Wow, a few people here seem to be missing the point of the project i think. And linking from websites that are covering one specific event, nearly a decade old out of 250+ such events, and then crying foul is hardly a well-rounded rebuttal in my opinion. And Radin is a project member, not the project director so i guess to me thats an important differentiator.
And saying that scientists are only 'right' scientists if they research areas you yourself feel relevant is just ridiculous, again in my humble.
And quotes like:
I would suggest that it has no value as a predictor, so it is in fact worthless as proof of anything.
is a pretty reductive and generally unhelpful statement, especially when it monumentally misses the fundamental principle of the GCP dataset, which can be found in the FAQ section, which i urge people to read for themselves and form their own opinion
'What we do is to predict that if there is a powerfully engaging event in the world -- like the Concorde crash -- the focused attention of large numbers of people will produce a departure from expected behavior in our network of REG detectors. We speculatively imagine a consciousness field that becomes relatively coherent and structured when these occasional global events occur. Continuing the speculation, we suggest that the information in such a field can somehow be absorbed by the REG devices, which then show patterns where none should exist.'
By all means stand at the end of the thoroughfare shouting at passers-by to beware the snakeoil salesman, just i dont see a salesman anywhere round these here parts...
A lot of iconoclastic dogmatism being displayed on the board in general, which personally i don't consider a 'good look'.
Believe or disbelieve as one sees fit but to reject someone's views out of hand, and then heap scorn upon them for holding those views just isn't cricket.