General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: James Randi: debunking the king of the debunkers [View all]Silent3
(15,909 posts)People can't just go around claiming all sorts of amazing things, then blame others for not replicating their work to prove them wrong. The world is way too full of so many such claims that placing the burden on skeptics is an absurd way to look at criteria for research and evidence.
Cherry-picked popular stories (often distorted) of how "the skeptics were wrong!" are the exception to the rule, rather than being the supposed lesson many people take from those rare (and often distorted) stories that being credulous and so open-minded that you risk your brain falling out is the way to be triumphantly correct... someday, you'll see!
Those who make extraordinary claims must accept the burden not only of doing good original research, but proving to others that there's a good reason, such as a plausible mechanism for their results that makes the effort of replication worthwhile for others to undergo. The fact that every once in a while a crazy idea that everyone was so skeptical of eventually pans out doesn't mean the those who are doubted shouldn't work harder than their critics to prove themselves right.
If not dog ESP, what "peer reviewed" work of Sheldrake's do you think a cruel conspiracy of oppressors is keeping down?
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):