[net.misc] Dan Klein on ESP

jeffma@tekgvs.UUCP (Jeff Mayhew) (02/10/84)

    "I have observed 'paranormal' phenomena, so you will have a hard time
     convincing me that they don't exist."

     "But:  It also is not coincidence.  Example:  I have not talked to Andrea
     in 2 months, nor have I really thought about her.  Suddenly I get the
     inspiration to call.  As I am walking to the phone, it rings.  Andrea is
     calling me.  The same thing happens with my sister (often we find 
     ourselves saying 'I was just going to call you')."

     "I am willing to write off my telepathic/empathetic abilities to simply
     the power of observation.  However the telephone episodes are another 
     story."

     "You have to take my word for it, and I think I am a bit more believable
     than Uri Geller, because 1) I am a scientist, and not a charlatan actor,
     and 2) I realize that I can't prove anything, so I don't come in with
     drum roll and fanfare."

			-Dan Klein, Mellon Institute, Pittsburgh [mi-cec.200]

A few comments on Dan's "reasons" for being more believable than Uri Geller.
I've got news for you, Dan.  History has shown us that merely being a
"scientist" doesn't equip you with the appropriate qualifications to expound
on alleged paranormal phenomena.  In fact, scientists are often more gullible
than the average layman.  Your second reason for being more "believable" is
rather puzzling.  Somehow we are supposed to believe you, because you don't
try too hard to prove it?  I guess I missed something there.  Sort of reminds
me of the time Merv Griffin decided that Uri Geller had to be genuine, because
he didn't always succeed in performing his miracles.  After all, a professional
magician would be able to do it every time....

I might also mention that when someone is asking you to "take his word" for 
the validity of his informal assessments of a non-reproducible and highly 
debatable phenomenon, rather than look at the solid (non-anecdotal) evidence 
to date, he is certainly not making that request in the role of a scientist.
Hence it is rather misleading to use the "scientist" label to justify it.

We are welcome to interpret such occurrences as we wish.  I have had
virtually identical experiences myself, but prefer to construct somewhat less
dramatic explanations.  Granted, it occasionally makes it a little harder to 
come up with exciting dinner conversation, but that's the price we skeptics 
have to pay...

						Jeff Mayhew
						Teklabs