Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: James Randi: debunking the king of the debunkers [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)83. Thanks for the heads-up, Jackpine Radical! Spooks like the paranormal jazz...
CIA ESP
By Jeffrey Kluger
Discover Magazine|Monday, April 01, 1996
EXCERPT...
Unlike the Gaps of the 1990s, which concern themselves less with geopolitics and national security than with Stone Washed Denims® and Relaxed Fit Khakis®, the gaps of the 1950s were of a far more Serious Nature®. For the better part of a generation, concerned Americans listened to dark warnings of missile gaps, preparedness gaps, and troop gaps. Now, according to newly declassified documents, it seems the American intelligence community was also concerned with an entirely different kind of gap: a genuinely feared, utterly in earnest psychic gap. Over the last 20 years of the cold war, the United States, it was revealed last year, spent $20 million investigating extrasensory perception and other psychic phenomena in an effort to determine whether these forces of the paranormal world could somehow be put to use by espionage experts in the natural world.
SNIP...
Generally, the CIAs ESP work involved selecting either a videotape or a photograph of a person, place, or thing, isolating individual volunteers in another room, and asking them to try to determine what the image was. In some trials a second volunteer was told to look at the image, concentrate, and try to transmit it to the receiver; in others the receivers were on their own. In all instances, Utts says, we were trying to discover whether the subjects could determine the correct image with a frequency greater than that which could be attributed to chance.
This question of whether the results of an experiment are caused by the phenomenon being investigated or by simple mathematical randomness is critical and is determined by what is known as the studys statistical significance. To calculate statistical significance, investigators factor together a number of variables, including size of sample group, number of trials per subject, number of possible correct answers per trial, the speed of sound in a semiviscous medium, and Eddie Murrays batting average during the 1983 season (.306 with 111 RBIs, hitting from both sides of the plate), and come up with a single numerical answer. If its lower than .05--meaning there is a less than 5 percent likelihood that you would see the results if chance alone were responsible--the study is deemed statistically significant; if its greater than .05, its not.
For Utts and the other ESP investigators, the overall statistical significance of the CIAs studies seemed impressive. Over the first 15 years of the 20-year study, she says, 154 separate experiments were conducted consisting of 26,000 trials. During those experiments, subjects correctly identified the target image frequently enough that the statistical significance figure was a mere .00000000000000000001--meaning that you would expect to see those results only once in 1020 tries if the outcome was due solely to chance. If you trust your observed results, the studies lead to the conclusion that psychic abilities exist.
But can you trust your observed results? For centuries, traveling hucksters have mystified audiences with displays of telepathic abilities that turned out to be nothing more than psychic snake oil. In the American West, visiting clairvoyants would regularly ride into town and put on public shows in which they appeared to read the thoughts of complete strangers in the audience. Ultimately, sharp-eyed townsfolk began to pick up subtle cues that the volunteers the supposed seer called on werent strangers at all--when they addressed him as Dad, for example. This generally led to a quick tarring and feathering, and soon most of the available positions for traveling hucksters went unfilled. In the 1990s the possibility of extrasensory chicanery is no less great than in the 1890s, and some researchers believe thats just what was going on in the CIA work.
SNIP...
Other trials struck Utts as equally convincing. In one experiment, the researchers dispatched a subject to drive around a site within 100 miles of the SRI building, while another subject, back at the lab, tried to determine where the car was. Almost immediately, the receiver began describing a landscape of rolling hills, with a propeller-like structure in the foreground used to produce energy. At that moment, it was later revealed, the volunteer transmitter had been passing the Rolling Hills Windmill Farm in northern California. In still another trial, the experimenters chose as their target image a top-secret underground intelligence facility in West Virginia. With little apparent trouble, two volunteers began describing the appearance and location of the complex, even identifying some of the code words used on the site.
CONTINUED...
http://discovermagazine.com/1996/apr/ciaesp738
PS: The world, as the great philosopher said, is more incredible than we can imagine. Thankfully, wot?
By Jeffrey Kluger
Discover Magazine|Monday, April 01, 1996
EXCERPT...
Unlike the Gaps of the 1990s, which concern themselves less with geopolitics and national security than with Stone Washed Denims® and Relaxed Fit Khakis®, the gaps of the 1950s were of a far more Serious Nature®. For the better part of a generation, concerned Americans listened to dark warnings of missile gaps, preparedness gaps, and troop gaps. Now, according to newly declassified documents, it seems the American intelligence community was also concerned with an entirely different kind of gap: a genuinely feared, utterly in earnest psychic gap. Over the last 20 years of the cold war, the United States, it was revealed last year, spent $20 million investigating extrasensory perception and other psychic phenomena in an effort to determine whether these forces of the paranormal world could somehow be put to use by espionage experts in the natural world.
SNIP...
Generally, the CIAs ESP work involved selecting either a videotape or a photograph of a person, place, or thing, isolating individual volunteers in another room, and asking them to try to determine what the image was. In some trials a second volunteer was told to look at the image, concentrate, and try to transmit it to the receiver; in others the receivers were on their own. In all instances, Utts says, we were trying to discover whether the subjects could determine the correct image with a frequency greater than that which could be attributed to chance.
This question of whether the results of an experiment are caused by the phenomenon being investigated or by simple mathematical randomness is critical and is determined by what is known as the studys statistical significance. To calculate statistical significance, investigators factor together a number of variables, including size of sample group, number of trials per subject, number of possible correct answers per trial, the speed of sound in a semiviscous medium, and Eddie Murrays batting average during the 1983 season (.306 with 111 RBIs, hitting from both sides of the plate), and come up with a single numerical answer. If its lower than .05--meaning there is a less than 5 percent likelihood that you would see the results if chance alone were responsible--the study is deemed statistically significant; if its greater than .05, its not.
For Utts and the other ESP investigators, the overall statistical significance of the CIAs studies seemed impressive. Over the first 15 years of the 20-year study, she says, 154 separate experiments were conducted consisting of 26,000 trials. During those experiments, subjects correctly identified the target image frequently enough that the statistical significance figure was a mere .00000000000000000001--meaning that you would expect to see those results only once in 1020 tries if the outcome was due solely to chance. If you trust your observed results, the studies lead to the conclusion that psychic abilities exist.
But can you trust your observed results? For centuries, traveling hucksters have mystified audiences with displays of telepathic abilities that turned out to be nothing more than psychic snake oil. In the American West, visiting clairvoyants would regularly ride into town and put on public shows in which they appeared to read the thoughts of complete strangers in the audience. Ultimately, sharp-eyed townsfolk began to pick up subtle cues that the volunteers the supposed seer called on werent strangers at all--when they addressed him as Dad, for example. This generally led to a quick tarring and feathering, and soon most of the available positions for traveling hucksters went unfilled. In the 1990s the possibility of extrasensory chicanery is no less great than in the 1890s, and some researchers believe thats just what was going on in the CIA work.
SNIP...
Other trials struck Utts as equally convincing. In one experiment, the researchers dispatched a subject to drive around a site within 100 miles of the SRI building, while another subject, back at the lab, tried to determine where the car was. Almost immediately, the receiver began describing a landscape of rolling hills, with a propeller-like structure in the foreground used to produce energy. At that moment, it was later revealed, the volunteer transmitter had been passing the Rolling Hills Windmill Farm in northern California. In still another trial, the experimenters chose as their target image a top-secret underground intelligence facility in West Virginia. With little apparent trouble, two volunteers began describing the appearance and location of the complex, even identifying some of the code words used on the site.
CONTINUED...
http://discovermagazine.com/1996/apr/ciaesp738
PS: The world, as the great philosopher said, is more incredible than we can imagine. Thankfully, wot?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
308 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

What truth? Seriously, all I see are lies defaming him for no better purpose than...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#105
I know, that's why I posted it, in case anyone didn't 'know a lot' about me.
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#174
Really? That explains why you denigrated me for holding an interest in the assassination of JFK.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#206
to be honest, I don't know a conspiracy theory you don't have an interest in....
snooper2
Dec 2014
#207
Wrong, again. The OP is an article detailing Randi and how he operates to discredit others.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#266
Sure it is. You go on believing that, octafish of DU, if it makes you feel better...nt
SidDithers
Dec 2014
#268
So the complaint is that he did not properly document that dogs don't have ESP?
Bjorn Against
Dec 2014
#3
Yes, the snake oil salesman with the dog ESP "data" is somehow the victim? Of what, the truth?
Fred Sanders
Dec 2014
#7
Hey quit using that logic and stuff! It Is more fun to believe dogs can read my mind. nt
Logical
Dec 2014
#99
And when they hear crumbling plastic-foil, they know there will be an opportunity to beg for food.
DetlefK
Dec 2014
#132
LOL, he has exposed 100s of scams, I'll trade that for a few mistakes. Wow, you are desperate. nt
Logical
Dec 2014
#153
I think the point he made went over your head, like by a mile or more.
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#239
Randi, 14 fucking years ago, admitted to a mistake, when the fuck is this latest breaking news?!?
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#252
"Sheldrake ran a number of studies on a dog that seemed to know when its owner was coming home."
hatrack
Dec 2014
#5
No. I'm only talking about people who believe something quietly by themselves.
scarletwoman
Dec 2014
#23
That's the point though, Sheldrake is committing open fraud or bad science, take your pick...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#28
You can claim that dogs have ESP till you are blue in the fact, but don't claim...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#53
What trouble? All I see are people lying through their teeth to disparage a man who...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#233
In other words, you think people should only be "allowed" to think as you would have them think.
scarletwoman
Dec 2014
#235
Do you object to adults making decisions about their own lives? Do you want the
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#119
I would like for the government to prevent fraudsters from committing fraud....
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#122
What's the matter? You'd rather look at freeway traffic than the sky? You know
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#214
The problem with your bigfoot and UFO examples is they are ambiguous...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#54
If I came across someone who thought the Earth was flat I'd certainly be taken aback.
scarletwoman
Dec 2014
#61
"Do you know any skeptics?" Well, they seem to be all over DU, so maybe I do.
scarletwoman
Dec 2014
#69
Generally speaking I wouldn't, unless they are trying to make money off it, by...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#13
That's part of the smear of the article: to make the rational appear irrational.
arcane1
Dec 2014
#29
Who lets themselves become "sleepless with fury" over what someone else believes?
trotsky
Dec 2014
#137
You are most welcome, scarletwoman! It turns out Amazing Randi skeptics flock together on DU.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#74
Really? An article that failed to do that doesn't help, nor your supporters...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#91
Are you an alt? I was talking about what was already posted on this thread at the time...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#123
James Randi is like the enigmatic wise man you climb a million steps up a mountain to see.
chrisa
Dec 2014
#12
It's in the linked article. Now he says he didn't say it. Maybe he didn't, maybe
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#57
You don't get to get away from responsibility that easily, that's a piss poor excuse...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#58
It's not my responsibility to correct the record or decide who's right. I responded to
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#71
Your responsibility, as it were, would be to at least attempt to be accurate in your posts...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#90
Oh for gosh sake. I responded to a link from a legitimate media source (The Telegraph).
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#195
I'm saying that you are disparaging someone consciously by repeating ambiguous information...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#230
I don't see how that is relevant, is Randi not allowed to be human, not allowed to love?
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#93
Love has nothing to do with the article. It does demonstrate that Randi's integrity is variable.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#96
For the man he is in love with, are you fucking kidding me? I would have done the same...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#97
For once, you and I agree. I find the crop circle threads amusing, but this shit crosses the line.nt
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#211
Yep. Isn't it a tragedy what gay couples had to go through before same sex marriage was legal?
Hassin Bin Sober
Dec 2014
#98
That Randi may have not told people about his partner's(now husband's) real identity...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#101
He has exposed a lot of idiots. People overall are gullible. Very disappointing! nt
Logical
Dec 2014
#18
What is very disappointing? This hitpiece? Its best to look at this article with a skeptical eye.
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#24
I mean Randi has exposed a lot of idiots. I am a huge Randi fan. You are correct.....
Logical
Dec 2014
#30
It is the quote given in the linked article and the linked article is what I responded
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#41
He's asking for a primary source, do but proving libel is difficult because intent has to be...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#49
Eugenics has a sordid history, and the quotes from Randi are actually against
NewDeal_Dem
Dec 2014
#56
And it's pretty hilarious how much the most credulous, believe-anything conspiracy theorists...
SidDithers
Dec 2014
#55
Don't link to conspiracy nutcases to prove your "case", which isn't much of one, to put it mildly...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#35
Not just a run of the mill CT, but an anti-Semitic one on top of that! n/t
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#47
I alerted on the jury result message from my inbox. That sends a message directly to the admins.
NYC Liberal
Dec 2014
#196
Well, I read quite a few of those when I was a kid and believed in flying saucers.
zappaman
Dec 2014
#190
Wow… the difference between provocative discussion and concrete thinking...
MrMickeysMom
Dec 2014
#241
it doesn't even need Sheldrake: his fellow skeptics doubt that his anti-epistemological clique
MisterP
Dec 2014
#106
OK, so I searched for what you claimed, and it seemed to be wrong, here:
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#107
Nor does preventing addicts from self-destructing through treatment programs.
Octafish
Dec 2014
#293
Yes, a trickster, charlatan, and cheat who exposes tricksters, charlatans, and cheats...
zappaman
Dec 2014
#246
Randi is a magician by profession, magicians, by definition, are charlatans...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#250
Okay....this poster has written the funniest line in all of recorded DU.....
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#208
When the fuck was science ever used to corroborate the existence of ESP?
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#237
How is he an asshole? Please illuminate us on this, no lies please. n/t
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#228
I believe this is called reaching, and why the fuck is Randi expected to be perfect...
Humanist_Activist
Dec 2014
#253
Yes I've read it. It's just a bunch of obfuscation directly from Randi's organization
CrawlingChaos
Dec 2014
#281
If you believe in one conspiracy theory, chance are you believe in several....
YoungDemCA
Dec 2014
#280