Daryl Bem just published an article in the very prestigious Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in support of the phenomenon of precognition (people reacting to things--in a small way—before being exposed to them). That’s right: there is empirical support for spidey-sense.
I have seen too many experimental and data-analytic shenanigans not to be skeptical of the findings. I have always been a skeptic, and my experience as a researcher has only made me more skeptical of science. I think that’s the way it should be.
But my experience is contrary to the current trend. I think scientists are becoming increasingly gullible and less skeptical. Reasonable people disagree on important questions, but what I don’t understand is the deep and abiding faith of supposed skeptics. A scientist states that the earth is getting warmer, and other scientists (and journalists) tamely accept that the world is coming to an end. Or someone says that there is no room for God in science, and people conclude that God must not exist. I understand that reasonable people disagree on these things; what bothers me is the absolute certainty espoused by people who consider themselves skeptics. The biggest difference between religious people and scientists is that religious people acknowledge they rely on faith.
This is why I am glad that the spidey-sense paper was published. It’s the position of a skeptic that we don’t know everything about psychology and the nature of the universe, and that stuff like precognition could occur.
(Although I doubt it does.)
