Does anyone know why he has stopped posting on his blog?
Eh? That hasn't been my experience...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.
Eh? That hasn't been my experience...
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
Well, response stimuli likes he's mentioning are usually the result of free response studies, and participants aren't usually monitored in those.I think the question still stands... Bish?
If "the meaning of it all" is as I suspect, this is the most reasonable action one can take.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.