Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00632)

Steve, you wrote in part:

=====================================================
I am sure Daniel's comments are made in good faith, 
but they constitute special pleading.

The fact is, almost none of HPB's demos constitute 
satisfactory scientific proof of phenomena (even 
though very one of them may have been phenomenal.) 
The scientific proof of an experiment is to replicate 
the experiment. To scientifically validate 
materialization you or Bart would need to materialize 
a teacup under scientifically controlled conditions."
======================================================

Steve, I am somewhat uncertain as to what you are
referring to when you say that my comments "constitute
special pleading."

You then go on to write that "almost none of HPB's 
demos constitute satisfactory scientific proof of phenomena. . . ."

I don't know if you are relating this statement to your
"special pleading" comment but to set the record
straight I was not suggesting that "HPB's demos constitute 
satisfactory scientific proof of phenomena. . . ." 

I was instead commenting on the technique of "isn't 
it possible?" and illustrating it with some of Bart's 
recent comments.

My main point was and I requote it:

"this type of argument ["isn't it possible?"] and the 
process of unpacking an experiment or a testimonial 
account becomes a game in which the critic cannot
lose."

But possibly I have misunderstood your latest comments
and exactly what your point was.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc
http://theosophy.info