From ozestrange@... Mon Jan 21 14:53:18 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: ozestrange@... X-Apparently-To: mysterylights@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 21 Jan 2002 22:53:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 12298 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2002 22:53:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m6.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 21 Jan 2002 22:53:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n11.groups.yahoo.com) (216.115.96.61) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2002 22:53:17 -0000 Received: from [216.115.96.43] by n11.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Jan 2002 22:53:17 -0000 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 22:53:16 -0000 To: mysterylights@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Albert Budden Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <200112061319.OAA09807@...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2064 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "ozestrange" X-Originating-IP: 210.49.20.33 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=61845547 X-Yahoo-Profile: ozestrange Hey Frits. The answers would have taken him about an hour to write. My belief is that he will "forget" to answer you. You never replied to my e mail. I waited over 40 days for him to reply. This site`s chat group is DEAD so I wont be back. Thanks for trying for me. Now you know why I was not convinced with his reductionistic beliefs. all the best 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" 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.