs. You can go to the PAs website and read the journal, check the minutes of the PA, etc.

Or read any of the various books being released about the subject.
 
#8
Because parapsychology is a science, and scientists usually don't have blogs. You can go to the PAs website and read the journal, check the minutes of the PA, etc.

Or read any of the various books being released about the subject.
Hey Iyace!

What are your thoughts on Bish's question here?
 
#9
Hey Iyace!

What are your thoughts on Bish's question here?
I briefly skimmed it. I think he's confusing modified free choice response studies with other presentiment studies. The ones he's referring to often don't have images, but physical stimuli, like small shocks.

It's really hard to find good stimuli for people.
 
#10
There has been nothing new from Penny Sartori for quite a while as well. Overall where I look on the internet the interest for the paranomal seems decimated the last couple of years.
Penny is now a mum, and it was always clear to me that her blog was recommended PR for the first book launch... after the launch, motherhood and increased popularity took its toll :)
 
#11
I briefly skimmed it. I think he's confusing modified free choice response studies with other presentiment studies. The ones he's referring to often don't have images, but physical stimuli, like small shocks.

It's really hard to find good stimuli for people.
I think the question still stands... Bish?
 
#14
I briefly skimmed it. I think he's confusing modified free choice response studies with other presentiment studies. The ones he's referring to often don't have images, but physical stimuli, like small shocks.
I don't think I'm confusing things, but then I'm not an expert on the studies. I'm referring to studies described in this except from Livescience.com
Real effect?

Many studies have shown that physical responses including heart rate, pupil dilation and brain activity change between one and 10 seconds before people see a scary image (like a slithering snake). In most of these experiments, frightening pictures were randomly interspersed with more-neutral ones, so that in theory participants didn't have any clues about which photo would pop up next. But because the finding seemed so unnatural, those studies were understandably met with skepticism.

To see whether the effect was real, Mossbridge and her team analyzed over two dozen of these studies. As part of the analysis, they threw out any experiments in which they saw bias or flaws.
Full text here.
 
#15
Yeah, but to answer your question, I don't think so. Presentiment studies used to be done with some low level shock stimuli. It's relatively recently that different response stimuli like porn were used, and there's not enough aggregate data to combine it.
 
#16
Yeah, but to answer your question, I don't think so. Presentiment studies used to be done with some low level shock stimuli. It's relatively recently that different response stimuli like porn were used, and there's not enough aggregate data to combine it.
 
#17
Yeah, but to answer your question, I don't think so. Presentiment studies used to be done with some low level shock stimuli. It's relatively recently that different response stimuli like porn were used, and there's not enough aggregate data to combine it.
I'm not sure I follow what you mean about combining data. I focused on photos because those have been the presentiment studies I've heard about from the media and on the skeptiko podcast (such as Radin's study on presentiment here). But my question can appy to any presentiment experiment in which physical response data is used to establish that precognition has occurred, whether it be electric shocks or porn.

It is here again, rephrased: Have researchers ever used the raw physical response data only to blindly confirm instances in which presentiment has been identified?
 
#19
Dean Radin is maintaining this site:

http://deanradin.com/evidence/evidence.htm

He's probably just fed up with resistance and just doing his own thing like many other people who realize that we're all own our own path and we choose how to spend our limited energy on this earth.
I think Radin should carry on doing the research and interviews and proponents like ourselves should be carrying the fight if you will (politely of course!)
 
Top