Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Founder of Skeptics Society has paranormal experience.

  • 10-11-2014 10:43am
    #1
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,657 ✭✭✭✭


    Hmm. THis might be a bit sticky for the 'skeptics', but it seems the founder of The Skeptics Society Michael Shermer has had a paranormal experience and now claims:

    "And if we are to take seriously the scientific credo to keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the riddle unsolved, we should not shut the doors of perception when they may be opened to us to marvel in the mysterious."

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/anomalous-events-that-can-shake-one-s-skepticism-to-the-core/

    Some of his commenters aren't too happy.


Comments

  • #2
    Standman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Standman


    maccored wrote: »
    Hmm. THis might be a bit sticky for the 'skeptics', but it seems the founder of The Skeptics Society Michael Shermer has had a paranormal experience and now claims:

    "And if we are to take seriously the scientific credo to keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the riddle unsolved, we should not shut the doors of perception when they may be opened to us to marvel in the mysterious."

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/anomalous-events-that-can-shake-one-s-skepticism-to-the-core/

    Some of his commenters aren't too happy.

    As a skeptic I don't find anything particularly "sticky" about it. It's another story of a person having an unexplained experience.

    The only thing is, with him being such a renowned skeptic I wish he had tried to investigate it a bit more. What frequency was the radio tuned to? Is there a classical radio station on that frequency in his area? etc.

    Maybe he prefers to leave it unexplained as he obviously got a kick out of the experience and it most likely made his wedding night feel that much more special.


  • #3
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,657 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    As a skeptic myself, I believe his last paragraph is the definition of skepticism, so I find it all a bit ironic. I think you are missing the point that the radio wouldnt work when he tried to initially fix it, and has never worked since.

    Standman wrote: »
    As a skeptic I don't find anything particularly "sticky" about it. It's another story of a person having an unexplained experience.

    The only thing is, with him being such a renowned skeptic I wish he had tried to investigate it a bit more. What frequency was the radio tuned to? Is there a classical radio station on that frequency in his area? etc.

    Maybe he prefers to leave it unexplained as he obviously got a kick out of the experience and it most likely made his wedding night feel that much more special.


  • #4
    Standman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Standman


    maccored wrote: »
    As a skeptic myself, I believe his last paragraph is the definition of skepticism, so I find it all a bit ironic. I think you are missing the point that the radio wouldnt work when he tried to initially fix it, and has never worked since.

    Yea "the scientific credo to keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the riddle unsolved" is at the core of skepticism, but it doesn't stop there IMO.

    Skepticism isn't simply about marveling in the mysterious, it's also about investigating it in an attempt to find answers. That's why I was a bit disappointed to see that he is apparently happy to revel in the mystery of it when, being such an avid skeptic, he has a unique chance to investigate it further.

    Also I didn't miss the part where the radio didn't/hasn't worked, but an old radio like that would have an analog dial which can be read while the radio is off so he can check the frequency. If there is a station that plays/ was playing classical music on that frequency that night then it would at least show that the radio was tuned into a regular radio station and not some phantom transmission. It doesn't explain why the radio turned on etc but it's a start.


  • #5
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,657 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Standman wrote: »
    Yea "the scientific credo to keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the riddle unsolved" is at the core of skepticism, but it doesn't stop there IMO.

    whoever said it did stop there??
    Skepticism isn't simply about marveling in the mysterious, it's also about investigating it in an attempt to find answers. That's why I was a bit disappointed to see that he is apparently happy to revel in the mystery of it when, being such an avid skeptic, he has a unique chance to investigate it further.

    Also I didn't miss the part where the radio didn't/hasn't worked, but an old radio like that would have an analog dial which can be read while the radio is off so he can check the frequency. If there is a station that plays/ was playing classical music on that frequency that night then it would at least show that the radio was tuned into a regular radio station and not some phantom transmission. It doesn't explain why the radio turned on etc but it's a start.

    Glad to see you recognise skepticism involves attempting to find answers. Not too many self proclaimed skeptics ever bother trying that. Its also good to see that the founder of the skeptics society admits he doesnt know it all.


  • #6
    Standman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Standman


    maccored wrote: »
    whoever said it did stop there??

    You said it was the definition of skepticism.
    maccored wrote: »
    Glad to see you recognise skepticism involves attempting to find answers. Not too many self proclaimed skeptics ever bother trying that. Its also good to see that the founder of the skeptics society admits he doesnt know it all.

    I'm aware that you think most self proclaimed skeptics are closet cynics so I won't bother going down that road with you for the umpteenth time.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,657 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    As in yes, the general idea that nothing is completely disproved until it has in fact, been completely disproved.
    Standman wrote: »
    You said it was the definition of skepticism.
    I'm aware that you think most self proclaimed skeptics are closet cynics so I won't bother going down that road with you for the umpteenth time.

    People who think the paranormal is bull****, have no interest in researching for themselves and who go to the ends of the earth to not change their view that the paranormal is bull****, are indeed cynical in regards to the paranormal. I cant see any arguing there now to be honest.


  • #8
    Pat D. Almighty
    Registered Users Posts: 668 ✭✭✭Pat D. Almighty


    I'm quite skeptical in general, and I've been very outspoken and often millitant in my skepticism when it comes to the supernatural. The problem is, a lot of skeptics seem to stop at a certain point of questioning. That point is usually where the ego gets in the way.

    Question everything, especially your own beliefs.


  • #9
    cruasder777
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭cruasder777


    The guy who investigated the Cardiff poltergeist,a professor of psychology was a skeptic until he investigated that case.

    5 mins 15 seconds.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJm6VBvC0Bk


    I have had a poltergeist experience, so am not a skeptic, if I had not had that experience I would be.

    I am a very logical person.


  • #10
    Samaris
    Registered Users Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    As a comment several months late to the thread - one can be skeptical about all different aspects of "the paranormal" or "supernatural" and yet give more credence to one than another. I feel that, based on my own knowledge of chemistry, homeopathy is bull**** apart from perhaps a psychological "placebo effect" factor (and the placebo effect is quite a strong thing). However, I also accept that some places just have a bad "feel" to them, and that seems to be more in places that have a bad history. That is stronger if one KNOWS about the bad history beforehand, but it can happen where you don't know the history too. As yet, I have no good explanation for that, although I'd be willing to accept environmental factors (a place being run-down, isolated, built like a Gothic castle :P, etc.)

    A couple of thousand years ago, lightning was "paranormal" - it was not yet understood and so given mythological underpinnings to explain it. Few people now would call it paranormal, despite it still invoking a sense of awe and wonder, but we have a rational explanation for it. It seems to be hubris to assume that we know of everything out there at this point in time, but I do reckon that anything we continue to discover will be based on the same scientific principles that have served us well in explaining everything else.


  • #11
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,657 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    i wouldnt class homeopathy as paranormal. your point about lightening (and more recently ball lightening) should actually serve as a warning not to class things as bull**** just because we currently have no understanding of them. If there aren't people wondering and asking questions, then there'll never be any discoveries. Its generally how science works. Not that paranormal research is scientific. its anything but.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    AnthonyGiarrusso
    Registered Users Posts: 43 ✭AnthonyGiarrusso
    Executive Motivational Speaker, Paranormal Lecturer, Sales Professional, Author, & Beach Traveler


    I'd label myself as an anti-skeptic supremacist.



  • #13
    maninasia
    Registered Users Posts: 4,615 ✭✭✭maninasia


    That's fascinating as Michael Shermer is the most famous skeptic of our time.



Advertisement