PA Conference abstracts

I'd love to hear what Penny Sartori has to say about Linda's claims and complaints on her study, on this show.
It's too easy to dismiss someone else's work in two words and avoid to discuss the criticism with the author.

I am sure Sartori would be available.
On a side note, it's also a pity that Sartori's book is almost unvailable.
 
"I'm sure Linda could do that. I certainly wouldn't stand in her way.."

What do you mean, you wouldn't stand in her way ? Why would anyone think that you would unless you were paying her wages or something. Are you Linda's guru ?

I simply meant it to mean I wasn't against her doing it. It's an expression.
 
Looks like I stirred up some trouble ... sry!

Anyhow, correct me if am wrong, but isn't 3-4 days about the longest your average joe can survive without any fluid intake. This guy made it 10 days? Is that not still remarkable despite the issues? What am I missing here? If he's an outlier, we should be curious as to why, shouldn't we? Rather than dismiss it. Let's not make it another either/or analysis - i.e. either he can survive indefinitely/unharmed forever without water on his magical guru powers, or not at all.
 
McMoneagle's remote viewing claim that "we were quite accurate" sounds impressive, but not after you read Ersby's book comparing what was actually said with what was actually happening, during the Iranian hostage crisis.

So, which targets was McMoneagle referring to when he said "we were quite accurate"?
 
I just find it ludicrous, K9 that Linda picks on tiny details to try to rubbish the whole case. Like Keith Augustine complaining that Pam Reynolds made a tiny mistake in identifying the Midas Rex saw. Why should we really care though, it's a game to her, that's all.
Of course it's a game. Just like when she pretends to be an academic. So much easier to pick on how well an abstract is written than to meaningfully comment on the actual research. We all know she's BSing her way through things. But I guess that's what entertains Arouet so much.

If she wasn't a BSer, she'd be published. Like Andy is.
 
Of course it's a game. Just like when she pretends to be an academic. So much easier to pick on how well an abstract is written than to meaningfully comment on the actual research.

Do we have access to the actual paper yet? I thought all we have is the abstract. If so, let's discuss that!
 
Looks like I stirred up some trouble ... sry!

Anyhow, correct me if am wrong, but isn't 3-4 days about the longest your average joe can survive without any fluid intake.

No. People can survive a week to 10 days, although not always reversibly. This case isn't out of the range of possibility, from a medical perspective.

Linda
 
Looks like I stirred up some trouble ...

Anyhow, correct me if am wrong, but isn't 3-4 days about the longest your average joe can survive without any fluid intake. This guy made it 10 days? Is that not still remarkable despite the issues? What am I missing here? If he's an outlier, we should be curious as to why, shouldn't we? Rather than dismiss it. Let's not make it another either/or analysis - i.e. either he can survive indefinitely/unharmed forever without water on his magical guru powers, or not at all.

Yeah, not to mention all the docs that oversaw the thing were flabbergasted. That is, if I am to believe the news reports from the BBC and others. Linda's got a problem having to do with the man's kidneys though. I have not looked into this yet, and I dare say it's not worth it.

Linda, could the renal thing have anything to do with this yogi reabsorbing his urine?
 
I simply meant it to mean I wasn't against her doing it. It's an expression.

It's still odd though that you would say that....".I wouldn't stand in her way" or I wouldn't have any objection to it is another way of saying it.....I wouldn't have thought that dynamic independent woman in the know, Linda for one.... would have cared less what you think she is allowed to do...unless there is some connection between you ? Are you her husband maybe ? It's okay if you are, it would explain a lot and maybe Paul is some relation too ? Am I getting hot, Arouet ?

No probably not
 
Yeah, not to mention all the docs that oversaw the thing were flabbergasted. That is, if I am to believe the news reports from the BBC and others. Linda's got a problem having to do with the man's kidneys though. I have not looked into this yet, and I dare say it's not worth it.

No pressure. I'm a bit flabbergasted by the docs myself.

Linda, could the renal thing have anything to do with this yogi reabsorbing his urine?

No. The lining of the bladder does not allow for reabsorption.

Linda
 
It's still odd though that you would say that....".I wouldn't stand in her way" or I wouldn't have any objection to it is another way of saying it.....I wouldn't have thought that dynamic independent woman in the know, Linda for one.... would have cared less what you think she is allowed to do...unless there is some connection between you ? Are you her husband maybe ? It's okay if you are, it would explain a lot and maybe Paul is some relation too ? Am I getting hot, Arouet ?

No probably not

You are correct that "I wouldn't have any objection to" is another way I could have written it. And true, Linda didn't ask for my opinion. K9 did. That's why my comments were directed at her.

And yes, you almost figured it out: I am Linda's husband, as is Paul (and my brother-husband, lucky me!). You should consider coming to live with us in our skeptimune. I'd have to get permission from our Amazing leader of course.
 
I asked Powell. She has written a paper and is looking into peer review journals for its publication. She did not have a time frame for its publication yet.

Cheers,
Bill

Wait, I thought the abstracts were summaries of papers for the conference that were peer reviewed already? I think I might be mistaken about how these things work!
 
I'd love to hear what Penny Sartori has to say about Linda's claims and complaints on her study, on this show.
It's too easy to dismiss someone else's work in two words and avoid to discuss the criticism with the author.

I am sure Sartori would be available.
On a side note, it's also a pity that Sartori's book is almost unvailable.

Personally, I don't have any significant problems with Penny not including the first 'informal' interview she undertook with patient 10 within the transcripts of her full study. It was clear to me from reading the first 'formal' interview transcript with patient 10 that there was a prior interview, and some of those pertinent missing parts were in any case published as a separate paper. Some of which are also referred to within the discussions of her original study.

It's a pity that the first 'informal' interview transcript with patient 10 wasn't included in the original study, but I really don't think it has much of an impact on patient 10's case. I hope (and expect) that Penny will address this at some point in the future, by finding and publishing the whole 'informal' interview. I gather it's all stored away in their loft, but rooting around up there to find it went on the back burner, as she had just become pregnant, and since then she's had her hands full - what with her book and their first child.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top