Have I mentioned how That Idiot From Maine© believes in telepathy and precognition because God?
Actually, Stupy, I believe in them because science.
The key phrase in the abstract reads:
"The paper reports a meta-analysis of 90 experiments from 33 laboratories in 14 different countries which yielded an overall positive effect in excess of 6 sigma with an effect size (Hedges’ g) of 0.09, combined z = 6.33, p = 1.2 × 10e-10. A Bayesian analysis yielded a Bayes Factor of 7.4 × 10e9, greatly exceeding the criterion value of 100 for “decisive evidence” in favor of the experimental hypothesis."
In layman terms this means that according to the same standards used to evaluate evidence throughout the psychological sciences that implicit precognition is a genuine effect. This outcome, combined with a meta-analysis of presentiment effects, provides additional evidence indicating that what bothers critics is their belief about how Nature should behave, rather than how it actually does.
We do not need precognition to predict that the new meta-analysis will not influence the critics' beliefs. Their beliefs, like those of most people, rest upon a naive realist (i.e., common sense) view of nature.
While common sense is good enough for most basic activities of daily life (not including an understanding of how television, smartphones, GPSs, and computers work), it is not sufficient to account for the larger reality revealed by science. Nor is it capable of perceiving the far stranger and vaster realities that patiently wait for us far beyond the reach of today's science.
Update: Well, if I knew making jokes about his lack of virility would have scared Simels away from here I'd have done it years ago. Do you know "Simels" is an anagram for "I'm less"?
Ah, pre-cognition. All those people who do so well in the stock market.
ReplyDeleteWell, if they did do you think they're likely to broadcast their ability?
DeleteYou didn't read the article, never mind the paper, I did. Your scoffing is ignorance based, my belief is evidence based.