Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 307 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Why Aren’t Paranormal Investigators Taken Seriously?

A man named Chuck, founder of the International Paranormal Project, published an article today in which he confronts the question of why paranormal investigators are not regarded as legitimate scientists. He writes, “i ask you this how can this be viewed as a legit science if we cant even get along with each other.There is no team no investigator any better then the team there bashing… Does it really matter who is the best or who does the best investigation? Once again i would say no.”

How would you respond to Chuck’s argument that the scientists who are the most cooperative are the most legitimate? If you don’t agree with his ideas, what alternative suggestion would you make to paranormal investigators?

2 comments to Why Aren’t Paranormal Investigators Taken Seriously?

  • berick

    I think it’s pretty simple.

    Perform clear, repeatable, double-blind studies. If you don’t find paranormal results, you’ll still eventually develop a reputation for good science. If you do find paranormal results, you’ll be controversial for a while, but if those results are repeatable, you’ll be extremely famous (in a good way).

    Whether you cooperate with others is not significant.

  • Bill

    As a scientist, I just love that these ‘paranormal investigators’ wear white lab coats. To, you know, keep from getting slimed.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>