Well, Harvey, I appreciate your clear-eyed integrity a great deal. My only argument is that we need to keep our minds -- as well as our eyes -- open for insights into those phenomena we have no decent paradigm for.   I am sure you'll find plemty of anecdotal evidence indicating that "the first event correctly predicted" has happened a large number of times; the question is of course what is simple extrapolation, and what, if anything transcends those bounds.

I agree completely with the gullibility of humans in general, and the problenm is made more difficult by the ready plasticity of the mind to create impressions of perceptions it wants to perceive, rather than being clear about what it has perceived, and when.

These things are complications to a difficult field, but I do think it would be an error to try to jam the phenomenology of psychic events into a material framework when seeking proof. There have been documented cases under strict research conditions of remote viewing, and the remote influence by intention of buried sensors (see the Puthoff and Targ series of experiments conducted at Stanford Research using various subjects including Ingo Swann, 1979-1984 if memory serves).

To do so would be similar to rejecting physical evidence of planetary orbits because ti didn't jive with someone's version of the divine revealed truth; it is a serious fallacy to mis-sort data into the wrong classes.


Very best regards,


A