Why "pseudoscience" in places like China and Russia can proven as "Science"?

I wonder why "Pseudoscientific" things like ESP and Psychic abilities when experimented in places like China and Russia can be fully "scientific"?

Maybe because our government is lame and don't want us to be out of their control with any abilities that they themselves cannot obtain.

So they call it something else to discredit it so anyone who is worried about what others think of them (sheeple) will not pursue it for fear of ridicule and rejection by their peers.

That's why people like Tesla, Stan Meyer, and anyone who doesn't "go with the flow" are labeled crackpots and made to keep quite, become discredited, and/or even made to "disappear".

SM

Originally posted by SkyMarshall
Maybe because our government is lame and don't want us to be out of their control with any abilities that they themselves cannot obtain.

So they call it something else to discredit it so anyone who is worried about what others think of them (sheeple) will not pursue it for fear of ridicule and rejection by their peers.

That's why people like Tesla, Stan Meyer, and anyone who doesn't "go with the flow" are labeled crackpots and made to keep quite, become discredited, and/or even made to "disappear".

SM

But why this is different story in places like China and Russia?

Originally posted by masonicon
I wonder why "Pseudoscientific" things like ESP and Psychic abilities when experimented in places like China and Russia can be fully "scientific"?

Why not? They were treated as scientific studies in the USA for a while until the results of the experiments showed them too unreliable to be of any use.

Science isn't about guessing whether something works or not. Do experiments to find out. The USA did. It didn't work. But maybe China and Russia want to do their own experiments and not accept the results the US got. Nothing wrong with that.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by masonicon
I wonder why "Pseudoscientific" things like ESP and Psychic abilities when experimented in places like China and Russia can be fully "scientific"?

Why not? They were treated as scientific studies in the USA for a while until the results of the experiments showed them too unreliable to be of any use.

Science isn't about guessing whether something works or not. Do experiments to find out. The USA did. It didn't work. But maybe China and Russia want to do their own experiments and not accept the results the US got. Nothing wrong with that.

How did both China and Russia gets results different from what USA got?

I think that back in the days of the cold war science was impaired in the communist countries by isolation from the West. I remember seeing some film of a woman using telekinesis on a table when a western magician debunked it by showing how it could be done witha piece of thread.

However do not forget that Uri Geller fooled people in the west. Also UK universities still offer degrees in Homeopathy and accupuncture with are both held to be pseudosciences by some.

[edit on 5-6-2010 by Tiger5]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by Tiger5]

[edit on 5-6-2010 by Tiger5]

reply to post by masonicon

How did both China and Russia gets results different from what USA got?

Who says they do?

Their psuedo-science is just like our psuedo-science, basically. There are psuedo-scientists all over the world, and pop-sci magazines in every language willing to publish their reports.

What peer reviewed papers published in reputable journals have you read that indicates that they are getting different results?

Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by masonicon

 

How did both China and Russia gets results different from what USA got?

Who says they do?

What peer reviewed papers published in reputable journals have you read that indicates that they are getting different results?

Exactly. I haven't seen any reliable information that they got results any different than the USA.

I can probably find some biased studies in many countries that haven't passed peer review.

I can also cite a study where ESP believers ignored the results of a study by "selective memory":

Biased Memory

One study showed how selective memory can maintain belief in extrasensory perception (ESP).[29] Believers and disbelievers were each shown descriptions of ESP experiments. Half of each group were told that the experimental results supported the existence of ESP, while the others were told they did not. In a subsequent test, subjects recalled the material accurately, apart from believers who had read the non-supportive evidence. This group remembered significantly less information and some of them incorrectly remembered the results as supporting ESP.

-from Russell, Dan; Warren H. Jones (1980), "When superstition fails: Reactions to disconfirmation of paranormal beliefs", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (Society for Personality and Social Psychology)

This makes perfect sense in here!! There are countless members that believe in aliens, ancient super-civilizations, giant conspiracies that run for centuries, and so on. When presented with evidence that makes their beliefs impossible they just ignore the evidence

Originally posted by Maegnas
This makes perfect sense in here!! There are countless members that believe in aliens, ancient super-civilizations, giant conspiracies that run for centuries, and so on. When presented with evidence that makes their beliefs impossible they just ignore the evidence

Yes, great point!

While that study focused on ESP as a specific type of paranormal belief, I think it's a reasonable extrapolation of the results of that study to expect that type of ignoring information that contradicts paranormal beliefs would apply to a much wider range of paranormal beliefs than just ESP. So yes I suspect it would include the other paranormal beliefs you mentioned also.

What I find interesting is that believers and non-believers are not equally biased. If I had to guess at the results of that study I would have guessed that both believers and non-believers of the paranormal would tend to recall studies contrary to their beliefs incorrectly. But that's not what happened. Apparently it was only the paranormal believers who recalled contradictory information incorrectly.

I guess this does help to explain why the skeptics have such a hard time winning a debate, if the opposition just chooses to ignore the evidence presented, or worse, as the study indicated, sometimes even recall the skeptics' evidence as saying the opposite of what it says.

Originally posted by Maegnas
This makes perfect sense in here!! There are countless members that believe in aliens, ancient super-civilizations, giant conspiracies that run for centuries, and so on. When presented with evidence that makes their beliefs impossible they just ignore the evidence

What's that Evidence?

Originally posted by Maegnas
This makes perfect sense in here!! There are countless members that believe in aliens, ancient super-civilizations, giant conspiracies that run for centuries, and so on. When presented with evidence that makes their beliefs impossible they just ignore the evidence

How about the evidence that makes believes like random Evolution, Man-Made Global warming, Islamic Terrorism, and so on impossible instead makes believes like aliens, ancient super-civilizations, giant conspiracies that run for centuries, and so on impossible or makes both beliefs impossible?

[edit on 10/6/2010 by masonicon]