Posted: Feb 05, 2013 6:11 pm
by tolman
Transilvanian wrote:There are a lot of meta-analyses which suggest, that there is something...
There are a lot of researchers who made a lot of test, mostly with positive results. Skeptic sciencists are saying that these researches are not replicated, but institues with the same 35% results are replicating each other. But if some institutes accepted by "science" made some tests with negative results, this can really disprove their results. But I still don`t find too much negative results, most of them, so far I see, are positive.

Where are the researchers standing up and saying 'If people come to my facility and observe my experiments for N days, they will see results of at least quality X or I'll pay for their expenses? That's when I might start wondering about suitably-skilled observers publicly doubting while failing to take up the offer.

Where are the researchers with results good enough to get media attention?
Given the amount of faketual TV programmes on psychics and ghosts, people can hardly say the media is infested with diehard skeptics making programmes for diehard skeptics.
Surely someone with good results and with confidence in their experimental setup should be able to get people interested in making a programme about them, possibly getting all manner of skeptics and scientists involved as well?