[Loquebantur]

Ironically, scientism is also a manifestation of "magical thinking": Going through ritualistic motions of scientific appearances without actual understanding, getting positive feedback from the multitudes being just as incompetent.

Here, with the "Telepathy Tapes", the subject matter is immediately categorized as "magic": stuff deemed to be impossible because of it "obviously/implicitly contradicting scientific knowledge".

But that contradiction doesn't really exist? To give a decidedly clumsy, but entirely "physically possible", explanation of "telepathy": little green men from outer space might facilitate that effect using extremely advanced technology, hiding their presence and foiling attempts at getting easily understood evidence.

While such a scenario is highly inconvenient for current human academia to address, it's not "impossible" in any way? Isn't it really "magical thinking" to assume, such "outlandish" scenarios were excluded by natural law?

[foltik]

Ritualistic “magical thinking” stays the same regardless of outcomes or new information. Science does the exact opposite - predictive power determines what’s true. Nobody said your alien hypothesis is impossible; just that it’s highly implausible. No predictions, no evidence, no way to test it.

[Loquebantur]

Your assessment of "magical thinking" being impervious to criticism funnily applies just the same to the attitude exhibited here regarding "fringed" ideas like "telepathy". The "Telepathy Tapes" are "new information", people's attitudes stay the same regardless.

"Predictive power" isn't the source of truth in science, evidence for that attribute is. Given even only a hint of such evidence, scientists are supposed to work in order to acquire more, not to ignore the hint because that work would inconvenience them.

You claim that "alien hypothesis" was implausible, but that statement would require solid arguments in its favor. And those don't exist. You rather argue from ignorance, but absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Again, your pretense of "no predictions, no evidence, no way to test it" is simply counter-factual. You argue from ignorance. (To reiterate, evidence isn't the same as "proof")

[Yizahi]

So, to explain one invisible and unprovable thing for which there is zero evidence, you have invented a completely different invisible and unprovable thing for which there is also zero evidence. Great job :)

[Loquebantur]

There are many "invisible" things that exist. "Telepathy" isn't "unprovable". The "Telepathy Tapes" are evidence in favor of telepathy (It appears, you confuse "evidence" with "proof"). The explanation I suggested is neither "invisible" nor "unprovable". There actually is evidence for it as well (again, your idea of evidence is wrong).

In other words, your assessment is entirely counter-factual and simply false.

Noting the absurd down-votes on my comment in conjunction with the lack of comments providing any rational argument is actually evidence in favor of the hypothesis presented there.

[ctoth]

But don't you see? My two invisible things with no evidence support each other, giving each other evidence! Hey, what are you doing... put down that razor!

[almosthere]

The problem with science approaching telepathy tapes is that a parent will say:

My kid knows when another kid is sick.

Scientist: We have to apply scientific rigor, so let's ask him for tomorrow's lotto numbers.

Parents: Yeah, we said he can tell you when another kid is sick and it's 100% correct every time.

Scientist: That proves this is all bullshit.