Mod+ 261. WHY SCIENCE IS WRONG...ABOUT ALMOST EVERYTHING

Alex

Administrator
#21
This is not exactly Skeptiko 3.0 but it is an idea. The idea is that you could start a Skeptiko "Channel B". The purpose of this new podcast would be to host much (possibly much, much) longer interviews with guests and, perhaps, to document some other activities. Let me explain.

-To me, reading the books of certain guests (Ian Rubenstein, Gary Schwartz, Andy Paquette and especially Nick Bunick) has greatly deepened and changed my understanding. So longer interviews would offer this to people in an easier way than buying books. Also, these interviews could be more aggressive. Really digging into critical points in an investigative journalism sort of way (while still remaining friendly - we don’t want to scare off the guests either).

-Other activities. For example, Nick Bunick (http://www.skeptiko.com/122-reincarnation-of-apostle-paul-nick-bunick-scrutinized/). In his book he mentions multiple people who witnessed this and that. So, you could check Nick Bunick’s facts. You can get all of these people (or at least some) and ask them to tell the story again. In a similar vein you could get Rey Hernandez’s wife on. This is not to be rude and doubt his integrity but is rather to take this thing and "nail it to the floor” so that it is fully documented in a public forum. For guests who are telling the truth, this is in their interest (and I believe the vast majority of the guests are telling the truth).

Science advances on the edge cases. Stuff that doesn’t fit. In this paranormal field, the edge cases are often personal stories but many have witnesses. Call the witnesses to the stand. We can’t, of course, force them to the stand but I think many will come anyway.

I am happy to kick things off by doing this with Nick Bunick (assuming he agrees). This way it would no longer be Nick Bunick saying x and y happened to him but rather a group of people saying that x and y happened (which has far more credibility). I also have some awkward questions for Nick which I would like to ask him (for example, what is up with this - http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/240995-108035-west-end-building-will-go-back-on-the-market).

I think the key thing is this. All the Dean Radin and Rupert Sheldrake stuff if great. Trying to be scientific is great. It builds credibility. But, to me, the most interesting stuff is this personal stuff. It is much harder to progress but it is not impossible.

The “scientific evidence” paradigm is the "gold standard" but it is not always practical for all this stuff. So, let’s move on to the “silver standard” of the “legal” paradigm. Call all the witnesses and “cross examine” them.

(and, of course, this is only part of “channel B” - "channel B" is also just more in depth conversations).

One more thing, “channel B” would be free of the constraints of channel A. So, for example, interviews can be 3 hours long or 10 minutes long. There can be one, two, three interviews with the same person. Interviews come out whenever they are ready (not to any schedule). There are different hosts depending on who is interested and available (so it is crowdsourced Skeptiko). Shows can also have a laser focus on very specific points. It would be nice if standards of production (audio quality and transscripts) can be maintained but if they slip then that is OK too.
I love this idea! I've thought about doing more comprehensive investigative journalism stuff... great idea.

I think I'm ok with the focusing on Nick Bunnick, but not totally sold on the idea. let's start a private conversation to discuss.

anyone else interested in this project with Nick Bunnick?

anyone interested in doing an in-depth look into another topic/person?
 
#23
Jacques Vallee, Dean Radin, Bernardo have written on the consciousness angle.

Dolores Cannon is the premier author on the subject of aliens and afterlife phenomenon. Much of what she writes is consistent with what I hear from other sources but some her stuff is pretty far out and I don't consider myself qualified to judge all of her work.

I don't know if there are many other specialists in the afterlife connection, it might be that you would have to go to a generalist and see what they can say about the subject. I suspect Joe McMoneagle knows something about the subject but I don't know if he would want to speak on it publicly. (I was going to suggest John Keel who has written about the coincidence between ufo phenomena and paranormal phenomena but unfortuantely he is deceased.)

I'll think about it and if I can come up with other names I'll post them.
 
#24
sure. e.g. someone said they would try and contact Vallee... he's be great.
I've sent off some emails, but haven't heard back yet.

But it isn't just the UFO thing I meant by my post. Why are world leaders interested in Psi when most of the rest of us know nothing about it? What does the work of Bill Bengston and Dean Radin have to do with global leadership? Why would Bill Clinton be giving a talk at the same conference as Jacques Vallee? It seems like the elite are interested in Psi, and I'm not just talking about Oprah (who had Dean Radin and John Mack on her show years ago).
 

Alex

Administrator
#26
Alex, my first thought for Skeptiko 3.0 is the Big Questions. What does the data tell us about those big questions? What does the data tell us about God, for example. You could do multiple shows on that--what does the NDE data tell us? What does the psychedelic data tell us? What does the religious experience data tell us? Etc. Other big subjects include: nature of consciousness, life after death, reincarnation, why we are here, free will, ETs, etc. I'm really not sure this is a good fit for Skeptiko. It's just the sort of thing I'd personally like to listen to.
I agree. Here's the questions I want to explore

-- how can Christ consciousness be real (I think the evidence suggests that it is) and the historical record of Christianity be such a complete mess (I think the evidence suggests that it is)?

- related topics -- Mormonism... great example of genuine spirituality (I'm assuming) from what started out as a scam (http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon430.htm)

- religious cults (as explored a couple of times on Skeptiko)... what are we to make of this shadow side of religious practices.

- bit question... if God/Spirit/Truth shines thru regardless what are we to make of religion?
 

Alex

Administrator
#27
Echoing Robert Perry's post, the things which most interest me are those which are only reached after we stop trying to find absolute proof or certainty. As some sceptics have demonstrated, for some people there will never be enough proof. But what territory do we find ourselves in when we look over that horizon and begin to explore the vast territory beyond? One example would include interviews with the deceased which are regularly published by various different sources, but tend to be disregarded by the majority here.
flesh this idea out. how would you do it?
 

Alex

Administrator
#28
I've sent off some emails, but haven't heard back yet.

But it isn't just the UFO thing I meant by my post. Why are world leaders interested in Psi when most of the rest of us know nothing about it? What does the work of Bill Bengston and Dean Radin have to do with global leadership? Why would Bill Clinton be giving a talk at the same conference as Jacques Vallee? It seems like the elite are interested in Psi, and I'm not just talking about Oprah (who had Dean Radin and John Mack on her show years ago).
ok, so who do you want to interview and what do you want to ask?
 

Alex

Administrator
#29
Dr Mitch Liester would be a really good interview as far as this topic goes. If Alex were interested in talking to Dr Liester, I could contact him.

interesting. queued up. but probably not the right time as I already have an interview scheduled for Jan on Ayahuasca.
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#31
I'd be interested in looking into the "immaterialist" movement taking shape. You have stuff like the Open Sciences with Sheldrake, Talbott's whole Goethian science approach, the Synch Press guys, Reality Sandwich, the stuff Kastrup is doing with Chopra and Tanzi, and the work McLuhan is doing with regards to the open data base.

What part of Chopra's work is selling garbage, and how can a guy who can write bestsellers not take a more grounded approach to presenting the evidence that suggests mind is not just brain? Why is the ASPR blowing through its endowment but not providing quality services for people who want to engage with the data? How many of the articles on Reality Sandwich are just dudes tripping out and babbling?

I guess I'm interested in "policing our own", so to speak, as well as pushing some of the major players to start organizing themselves more.

Beyond that, some of the stuff LoneShaman talks about is really interesting - Electric Universe, Biosemantics. Guys knowledgeable about that sort of stuff, questioning the accepted paradigms from different angles, would make interesting podcasts.
 
#32
I've got a few people that I'd love to see. Have ya'll ever tried to get William Buhlman on the show? I feel like he would be an interesting guest. I'd also love to see Bruce Moen, but I've heard his health isn't so great these days so it might be hard to get him on. I'm a member of his forum too, so I could propose it to him if ya'll like. I only wish Bob Monroe was still "over Here" so Alex could interview him. I feel like that would be a great interview.

Tom Campbell's been doing quite a few interviews lately, and he helped Bob get the Monroe Institute going. I feel like he takes his virtual reality analogies a bit too far sometimes, but he might be an interesting one to have on.
 

Alex

Administrator
#34
I'd be interested in looking into the "immaterialist" movement taking shape. You have stuff like the Open Sciences with Sheldrake, Talbott's whole Goethian science approach, the Synch Press guys, Reality Sandwich, the stuff Kastrup is doing with Chopra and Tanzi, and the work McLuhan is doing with regards to the open data base.

What part of Chopra's work is selling garbage, and how can a guy who can write bestsellers not take a more grounded approach to presenting the evidence that suggests mind is not just brain? Why is the ASPR blowing through its endowment but not providing quality services for people who want to engage with the data? How many of the articles on Reality Sandwich are just dudes tripping out and babbling?

I guess I'm interested in "policing our own", so to speak, as well as pushing some of the major players to start organizing themselves more.

Beyond that, some of the stuff LoneShaman talks about is really interesting - Electric Universe, Biosemantics. Guys knowledgeable about that sort of stuff, questioning the accepted paradigms from different angles, would make interesting podcasts.
cool... but there are a lot of suggestions. how about you narrow it down to one or two you'd be willing to go after.
 
#35
flesh this idea out. how would you do it?
Well, I was just thinking out loud, as it were. It may not be practical at all. My post was ambiguous, it seemed to suggest that you yourself might attempt an interview with someone in the afterlife. That isn't really what I had in mind, I was thinking more in the direction of perhaps talking to some of those people who do (claim to) carry out such activities. Some of the best work (from my point of view) is done by people who prefer to remain anonymous (for reasons which seem valid) but this does raise difficulties right at the outset. It also isn't a popular topic among the forum members here, so might be hard to justify.

My reason for mentioning such topics is really related to the 'paradigm shift' which is usually considered in relation to opening up the mainstream to consider such topics as psi and the possibility of consciousness being distinct from the physical brain. But there is another paradigm shift, that is, the uplifting messages may also have a transformative effect on society. I mentioned previously that I was considering topics where there may be no proof - in this respect I'm referring to something similar to the uplifting feeling we may get from listening to great music, or viewing great art or reading great literature. We don't ask for 'proof' there, not because these things are fictional, but because we know their value from the effect they have on us.
 
#37
ok, so who do you want to interview and what do you want to ask?
I think Dean Radin would be someone to start with. He's talked to the elite, been on Oprah , and has been invited to talk in a great variety of forums that one wouldn't necessarily connect to an interest in Psi. He's also the senior scientist at IONS, an organization founded by an astronaut (you don't get more elite than that), and a place that has hosted talks by the likes of John Mack and Jacques Vallee.

I'd like to know if the world's elite knows someone the rest of us doesn't, or do they just have more time on their hands to waste on silliness?
 
#38
I'd would too... they won't engage in this dialog. pls find them and book them for me. I would love the change to dialog with them.
I guess I half expected that answer :(

Alex, people shower you with suggestions for possible interviewees, and I am sure some names come up over and over again, so suppose we have one thread devoted to this issue, and the first entry would be yours, and would contain a list of people you have contacted so far, and their response. The rest of the thread would be for people to suggest names, but the important point is that you could just edit that first entry and add names as and when you or anyone else gets rebuffed.

It might be interesting for people to see exactly who has refused to come on the show (and why, if they say why)

David
 
#39
pls wait.

how about finding a Ayahuasca skeptic? someone who doesn't buy any of the spiritual claims.
And you would record the podcast deep in the Amazon jungle (for legal reasons), and he would drink some in the interview.... :)

Seriously, I do think the whole issue of hallucinogenic/entheogenic plants and chemicals would bear more discussion. Maybe K9's suggestion or someone associated with Erowid?

David
 
Last edited:
#40
Top