"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4b111fbd$1@news.povray.org...

> >> Disproving a theory is every bit as important as proving a theory. By
> >> proving that the psychic phenominon does not exist, now nobody else
> >> needs to study it. This is beneficial.

> > If *nobody else* studying it is good, an unqualified *nobody* studying
it is
> > even better, is it not?

> The only way to scientifically determine whether a claim is valid or not
> is to, you know, actually investigate it. If we wrote off anything that
> sounded too weird, human kind would never have advanced anywhere.

Person A: I can read minds.
Scientist: Hypothesis: Some people can read minds. Sure, let's test it.
- Test yields a negative result -
Person A: I was off that day. I cannot read minds on Fridays.
Scientist: Sure, let's repeat the test on a Monday.
- Test yields a negative result -
Person A: The room was too cold. It doesn't work in the cold.
Scientist: Sure, let's repeat the test in a warmer room.
- Test yields a negative result -
Person A: There are too many lights. I cannot concentrate.
Scientist: Sure, let's repeat the test in the dark.
- Test yields a negative result -
Person A: Today's subjects were antagonistic. It doesn't work with
everybody.
Scientist: Sure, let's find new subjects.
Person A: No, I've had enough. I don't have to prove myself to you.
- next day -
Person B: I can read minds.
... rinse and repeat.

So what did the scientist "prove"? Even if she tests a million people with
negative results, she can not conclude that reading minds is not possible
because there will be a million and first person making the same claim or a
similar claim with minor variations. The supposed hypothesis stated at the
beginning was patently inadequate and nonsensical, for she did not take into
account the effect of Fridays, temperature of the room, alignment of moon
and venus, the effect of coffee... etc, all of which the subject made up on
the way. Not only that, but one cannot disprove *some* without exhaustive
search. Do you think scientists should investigate if "some" apples might
fall up?

A claim itself is not evidence (unlike what some people here seem to think).
With paranormal, there are only personal/subjective claims.

Post a reply to this message