By implication, we expect critics to not be biased.
Enter our super sceptic Professor Wiseman.Anyone can mock anecdotal reports of paranormal events..its safe and easy.But instrumental results is a tad more difficult.Now this is a great example here of what happens when a brain dead sceptical "comedian" expects to get no "results"..because we all know there is no form of "evidence" of anything paranormal.
But what happens if he does get a result.Damn..actions stations..damage control.
So..our "comedian" tells us he has to take the result to Professor Wiseman who is a psychologist....
Wiseman then plays strawman games with the grade c evp "words"..ignores the scream..and then dismisses short evp utterances and implies he would accept a long evp utterance(why would he?)
I like the way Wiseman uses a pea and thimble broad generalisation "with evp what you have got is a lot of random noise..so the systems they use are designed to create noise."
Can anyone spot the STRAWMAN..
What he is saying, is correct for some evp work..but it has ZERO to do with the examples that are being shown to him.The dopey host was so enthralled with Wiseman`s mendacious obfuscation, that he didnt pick up this bleeding obvious point.
Bookmark & Share