Websites of interest

Here's a few interesting websites I've run across.

Stacy Horn's blog. Stacy is author of Unbelievable, an excellent book about the J B Rhine era.

Winston Wu's "debunking skeptics" site, SCEPCOP. In the spirit of the Skeptical Investigations website.

Interchange Laboratories, Inc. is developing a mind-machine interface technology.

Mark Zilberman's Intuition Tester and especially his "Artificial Intuition Device."

UC Irvine's Don Hoffman's "User interface theory of perception" and other papers and materials. Prof. Hoffman gave a very interesting lecture at the recent Parapsychological Association conference held at the University of Washington in Seattle.


Anonymous said…
I am a little confused by Vinstonas Wu's exact opinions. In some essays he seems to be saying that he approves of authorities such as Wayne Dyer, e.g.:

whereas in other essays such as:

he seems to be saying that Wayne Dyer is too vague to be of use.

I note that SCEPCOP is run by Wu and has recently been endorsed by Victor Zammit.
Anonymous said…
Another interesting site likely to be of use to parapsychologists is:

Martin is a critic of conflicts of interest in science.

is IMHO very relevant to psi research.
WWu777 said…
Hi FB,
This is Vinstonas Wu. To answer your question, first of all, those two articles were written years apart. Second, my position on Wayne Dyer is that he is very inspiring, charismatic and has a lot of spiritual wisdom to share, which he mostly borrows from other sources, he admits, and packages it all together in an attractive feel good package. Nothing wrong with that. My only beef is that he takes the "thought creates reality" New Age mantra as a Gospel Truth and an all powerful force.

I never said that he was good or bad, I just listed the pros and cons of his message. No one is all right or all wrong. Most people's opinions contain elements of truth in them, as well as limitations, flaws and weaknesses.

I hope that clears things up for you?


Popular posts from this blog

Feeling the future meta-analysis

Skeptic agrees that remote viewing is proven

Show me the evidence