Any good theory can be falsified by repeated experiments, Super Psi appears to have been falsified based all thousands and thousands of experiments producing weak psi effects inside a laboratory setting. I know Dean Radin still believes that psi could be a function of the brain therefore leaving the door open to Super Psi and also satisfying the materialists who won't accept the evidence for psi until there is a strong psi effect.
Knowing that psi is weak in a laboratory setting greatly strengthens the case for survival of bodily death but also appears to verify that it's the better hypothesis out of the two. If it was shown that strong psi existed into a laboratory setting at least a lot of the time this would falsify the survival hypothesis therefore making super psi the better hypothesis.
However that isn't what is happening it's time for Dean Radin along with other parapsychologists who think there is better evidence for psi among the living to accept the fact that the evidence is based on weak effects which therefore doesn't account for the evidence in support of the survival hypothesis. That however doesn't mean i think psi doesn't exist i do think psi phenomena exist but not super psi. The survival hypothesis predicts that psi will be commonly weak and this is the outcome been consistently occuring. So what do you think which is better supported the survival hypothesis or the super psi hypothesis?.
Vonnegut on writing
1 week ago