|
|
||
Sceptics Exposed As Fraudulent
confess I am very sceptical, about sceptics. Because most have never studied the subject, to be sceptical means you have to know what you are sceptical about, instead, this often means something needs explaining to you, who should actually be open minded, as most scepticism is a mask for ignorance, or another agenda. While moderate scepticism is a healthy and normal reaction, a new breed of British sceptics such as the disturbed Susan Blackmore and manic Richard Wiseman are entrenched in Denialism, and like the pope claim an Infallibility in what they teach. This can be a recognised mental disorder and is part of the “Pathological scepticism constellation”. Their often confused explanations of paranormal happenings are less feasible in logic than the happenings themselves. This is because to obtain research funding means you first have to reach the conclusions of the grants givers, in other words the answers are first on the test sheet and you have to provide the questions. The children’s conjurer James Randi is a case in point, with his constant attacks on alternative medicine and the paranormal, even when proved wrong does not admit so. This idea that a person with some accreditation in one area qualifies him to speak in another field, has made fools of many psychologists who speak out of their depth on psychic subjects. James Randi’s views on Homeopathy are only eclipsed by the remarks of buffoon astronomer Patrick Moore on Astrology, and are a case in point. There have been attacks in the press of late on several of the psychic worlds top performers, these people were tested by scientists, and assumed genuine and given the green light, yet are now attacked on a regular basis as fraudulent by sceptics and denialists. Yet it is true that the realm of the supernatural is as genuinely ridden with fakes, quacks and the deluded, as psychology and allopathic medicine, probably more so. Scientists are in the very worst categories here, where there is more fraud than in any other arena of life. They are more guilty of observer bias, filtered statements, using spurious facts, altering data, twisting statistics and using only positive study reports than in any other aspect of junk science, and such tricks as conducting an experiment 20 times to document the result of just one test are common place. A favourite trick to skew statistics is to ask the question; “ do you believe in the paranormal “? Surveys average out at between 63% and 75% in favour, but if the question is asked: “ do you believe in the paranormal, e g lock Ness monsters and father Christmas “? Answers drop drastically to 7% to 10% in favour. The full question is rarely shown in full. Another trick is “the aunt Sally” this was pulled beautifully by New Labour to appease British Muslims that there was no torture at Guantanamo bay, photos were shown in a down market daily newspaper in Britain showing proof of definite torture, Yet these were quickly disproved as fake- thus also condemning as fake all future news and photos. I also know from my time in both psychic testing, alternative medicine and adult education that the professors practise of asking for student work on a topic, then masking up and passing the students written work as their own is common place.. * The biggest break through in recent years the cloning of Dolly the sheep, by Prof. Ian Wilmott, is the subject of a court inquiry, and has been accused of stealing the work of several other experts. * The South Korean world expert on stem cell science, Hwang Woo-Suk admitted today Dec.22 2005 he had stolen information then made up stories on a major breakthrough. |
