| Revision as of 20:30, 31 January 2007 editDreadstar (talk | contribs)53,180 edits →ESP: joke?← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:38, 31 January 2007 edit undoDreadstar (talk | contribs)53,180 edits →ESP: studies and espNext edit → | ||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
| :] <small> ] </small> 20:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC) | :] <small> ] </small> 20:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::Excellent point. Why didn't I think of that? :) (Extra-sensory perception, not ESP!) Heh! I'll take a look at the other stuff later, looks interesting! And I think ] is up to date on the recent studies that show a large percentage, if not a majority, believe in psychic or esp abilities. Solar had references to studies, but I'm not sure what happened to those references. It's a tough battle keeping up with the super-skeptics (or "pseudo-skeptics" and "cynics" as a friend of mine likes to call them...) ] <small> ] </small> 20:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:38, 31 January 2007
Please put all new content
at the bottom of the page
| You scored as Cultural Creative. Cultural Creatives are probably the newest group to enter this realm. You are a modern thinker who tends to shy away from organized religion but still feels as if there is something greater than ourselves. You are very spiritual, even if you are not religious. Life has a meaning outside of the rational. |
|
I live/work here in Monument Valley Utah. It is wilderness, and I have a lot of time to study, especially Parapsychology.
I'd be very happy to hear from you.
Martin (Talk Ψ Contribs) 06:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Archive in main namespace
You created Archive Martinphi 1 in the main wiki namespace, when I suspect you intended to create User talk:Martinphi/Archive 1 or something? eaolson 04:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- You can use the {{db-author}} tag to have them speedy deleted. I've already tagged them as such. eaolson 05:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
EVP
Thank you for adding the attribution to Smyth, Bayless and Raudive in the opening definition, and AA-EVP in the following paragraph. I appreciate your cooperation, and hope you don't view it as a concession. My concern is that an UNattributed definition is perceived as "Misplaced Pages defines EVP as...". Again, thank you, and although we often differ, I hope this article can become more of a collaboration and less of a battleground. --- LuckyLouie 01:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- And thank you (: No, I may have mis-understood when there were battles over "attribution." I never had any problem whatsoever with saying who though it up, invented the term, popularized it etc. I routinely put that kind of info into summaries. I just didn't like it to say "believers," or whatever. Maybe it was all a misunderstanding.
- When people said they wanted to include "Who believes it," that to me (seeing how they changed the summary) meant "what kind of person believes it," ie, to hammer that "only believers in the paranormal would believe it."Martin (Talk Ψ Contribs) 01:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think we can get PerfectBlue to endorse the current opening definition. Come by my Talk page. --- LuckyLouie 16:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I plugged in the Macrae name. Now I will go seek User:Zoe. --- LuckyLouie 20:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Mediation is fine
I don't see any evidence of these issues being discussed to resolution on the talkpage previously. I don't consider the version you and LuckyLouie developed to be "consensus" since you did not get input from me. I would gladly enter mediation. --ScienceApologist 06:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
ESP
Check out the eighth entry under the "see also" section. I was engaged in a small vandalism edit war last night, and couldn't follow-up properly. Dreadlocke ☥ 20:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- It is kinda funny, but the anon editor who put it there said he wasn't joking! He even gave me two sources (blogs - and therefore no good - but sources nontheless....:)
- In response to the note that you left of my user page. Here is evidence that people get it confused. I'm not making it up, and I'm not vandalising. (you have to scroll down to the bottom) and I'm going to fix it on the ESP page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.7.167 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent point. Why didn't I think of that? :) (Extra-sensory perception, not ESP!) Heh! I'll take a look at the other stuff later, looks interesting! And I think Solar is up to date on the recent studies that show a large percentage, if not a majority, believe in psychic or esp abilities. Solar had references to studies, but I'm not sure what happened to those references. It's a tough battle keeping up with the super-skeptics (or "pseudo-skeptics" and "cynics" as a friend of mine likes to call them...) Dreadlocke ☥ 20:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)