New book! Randi's Prize - Why Skeptics are Wrong

[Arouet]

I'm not saynig that the skeptics are perfect, but let's be honest too: the skeptics are out there and there is a lot more data to cherry-pick. These are pretty prolific people. Even the parapsychologists who have blogs are not that prolific.

Also: why do people go to dishonesty? Most of the time incorrect statements are erors. You say Novella holds things back: well, maybe he doesn't know everything.

Should I think Radin dishonest for touting poorly done meta-studies in his book announcing astounding odds?

And let's be honest, while the parapsycholgists are less prolific, they give as good as they get. Read Radin's blog. Read the Radin/Bem replies to Alcock. Mud flies everywhere. Even the preambles to many parapsychological studies throw mud at skeptics for no discernible reason. Are they trying to manipulate the reader by doing that? You tell me.

Folks: we're all just people here. There are good guys and bad guys on all sides, in pretty well every issue.

Most of the time the two sides throw the exact same accusations at each other!

My goal: bring the two sides together. Have serious discussion without making it all so gosh darn personal!