ESP and actual neurobiology
Haunter at castles.com
Sun Jun 17 21:26:32 EST 2001
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 01:09:05 GMT, "Richard Norman"
<rsnorman at mediaone.net> wrote:
>"Haunter" <Haunter at castles.com> wrote in message
>news:3b39459a.973576277 at cnews.newsguy.com...
>> On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 22:04:06 GMT, "Richard Norman"
>> <rsnorman at mediaone.net> wrote:
>> >There was recently a query about ESP on bionet.neuroscience and
>> >then a lot of flames about trolling and stuff. Then somebody
>> >(I am having trouble tracing the names) wrote:
>> >> Regarding the issue of technology and ESP, I thought you might find
>> >> the following abstract of interest
>> >>EEG AND SPECT DATA OF A SELECTED SUBJECT DURING PSI TASKS:
>> >>THE DISCOVERY OF A NEUROPHYSIOLOGICAL CORRELATE
>> >>CHERYL H. ALEXANDER, MICHAEL A. PERSINGER,
>> >>WILLIAM G. ROLL, AND DAVID L. WEBSTER
>> >I have searched the National Library of Medicine (Pub Med).
>> >I find there is an "MA Persinger" who is a fairly prolific researcher
>> >Laurentian University in Ontario, Canada. His web page is
>> > http://www.laurentian.ca/neurosci/persinger.html
>> >and his publication list does NOT include anything at all like
>> >what is cited.
>> >There is a WG Roll who did publish a paper entitled "ESP
>> >and memory" in Int. J. Neuropsychiatry in 1966 but I don't
>> >see anything by him/her since 1977.
>> >I can't find anything pertinent by CH Alexander or DL Webster.
>> >Please do NOT submit citations to bionet.neuroscience unless
>> >they are in refereed journals. If you do want to talk about
>> >"work in progress", please cite the names and institutional
>> >affiliations of the individuals involved so that they can be
>> >My own conclusion is that the paper cited is bogus, but I will
>> >be very happy to retract that statement if someone can show
>> >me evidence to the contrary.
>> >I don't care what is discussed in alt.paranormal, but the subject
>> >matter of bionet.neuroscience is, in fact, science which proceeds
>> >by certain standards and criteria.
>> Here's the cite...thought I included it.
>> From The Journal of Parapsychology
>> Volume 62/Number 2 June 1998
>> Published by Rhine Research Center
>> since 1937.
>Sorry, still not acceptable for bionet.neuroscience.
>Even if you would accept the Journal of Parapsychology
>as a peer-reviewed primary research article (which I don't),
>the fact is that the paper cited is an abstract of a paper
>presented at the 41st Annual Convention of the Parapsychological
>Society. That is, the particular work is still not peer-reviewed
>and therefore does not rise to the level of primary research.
That's fine, Richard. I'll assume that b.n. is made up of more than
just yourself and that -someone- may have found it of interest, and
leave it at that. That -is-, after all, what I clearly stated in my
original post...it may be of interest to someone. That you are not
that person, does not concern me.
Knowledge is the antidote for fear
Patrick's Gallery of Dreams and Weirdness
Haunter's Ghost Stories
More information about the Neur-sci