What about the mirror riddled with anomalies thats advertised in theoretical phys. ?. What about the social anomalies, where is the proletariat ?. What about the political anomalies, this strange alliance between leadership and the syndrome of Down ( in our country we have this thing called Geert Wilders ). How do we join the order of things, anyway ?.

Uit de belaagde landen
Greetz Vincent Voll.

…sounds like someone got their feelings hurt…waaa….waaa…waaa…somebodyshould get tmac57(Tracy McGraddy?!?) some tissues, cuz he’s upset…

Case in point: I find Dean Radin’s work on anomalous interactions beteen humans and machines deeply impressive, and Radin seems like a thoughtful, scientifically-minded fellow–yet the skeptical community has treated him like something of a crackpot (when they choose to acknowledge him at all), and the critical studies I’ve read of his work have not only seemed unconvincing, but have struck me as a slippery, defensive upholding of the status quo.

Similarly, I’ve seen skeptical attacks on researchers who stand to profit from their promotion of anomalous phenomena (UFOs, Bigfoot, etc.), and that’s a perfectly legitimate criticism; yet that sword cuts both ways, i.e., if someone makes their living debunking anomalous phenomenon (say, the publisher or editor of a skeptical magazine), why should we trust their judgment of the evidence to be any less biased for reasons of profit? After all, if they were to start publishing articles favorable to these things, they’d be out of a job. What’s good for the goose…

- Don’t ignore simple human error before concluding there is a conspiracy.

- NASA would have a huge incentive to go public with information about possible alien artifacts on Mars. Think what that would do for their budget, and for public support for more Mars missions.

- You ask for a reason why they would tell the truth (and I just gave you one), but you have not provided a reason why they would lie.

In that very little can be proved impossible, the better, truer judgment would be rating the probability that scientific skepticism and scientific method are illusory, mere mental pitfalls. I would rate that probability at virtually nil.

I say this bevause it works. It’s testable and one can arrive at an objective conclusion. One might cogitate an application of a theory for unpowered human flight that may or may not be total hogwash, a perfect example of a ‘mental pitfall’, but if the model works and the human-piloted hang glider goes aloft and remains there, safely returning to earth, all according to plan, that’s a pretty good endorsement of the science that went into it. Of course, we have literally millions upon millions of these full endorsements.

To be correct, any hypothesis stating that skepticism and science are illusory, a mental pitfall of humans fooling themselves, also has to explain why it nonetheless works.

First, to “tmac”, please tell me why you think the U.S. Government would come out and tell the public if they found aliens. WHY would they do this?

And to Adam—did you even read my post? I brought up a valid point regarding NASA’s less-than-honest approach to dismissing the “Face.” Where did I say, “It’s all faked,”?

Both of you ignored the heart of my comment and jumped on me as not being a critical thinker. HMMMMM. Maybe you should read more carefully. Or maybe this is yet another dopey blog that’s not even worth reading, because it’s just a circle-jerk for nerds who want to reinforce each other’s trite opinions without having to bother DISCUSSING things.