From fwestra@... Thu Dec 06 05:19:11 2001
Return-Path: <fwestra@...>
X-Sender: fwestra@...
X-Apparently-To: mysterylights@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_2); 6 Dec 2001 13:19:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 38652 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2001 13:19:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167)
  by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2001 13:19:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.pcmnet.nl) (213.53.80.139)
  by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2001 13:19:10 -0000
Received: from 1Cust181.tnt29.rtm1.nl.uu.net by smtp.pcmnet.nl
	via 1Cust181.tnt29.rtm1.nl.uu.net [213.116.152.181] with SMTP for <mysterylights@yahoogroups.com>
	id OAA09807 (8.8.8/1.13); Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:19:05 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <200112061319.OAA09807@...>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: <mysterylights@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:19:30 +0100
X-Mailer: Net-Tamer 1.12.0
Subject: Re: [mysterylights] Re: Albert Budden
X-Mailreader: NTReader v0.36w(P)/Beta (Registered)
From: Frits Westra <fwestra@...>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=196822
X-Yahoo-Profile: parodynl
    
Hello Mike,

I happened to receive a telephone call from Albert Budden
himself today and I told him about your critisism, which seems
to boil down to below points. Budden would like to react to
relevant remarks of yours. I'll forward below list to him. I've
added a new numbering and removed personal remarks of yours that
I deemed irrelevant and also one that was a misrepresentation
of my views.

This procedure may take a while, since Budden will send his
reply to me by snail-mail. I'll then forward it to this list.

Cheers,
Frits

On 5th December 2001, "Mike Williams" <ozestrange@...> wrote:

  >1/The TriField device he uses is a toy.

  >2/No one else has ever found the consistent readings he seems to 
  >find everywhere. If there exists someone please tell me.

  >3/I have found very few readings of interest since i I have owned 
  >the device.And I want to find odd readings as well, to try and 
  >establish a clear causative link.

  >4/Budden seems to believe his hypothesis covers ALL paranormal 
  >claims.But his parameters are to large. They have to be falsifiable, 
  >ie Popper/Kuhn.

  >5/Please tell me a black and white way of proving/testing etc 
  >whether Buddens ideas are applicable in ALL cases.And how to falsify 
  >the idea/hypothesis.Because if you cannot falsify it/then it isnt a 
  >theory worth anything.

  >6/Budden implies that ALL paranormal events are.. 
  >mag change=neurological change=paranormal claims.
  >A more realistic belief might be..
  >Some paranormal events may cause field changes=neurological 
  >change=paranormal claims.