CSICOP

[Kind of Blue]

I've found lately that some of the best places for getting information about the research into the paranormal and to counter misleading charges against these studies are on sites debunking the debunkers. As an aside, the funniest I've read was "How to Debunk Just About Everything" http://web.me.com/dandrasin/Dansworld/zen.html

Anyway, I was surprised by a history lesson in a long article on CSICOP (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) that came to be in 1976 for "the critical investigation of paranormal and fringe science claims from a responsible, scientific point of view factual information about the results of such enquiries to the scientific community and the public." This is a fascinating read in 6 parts on the organized skepticism movement. "Has CSICOP Lost the Thirty Years' War?" http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/New/Observeskeptics/CSICOP/30yearswar1.html

"Before CSICOP was founded an extraordinary claim had been made that called for thorough examination, since if true it would have far-reaching implications. This was that the position of a planet at the moment of birth had an influence on the future development of the baby. Sports champions, for example, tended to be born when Mars was at certain points in the sky far more often than chance would predict. The claimants, French psychologist, statistician and, ironically, debunker of many features of traditional pop astrology Michel Gauquelin and his wife Françoise, also a psychologist, had studied the birth data of more than 2,000 champions (and many times that number of non-champions), finding that 22 percent of the champions had been born with Mars ‘rising’ or ‘transiting’ when chance would only predict 17 percent - the exact figure for the non-champions. The size of the sample made the result highly significant statistically. Moreover, their findings had been replicated by a group of Belgian sceptics known as the Comité Para.

This, surely, was just the kind of claim that his committee (Paul Kurtz, founder and past chairman of CSICOP) had been set up to investigate? He particularly wanted to debunk a claim involving astrology, having alleged that it had led to no less than 200 suicides and even had something to do with the rise of fascism. And so followed CSICOP’s first attempt to replicate a paranormal claim according to accepted scientific practice. It was also to be its last.

It was a total disaster. The percentages in the large control sample studied by a CSICOP team turned out to be the same as those of the Gauquelins. The whole story of what followed was told in great detail in a 31-page article in Fate (October l982) with this editorial comment: They call themselves the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. In fact, they are a group of would-be debunkers who bungled their major investigation, falsified the results, covered up their errors and gave the boot to a colleague who threatened to tell the truth."

This site is packed with many links that eventually led to the study http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. Effective science probably should not -begin- with a conclusion.

Then again, I'm a mystic and can't speak for science.

[Kind of Blue]

2. Sounds fair to me :) n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

8. When people attack something, it speaks to their own fears.

Edit: Several persons here at ASAH have proven the validity of astrology, spirituality, and spiritual phenomenon. Over the next year, these things will be of increasing interest (and discomfort) among the general population, as spirituality is America's direction.

That recent television show attacking psychics is more about squirming discomfort than anything else, certainly not any success in disproving what those here already know to be perfectly real and true. :shrug:

[Kind of Blue]

9. And thank goodness, squirming discomfort

has not significantly slowed research in the field, IMO. I agree that spirituality is the next direction and truly appreciate the results shining light for those willing to dig a little further.

[Fire Walk With Me]

10. The new energy will make it easier for people to get used to/get into spirituality

but it will be bumpy during transition when it becomes plain to the many that the Siddhis are real, and that spirituality is real. What then, to do about it, personally and socially, will be the question.

What worries me are the number of parasites intent upon taking advantage of the upcoming interest in spirituality. It will pay to be Discriminating, Discriminating, Discriminating. Just because someone is dead and speaking through a medium, doesn't mean that they are either useful or positive, for example. Also beware of discarnate beings who have previous track records with extinct cultures. Sorry, thinking out loud. It will likely be easier for astrologists to gain entrance into the overall social psyche as it's not as scary as those who percieve non-linearly. However, people accept things with a speed and depth proportional to how much it will benefit them. It will become more and more difficult to ignore real truths, and your guts' response to them.

[Ricochet21]

3. Many people who have started out to debunk astrologer

have become some of our best astrologers, including the Gauquelins. You can't GET IT until you do it. It's just so hard to explain; that's why there's so few good ones around and why it gets such little respect. You have to do your own charts.

[Kind of Blue]

4. Thanks for weighing in, Ric.

I was hoping that you knew of this incident in astrology history and could shed more light on it. Very, very interesting that the Gauquelins are astrologers.

Yes, and when one finds a good one, like many of us here have in you, it is literally life changing.

I'm looking forward to reading about the studies of the "Mars Effect Controversy," as it's called in these articles.

[Ricochet21]

5. It's not a controversy

what happened was simple:

Saturn has been sitting across from Uranus (conservative energies v. liberal, both making a square to Pluto
all that tension has been exhibited in our country, in individuals and outside.

then, Mars, the trigger, opposed Pluto, squaring the other two, that's why it was easy to define the 8th and 9th of Aug
as the events

[Kind of Blue]

6. Oh, I totally agree! It's the way the articles

are titled or use of the word in the articles. The controversy is that with at least 3 or 4 identical results (including CSIOPS's own) using the same methodology, CSICOPS continued to suppress the information, move the goalpost, threatened one of its original scientists who disagreed with their tactics, among other unscientific behavior to maintain their a priori conclusion and vendetta against astrology.

[Ricochet21]

7. People have no idea when they try scientific methods against astrology

it's not even worth arguing about; they know nothing about it.

[Celebration]

11. all those :"scientific" debunking sites

Are great examples of pseudoscience themselves. One of the worst is the Quackwatch site. I happened to look at their studies cited on muscle testing one time............they put in the one or two negative studies and completely left out the positive ones.

Sometimes there will be a positive study on something they want to debunk. Then they go into all the qualifications of the study and why it isn't accurate or come to the correct conclusion. But you can do that with ANY study, and guess what? They never do it with studies they agree wtih.

I get a big laugh out of so called scientists lapping that stuff up. I think it is a bit on insanity.

[Kind of Blue]

12. Yeah, and the cool thing is

that it's doing nothing to stop those on the receiving end of the derision stick and they're learning how to debunk the debunkers YAY!

[SpiralHawk]

13. CSICOP is a right-wing disinformation campaign (R)

They have no respect for the truth -- and fudge all their bullshit 'reports.' Totally without honor (R).

[Kind of Blue]

14. I should have known.

OMG, I read in one of the articles how CSICOP would call and harass scientists working on things they didn't like.

Thanks for the insight, SpiralHawl!