Scientists ..Is there any paranormal claim that you would take the time to test?

Question

(If someone covered your expenses)

Answer 1

science is always doing this - except we don't call them paranormal. why? cause they are not that paranormal when u understand how it happens. I will try reincarnation. its bad enough sometimes and think of having to come back, maybe as a silly pig or something....

lol

Answer 2

I would hope that any scientist that was qualified to do so (in other words claims of ESP in animals might require a biologist, where claims of mind-machine interaction might best be studied by an engineer or physicist) would be open to the pursuit of knowledge and the advancement of science.

"It was JB Rhine who began formal tests on the subject when he met a gambler who claimed to exert mind power to influence the fall of dice. For many years in the 1930s he tested many people, gaining a slight, but regular, statistical bias above chance."

(link below)

To dismiss evidence (claims) without examination is not science no matter how extraordinary the claim may seem (or be).

Some experiments to test claims would require expenses that most people (and many institutions) could not fund.

For example dream ESP studies have not been replicated because sleep laboratories are extremely expensive.

So, testing for a person that claims he has ESP during dreams/sleep might not be realistic (at least in ways already tested).

Psi

Answer 3

I am not a scientist but I like the question Deenie. But if I was I would look into EVPs. I find them extremely fascinating. I know I could easily research this but am reluctant being a Christian.

I know this sounds a little demented but since I recently learned that people having been cleanly decapitated supposedly have up to 30 seconds of conscious awareness, I wish I could find proof. But since the guillotine is long gone there is not way of researching this. Please don't t freaked out by that, I can't even kill a bug and freak out when it comes to blood, guts and medical stuff.

Answer 4

Sure, if the claim appears to have an empirical basis that can be approached scientifically. But keep in mind scientists still work for "the man", so if a scientist wants to study something and be funded for it, he's going to have to convince his supporters (e.g., the NSF, the company he works for, the university or whoever has given him grants to do his research. etc.) that the research is pertinent to their interests and is likely to yield useful results. That can be much easier said than done.

Otherwise, the scientist is doing research on his own time, which many do anyway. And many interesting and important scientific results have been gained by scientists following their own hunches and interests.

EDIT: Oh sorry for not understanding the question. Since remote viewing (e.g., ganzfeld experiments) seem to be of great interest and great debate, I wouldn't mind getting involved in that area of research. The first order of business would be to do away with the need for meta-analysis (a statistical method never used in science to support theories but instead to generate hypothesis, thus peculiar to use here and a great source of doubt) and to create a replicable experimental method so that the results, positive or negative, can be readily confirmed by independent research teams.

Answer 5

If I had a blank check I would investigate a lot of things.

However, since you can't prove the absence of something I might just be spinning my wheels.  By its very nature paranormal phenomena are those things which have eluded any sort of empirical evidence.  The only people who find evidence of anything paranormal are those who take the phenomenon's existence for granted to begin with.