>CSICOP goes out, collects extensive information, considers alternative
>hypotheses, and frequently conducts research to verify them (e.g.
Randi's
>experiments). That's the very heart of science.
Show me proof. I have yet to see CSICOP 'consider alternative
hypothesis' as you claim. A good example was a couple of scientists
who on a whim, decided to do a statistical study on the accuracy of
astrology. Using over 6000 people they wanted to see if they could
find any sstatistical variations outside of chance. They did, albeit
small. When they went to CSICOP to have it published, CSICOP refused
saying "We refuse to publish anything that may demonstrate any
phenomona outside of known scientific knowledge"! This position is
antithetical to the spirit of scientific inquiry!
>Anything that can get a human on the
>moon, build microchips, eliminate smallpox, and alter the atmosphere
can
>certainly fake a couple lousy crop circles.
>
I totally agree! If you had read my earlier post, I talked about how
relatively easy it is to fake a UFO in broad daylight. I am a skeptic
as much as yourself, but unlike CSICOP, I'm willing to consider
alternatives.
:-)
Paul Hughes
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com