Re: Bigger better balls: "ball lightning" in the kitchen

From: Don Klipstein (don_at_manx.misty.com)
Date: 07/31/04 

Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:18:01 +0000 (UTC)

In article <61eag05feid34en7k2s0bm1n13glj6f4ji@4ax.com>, Ben Bradley wrote:
>In sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics,sci.electronics.design,
>don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
>
>> According to some "theory" by promponents of such things, this is
>>something that will tend to avoid laboratory scrutiny the way ESP has.
>
> Who are these proponents? How does ESP avoid laboratory scrutiny?

  I last read books mentioning ball lightning before I ever heard of such
a thing as the Internet, so I am unable to cite those who claim
supernatural explanations for ball lightning.

  And my mentioning ESP avoiding laboratory scrutiny was not to claim that
it exists while avoiding laboratory scrutiny.
  However, I do believe in it, just as I believe in God - and I don't hear
of many experimental findings withstanding peer review and published in
the major scientific journals showing evidence that God exists.

  The "Amazing Randy" has a website where he pokes holes in studies that
show "evidence" that ESP or anything supernatural exists. Either he is
selective about what studies to stab or the supernatural only exists in
ways that avoid leaving evidence that withstands scientific scrutiny.
  And there are rewards out there for providing experimental evidence of
ESP that withstands scientific scrutiny.

 - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Relevant Pages