Study: magnetism does not cause paranormal experiences

[flyboy217]

An interesting article I read today:

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6732

Previous research has shown that paranormal experiences can be achieved via electromagnetic stimulation of the temple lobe. Now scientists from Uppsala and Lund universities in Sweden are calling into question how the experiments were set up and therefore questioning the results. Their study involving identical magnetic field equipment produced no such relationship.


These were conducted in light of possible methodological flaws of earlier studies, including possible lack of true double blindness.

[Open Mind]

Interesting indeed.

So CSICOP psychologists have been ppearing on TV programs trumpeting a theory that wasn't even confirmed by a double blind trial? :rolleyes: :D

Psychologists have been nitpicking with 'sensory leakage' and use 'false memory sydrome' theories to explain away any claimed PSI experience .... yet it looks like they have trusted research that was similarly putting ideas in the participants minds?
:id:

And didn't CSICOP's Sue Blackmore claim she had paranormal experiences from such type of experiments? She let her imagination (and theories) run wild too?

Does this suggest some skeptic trusts any alternative explanation of PSI trial with much little questioning? When we take the bias out of PSI research we might actually find out something weak but genuinely interesing is going on ....... and change physics accordingly ;)

[Ratman_tf]

Originally posted by Open Mind

And didn't CSICOP's Sue Blackmore claim she had paranormal experiences from such type of experiments? She let her imagination (and theories) run wild too?


Is this the same Susan Blackmore who, after years of investigating ghosts and haunted houses, said she never enountered anything paranormal?

[Open Mind]

Is this the same Susan Blackmore who, after years of investigating ghosts and haunted houses, said she never enountered anything paranormal?


Sorry I missed out a vital word .... I should have said she had 'paranormal like experiences' using that sort of experiment ....here is her account and conclusion...

'......For the first ten minutes or so nothing seemed to happen .To tell the truth I felt rather daft. Instructed to describe aloud anything that happened I did not know what to say and felt under pressure to say something - anything. Then suddenly all my doubts were gone. "I’m swaying. It’s like being on a hammock." Then it felt for all the world as though two hands had grabbed my shoulders and were bodily yanking me upright. I knew I was still lying in the reclining chair, but someone, or something, was pulling me up.

Something seemed to get hold of my leg and pull it, distort it, and drag it up the wall. I felt as though I had been stretched half way up to the ceiling.

Then came the emotions. Totally out of the blue, but intensely and vividly, I felt suddenly angry - not just mildly cross but that sort of determinedly clear-minded anger out of which you act - only there was nothing and no one to act on. After perhaps ten seconds it was gone but later was replaced by an equally sudden fit of fear. I was just suddenly terrified - of nothing in particular. Never in my life have I had such powerful sensations coupled with the total lack of anything to blame them on. I was almost looking around the little room to find who was doing it.

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/journalism/ns94.html

It is known that the sense of presence can be created by stimulating the temporal lobes of the brain. These are above the ears on either side of the brain and are concerned with the integration of memory and experience, and with the body image, and many other functions. Epileptics often have the focus of their seizures in this area of the brain. Stimulating the temporal lobe (for example with electrodes or with magnetic fields) can give rise to out-of-body experiences, mystical experiences, sensations of floating and flying and also the feeling that there is someone there - even if you cannot see anything. The temporal lobe is especially active during some phases of sleep and so there may be a connection here with sleep paralysis.


http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Conferences/ba96.html



'Susan Blackmore who, after years of investigating ghosts and haunted houses, said she never enountered anything paranormal?

According to

Blackmore reported 29 experiments completed over this two-year period, of which 21 were eventually published as separate experiments in five parapsychology journal papers. Seven of these experiments produced statistically significant results. Although these experiments form the basis of Blackmore’s claim of “failing to find the paranormal�, the odds against 7 successes out of 21 happening by chance are over 20,000 to one!

So, how does Blackmore reconcile the fact of 7 successful experiments out of 21 with her often-repeated claim that her own research led her to become a skeptic? Simple: results from successful experiments were dismissed as due to flaws in the experiment, yet study quality was simply ignored when the results were nonsignificant. There are many design flaws that can lead to false positive results, but there are also many that can lead to false negatives, such as inadequate sample size (low statistical power), inappropriate sampling, and so forth. Berger writes “Blackmore’s database is replete with examples of such flaws� ........

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/anomalistics/skeptic_research.htm

[davidsmith73]

Originally posted by flyboy217
An interesting article I read today:

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6732


These were conducted in light of possible methodological flaws of earlier studies, including possible lack of true double blindness.

It pays to be sceptical of the sceptics!

[Dr Adequate]

Originally posted by flyboy217
These were conducted in light of possible methodological flaws of earlier studies, including possible lack of true double blindness.
So the contention then would be that experiences like this:
Then suddenly all my doubts were gone. "I’m swaying. It’s like being on a hammock." Then it felt for all the world as though two hands had grabbed my shoulders and were bodily yanking me upright. I knew I was still lying in the reclining chair, but someone, or something, was pulling me up.

Something seemed to get hold of my leg and pull it, distort it, and drag it up the wall. I felt as though I had been stretched half way up to the ceiling.

Then came the emotions. Totally out of the blue, but intensely and vividly, I felt suddenly angry - not just mildly cross but that sort of determinedly clear-minded anger out of which you act - only there was nothing and no one to act on. After perhaps ten seconds it was gone but later was replaced by an equally sudden fit of fear. I was just suddenly terrified - of nothing in particular. Never in my life have I had such powerful sensations coupled with the total lack of anything to blame them on. I was almost looking around the little room to find who was doing it.
can be brought on by suggestion alone?

Well, that would account for all the reports of the so-called "paranormal" we keep hearing about. "Suddenly, all my doubts were gone..." yeah, that sounds familiar.

Curiously enough, you seem to be having a go at the wrong person. Susan Blackmore was, in this account, the guinea pig. The experimenter was Michael Persinger. I can't say whether he's a sceptic, as I've never heard of him.

[CFLarsen]

No need to fire up the glee club.

Persinger's experiment was double-blind:

Dr Persinger has designed a helmet that produces a very weak rotating magnetic field of between ten nanotesla and one microtesla over the temporal lobes of the brain. This is placed on the subject's head and they are placed in a quiet chamber while blindfolded. So that there is no risk of 'suggestion', the only information that the subjects are given is that they are going in for a relaxation experiment. Neither the subject nor the experimenter carrying out the test has any idea of the true purpose of the experiment.
Source (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrainqa.shtml)

It pays to check the facts!

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
No need to fire up the glee club.

Persinger's experiment was double-blind:



It pays to check the facts!

I'm surprised that the isolation, darkness etc. didn't produce some anxiety even with the magnets off. Maybe it did, but on a mild scale.

In the dark and quiet one can start to imagine strange things.

I'd imagine that Dr Blackmore knew the purpose of the test, though. I think her inclusion was for PR reasons.

Of course, the main test subjects did not know the purpose of the test, or whether the magnets were on or off. That is double blind.

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by Dr Adequate
So the contention then would be that experiences like this:

can be brought on by suggestion alone?

Well, that would account for all the reports of the so-called "paranormal" we keep hearing about. "Suddenly, all my doubts were gone..." yeah, that sounds familiar.

Curiously enough, you seem to be having a go at the wrong person. Susan Blackmore was, in this account, the guinea pig. The experimenter was Michael Persinger. I can't say whether he's a sceptic, as I've never heard of him.

Never heard of him?! :eek: . .WOW!

[Cynical]

If you are going to preach "checking the facts", Claus Flodin, why don't YOU check the facts regarding a person's right to carry a firearm.

Sorry to drag the subject into this thread, but hey...if you're going to talk about "checking the facts"....it should apply to everything, not just the facts according to Claus Flodin.:p

[Ashles]

Another brilliant contribution to a thread from Cynical.

Cyncal, please try to be quiet when the grown-ups are talking.

[Cynical]

Whaddya mean ANOTHER, Ashles? I don't even know you...we have never "met".

So how do you do, Ashles? I've been around here for four years, and I see you've only been here a year and a half. So actually, YOU should have introduced yourself first.

Anyway, I look forward to speaking with you again, Ashles.

[Ashles]

Well it looks like my posting rate is a lot higher than yours then.

And my posts are on slightly more diverse subjects than Larsen and his middle name. It really looks like you're stalking him.

[Cynical]

Well, THAT'S real insight, Ash.

Because I AM!:D

[B.S]

I just saw Dr. Persinger ( who was discussed earlier in this forum ) on tv tonight claiming that in some of his experiments a weak magnetic field was used to repress or inhibit some serious medical symptoms in rats. If I remember it right they were symptoms that resembled MS in humans. This was all in relation to a show about how the weather can affect people physically. The show was "Balance: Under the Weather", but I can't find a way to link anything here.

If he claims weak magnetic fields can have this much of an effect on an animal's health, can we take him seriously here?

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by B.S
I just saw Dr. Persinger ( who was discussed earlier in this forum ) on tv tonight claiming that in some of his experiments a weak magnetic field was used to repress or inhibit some serious medical symptoms in rats. If I remember it right they were symptoms that resembled MS in humans. This was all in relation to a show about how the weather can affect people physically. The show was "Balance: Under the Weather", but I can't find a way to link anything here.

If he claims weak magnetic fields can have this much of an effect on an animal's health, can we take him seriously here?

Wait a second. There's a difference between repressing symptoms and having an actual effect on an animal's health.

It's quite possible that a weak magnetic field has some sort of calming, pain relieving effect, but I'm not sure about whether it could heal something. It would depend on the disease, of course, but I can't see how it could cure a wound. But diminishing the pain? Possible.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Cynical
Well, THAT'S real insight, Ash.

Because I AM!:D

Isn't that a crime nowadays, or at least against forum rules?

[JMA]

Originally posted by Open Mind
Does this suggest some skeptic trusts any alternative explanation of PSI trial with much little questioning? When we take the bias out of PSI research we might actually find out something weak but genuinely interesing is going on ....... and change physics accordingly ;)

Not at all...

Because for the techtonic strain theory, Persinger previous ligne of works, I have red many french skeptic's articles who found that is hypothesis was dubious and his researchs not convincing...

So if Persinger was criticized by skeptics, I think you are really wrong on that point Open "Closed" Mind...

[B.S]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Wait a second. There's a difference between repressing symptoms and having an actual effect on an animal's health.

It's quite possible that a weak magnetic field has some sort of calming, pain relieving effect, but I'm not sure about whether it could heal something. It would depend on the disease, of course, but I can't see how it could cure a wound. But diminishing the pain? Possible.

Well, I'm no expert on any of this, and since I can't remember his exact words I can't complain any further about it. I've always liked Dr. Persinger and his work, I just get a little nervous when I hear references to magnetic healing ( even though that may not be what he was claiming). I'll just have to wait for more info about it. Carry on.

[Open Mind]

Originally posted by JMA
Not at all...

Because for the techtonic strain theory , Persinger previous ligne of works, I have red many french skeptic's articles who found that is hypothesis was dubious and his researchs not convincing...


Without having access to your report, I would guess they were critical of the ‘techtonic strain theory’ in particular and were probably less critical of (Persinger’s) disruption of temporal lobe/magnetic fields can stimulate paranormal like experiences …… is that so?


So if Persinger was criticized by skeptics, I think you are really wrong on that point Open "Closed" Mind...

My point is that prominent CSICOP members have been quoting Persinger and have received much media attention on TV science programs and Newspapers making such claims appear proven to the public!

As mentioned above Sue Blackmore (psychologist, CSICOP) has given credence to the claim …. And for example here is the ubiquitous Richard Wiseman (psychologist, CSICOP) published paper on hauntings ….. (I’ve added emphasis)


In addition, the number of unusual experiences reported by participants
was correlated with magnetic variance. This was not replicated in Expt 2 , which found a
non significant positive correlation between magnetic variance and the haunted order.
These results provide some support for the controversial theory that the presence of
certain types of local magnetic fields may impact upon a range of psychological,
psycho physiological and health-related variables . (Korinevskaya, Kholodov, &
Korinevskii, 1993; Voustianiouk & Kaufmann, 2000). Acontrolled laboratory study by
Stevens (2001), for instance, showed psychological and physiological reactions to a
changing magnetic field of comparable magnitude to those measured in our two
experimental venues. Even subtle psychological and physiological changes occurring
in a context that might suggest paranormal events (e.g. occurring to a person who
believes in ghosts, occurring in a location with a haunted reputation) may lead to that
person making a ‘paranormal’ attribution to what they might otherwise interpret as an
ambiguous stimulus. And it has been shown that experimentally applied weak magnetic
fields can lead to more powerful and compelling experiences, such as a sensed
presence, that are directly comparable to the kinds of experiences that are spontaneously
reported (e.g. Persinger, 2001). Such findings suggest that magnetic fields, along
with a range of other variables

http://phoenix.herts.ac.uk/pwru/BJP_Wiseman_paper.pdf


Wiseman failed to replicate the magnetic variation theory in his experiment 2 (at Edinburgh Vaults) and still supported the theory in conclusion …… biased? In both experiments they found a correlation between the most reportedly haunted area and the most paranormal like comments by participants (other non reported things happened like the failure of very reliable TV camera to work inside one of the most haunted Edinburgh vaults, but worked again outside). Many other experimenters therefore would have at least considered the possibility that there could be a paranormal activity present ….. but not Wiseman (not mentioned in paper either) , his reaction since seems to have been something like ‘let’s build a fake haunted house and make people hallucinate ghosts’ . He is looking for any psychological explanations but a paranormal one…… this guy offers critique of others methodology in positive PSI experiments and his own are often flawed to be the point of being meaningless ….

For example even in this experiment, he wasn’t monitoring genuine paranormal experiences he was getting people to basically guess which areas were most paranormal ……. The proof of this is the questionnaire 2 asking if they believed their feelings were paranormal ……

In Experiment 1
‘Definitely yes’ = Only 8 people! …… . 3.72%
‘Probably yes’ = 10.23% … still rather low?
‘Uncertain’ = 37.21% ……. Hmm
‘Probably no’ = 40.46% ….. Is this skeptic bias introduced into experiment?
‘Definitely no’ = 8.37%

In Experiment 2
‘Definitely Yes’ = just 1 person (0.67%)
‘Probably yes’ = 2.67%
‘Uncertain’ = 38.67%
‘Probably no’ = 43.33%
‘‘Definitely no’ = 14.67%

So since tyhe vast majority had no real paranormal sensation they believed in ........ this was an experiment on guess, opinion or what? :D

Wiseman’s Paper hints his purpose in running these trials ‘These high-profile claims have been the subject of very little well-controlled, systematic, research. This is unfortunate, in part, because media reportage of many of these cases exerts a major influence over the public’s belief in the paranormal (National Science Board, 2000). …. His motive as a typical CSICOP member is to debunk the paranormal …… and who is he to judge what is ‘well controlled. Systematic research’ ? Does his own work pass? He seems to have long trail of disputed conclusions following him around......

[Open Mind]

Originally posted by Dr Adequate
[B]So the contention then would be that experiences like this:

can be brought on by suggestion alone?


Well there are many possibilities ...

One possibility, perhaps Blackmore in her keenness to find a non PSI explanation (to support her theories) has prematurely stated hallucination via disrupted temporal lobes explains PSI/religious experiences. :) There is absolutely no doubt the human brain can be made to hallucinate ……. Here we have double blind trial that possibly got hallucination but little matching with religious/PSI type phenomena. What would be religious type phenomena? Seeing dead relatives, seeing beings of light, traveling through a tunnels of light and so on …..

For such skeptic psychologists to assume the magnetic disruption of the brain explains PSI experiences required a leap of faith that too many anti-PSI psychologists seem willing to make …. it much like saying a alcoholic hallucinating is proof of no PSI.

Also if magnetic disruption of temporal lobes can cause PSI like experiences they need to do telepathy/ESP experiments under those conditions before claiming PSI doesn’t exist.

..… perhaps the human brain has developed to block telepathy, (100% telepathy, if it existed, would possibly mean no individuality of minds), the evolution of life form individuality might require a brain that closes down telepathy to increase individual, selective awareness……so before skeptic organizations shut down all PSI research funding, claiming they already know the answers (when in fact PSI has never been properly funded at any point of it’s 100 years existence) .. let’s do ALL the important experiments first …. If science can disprove PSI, fine - let it do it ….. but if science regards the subject as taboo for scientists reputation or ‘pathological science’ or as political campaign to influence humanity off religion and towards humanism/aethism …… well that is not science …. it’s dogma remarkably similar to religious dogma.

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by Open Mind


For such skeptic psychologists to assume the magnetic disruption of the brain explains PSI experiences required a leap of faith that too many anti-PSI psychologists seem willing to make …. it much like saying a alcoholic hallucinating is proof of no PSI.



Alcoholics hallucinating is proof of no PSI! :mad:

[c4ts]

I'll tell you what does cause paranormal or relgious experiences: mescaline. Or anything else that causes brain damage.

[JMA]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Persinger's experiment was double-blind:

Thanks Larsen... You're right. That's a very interresting information.

[Cynical]

Originally posted by The Mighty Thor
Isn't that a crime nowadays, or at least against forum rules?

Oh, don't worry about that, Mighty Thor. I can assure that Claus Flodin enjoys the attention.;)

[flyboy217]

Originally posted by c4ts
I'll tell you what does cause paranormal or relgious experiences: mescaline. Or anything else that causes brain damage.

Are you suggesting that mescaline causes brain damage? Care to back that up with any evidence?

[Dr Adequate]

Originally posted by Open Mind
For such skeptic psychologists to assume the magnetic disruption of the brain explains PSI experiences required a leap of faith that too many anti-PSI psychologists seem willing to make …. it much like saying a alcoholic hallucinating is proof of no PSI.
It might explain some funny experiences, but I don't think anyone's claimed it would explain them all.
Also if magnetic disruption of temporal lobes can cause PSI like experiences they need to do telepathy/ESP experiments under those conditions before claiming PSI doesn’t exist.
They're not trying to replicate telepathy, are they?
……so before skeptic organizations shut down all PSI research funding
That came out just a teensy-weensy bit paranoid, didn't it?
If science can disprove PSI, fine - let it do it …..
Ah yes, the demand for a proof that nothing paranormal exists... oh dear me, no, we haven't got one of those. How could we?
but if science regards the subject as taboo for scientists reputation or ‘pathological science’ or as political campaign to influence humanity off religion and towards humanism/aethism …… well that is not science ….
I think the key word there is "if", because I don't know anyone who would say that. But you wish to lead up to the usual trashy piece of Troo Bleever spam we get served up three times a day:
it’s dogma remarkably similar to religious dogma.

[Jyera]

Statements such as
CampA: "Magnetism causes paranormal experiences."
CampB: "Magnetism does not cause paranormal experiences"
balances each other.

Perhaps they are both partially right as well as both partially wrong. But they do balance each other.

The term "paranormal experience", has too wide a meaning.
It could mean anything from telepathy, seeing future, communicating with dead people...etc. As such, I feel both camps will not be able to conclusively provide a comprehesive proof.

On the other hand , they could simply work together to reinforce our knowledge. To find out whether "magnetism can cause hallucination or not".

There will be temptation to use this magnetism-hallucination association to explain that, all personal paranormal experience are just imagination in our mind. But the non-specific definition of "paranormal experience" will continue to cloud the debate.

Moreover, a strong "yes" or "no" conclusion on whether "magnetism can cause hallucination or not", should provide a strong outpost for our scientists. An outpost for them to find thair way back, after failing in their attempt.

More work should be done on the magnetism-hallucination association.

[Jyera]

I feel uneasy with the term "weak magnetic field" too.

Fire burns. And it is typical to expect a stronger fire to have a more devastating effect.

"weak magnetic field" ???
The weaker the better ? Sounds "homeopathically" unsound.
Or does the researcher intend to imply that stronger magnetic field, the stronger the effect. That should be fairly easy to prove, isn't it?. But then they should drop the word "weak".

I would rather that the researcher describe it as "controlled magnetic field", and specify the specfic magnetic field strength they used that to produce the effect they try to prove.