Clownfish, I concur that psychic ability is something quite different from gut feeling eg link to a scientific article about the gut brain. However, this article as an example of something scientific which is to do with 'gut feelings' does highlight that there is still a lot we do not yet know. Whoever would have thought that a gut feeling had anything at all to do with a gut brain and that the cellular make-up of the brain has strong connections and similarities to the gut. There is also the theory that peptides have the ability, as information messengers in the body, to carry emotions. So I say Clownfish, who knows? And yes, it could sound like cherry-picking to bring up a single incident to use as an example to prove one vast and completely unknown to science area. It may have indeed been luck, or dumb luck as either you or JJ put it. Maybe, I don't know. It happened and it was strange that it did. Perhaps some people do have psychic abilities. This has not yet been proven by science, so none of the rest of us will know for a fact if this is true or not, and that includes you Clownfish.

No magical powers, just a bit of intuition and a bucketload of pure, dumb luck.
Posted by Clownfish, Monday, 23 August 2010 10:01:39 PM

You said it all yourself Clownfish! Intuition! Why demonstrate hypocritical behaviour of both Dotto's and my story?

An excellent article Dotto thank you most kindly!

Oh dear, dotto, where do I start ...

The peptides claim is peddled by Candace Pert, aptly described as 'a talented scientist who went woo woo many years ago.' Pert also claims to have found a cure for AIDS, but - surprise, surprise - her work is 'being suppressed'.

'It happened and it was strange that it did.' Perhaps so, but that don't mean a thing, on its own. Strange things happen sometimes. Which, given probability, is exactly what we should expect.

'Perhaps some people do have psychic abilities'.

Perhaps, but they've yet to offer any proof. No-one has *ever* been able to demonstrate any undisputed 'psychic' ability. Most 'psychics' appear to be shonksters, pure and simple. Some 'psychics' may genuinely believe that they're the real deal, but, again, none of them have been able to prove it under test conditions. For a straightforward explanation of 'genuine psychic ability', I'd suggest you read up on the 'Clever Hans Effect': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clever_Hans

But the point is: science does not have to prove anything, with regard to 'psychic' abilities; 'psychics' do. They're the ones making the claim, after all, so it is beholden to them to prove it.

You are using an argument quite common to proponents of such beliefs as 'psychics': 'science doesn't know everything, therefore my whacked-out belief must be true'.

Of course science doesn't know everything - which is part of the beauty of science - but that doesn't mean that any woo-woo idea that cannot be categorically proven false is therefore true.

Something is only worthy of consideration *if there is a reason to suppose it is true*. In other words, there must be some evidence. So far, 'psychics' have, over the centuries, given none. Therefore, it is wisest to judge that they are false.

The final word should go to Skeptico: 'If you don’t restrict yourself to things that are backed by some evidence, or if there is at least some logical reason to suppose they might be true, you will believe in absolutely anything. And I have this really great bridge to sell you.'

rather than 'the application of critical thinking to evaluate truth claims' or 'the position that what cannot be proved by reason should not be believed.'.

I save the application of critical thinking to evaluate claims for my work and field [rather 'lucky' for yourself and others] Clownfish. The latter you mentioned above is just one of the differences of opinion and lifestyles between yourself and I: ie you have indicated that you appear to live your whole life sitting around and awaiting scientific evidence and for facts to be presented in front of you; as opposed to myself not requiring the methods you choose on every occasion.

As stated to you in my previous post, Clownfish, what you do not know or what you have not experienced cannot hurt you. Why are you bothered debating this issue if a skeptic? Fear? Worried you may allow your mind to learn, grow and expand to experience some more positive moments in your life?

I do not believe in Psychics having the ability to forsee one's future set in concrete. Peoples thoughts, behaviour and lives are ever changing. Although it is my experience that some gifted honest Psychics are able to channel certain visions and messages to certain individuals. Whether or not the Psychic has correctly comprehended the messages at the time is another story.

Experienced the evidence put in front of me accompanying another friend to a Psychic!

We are unique, you haven't answered a single challenge, or proffered a single proof. All you've done is subtly insult me, proffer a single, uncorroborated anecdote, and shift goalposts with some meaningless NewAge waffle.

So, by all means show me what evidence you, or anyone, has that 'psychics' are genuine. I'll be duly impressed if you do. In fact, show James Randi - he'll not just be impressed, he'll also give you a lot of money.

Until then, I'll have to reluctantly conclude that you're just another gullible mark.

Not that it's any of your business, but I fail to see what being gullible has to do with 'allow[ing] your mind to learn, grow and expand to experience some more positive moments in your life'.

I do all those very nicely, thank you, but if you try to sell me a bridge, I'll want to see some proof that you own it.

One last word of advice: if you open your mind too much, your brain falls out.