Reddit reviews Fringe-ology: How I Tried to Explain Away the Unexplainable-And Couldn't

As r/Jack_Shid said, there are just too many ways to create video/audio/images to trust anything online.

However, there are a few books that opened me up to a much broader view of existence, that I can recommend:

Will Storr Vs the Supernatural by Will Storr -

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0061132195/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1457993127&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=will+storr+vs+the+supernatural&dpPl=1&dpID=51GD2%2B3MgfL&ref=plSrch

A great look into ghosts. Some of it is funny, some of it is cringey, but there are quite a few moments that give you pause. A great read.

Fringeology by Steve Volk -

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0061857726/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1457993301&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=fringeology&dpPl=1&dpID=41%2BFB2uuB6L&ref=plSrch

A journalist investigates the paranormal as a whole and finds some suprising things. Changed the way I looked at quite a few things, especially when it comes to what drives people to believe the things that they do.

Spoiler: "Logical" people are just as open to bias, ignoring evidence, and being zealots as anyone else.

In situ testimonials like this are really interesting to hear - thanks for posting. I'm particularly intrigued with the astronauts comments. Given the amount of training, the dedication to the job, the high bar for getting the opportunity - suggests to me that these are very solid, very grounded people. Of course, they don't say much in these particular recordings so hard to draw conclusions from this - but as we know, other astronauts have discussed encounters and other aspects of the space experience. Edgar Mitchell, for example, and his Noetic Sciences work. I recently read this book, which has a lot of great discussions on this and other "fringe" topics. Excellent writing, too.

Steve Volk was an awesome guest who was promoting his book 'Fringe-ology'. If you're into taking a more objective look at the unexplainable- like paranormal, psychic phenomena, and extrasensory perception then this book is hard to beat. Really fun read too.

>1.Cant find a reputable source for the Wiseman quote so thats mute, and even if I had what he believes makes no difference,

Not that it matters, then, but here. It says in the article that the author of the book makes that claim therein.

>what he can prove does and where is that research?.

Good question. Amusingly, Wisemen is often referred to as a skeptic of the claims of parapsychology. For a good summary of the data in favor of parapsychology, see here and here.

>2.Donald Hebb (possible torturer) opinion is unclear, cant find that quote either, but again dosnt matter no proof.

Hebb, D.O. "The Role of Neurological Ideas in Psychology." Journal of Personality 20 (1951): 39-55

>Please actually read that and how moronic it is... now lets rephrase that to ''so now we have two skeptics admitting that of the two choices we should probably stick with the one that gives us MILLIONS of real world results rather than the one that gives us nothing and will probably be found out to be an error''.

Except for the fact that the findings of parapsychology is in no way incompatible with the rest of science. How would they be? They are incompatible with the outdated and provably incorrect notion of Newtonian physics, but who cares about that fact these days?

>Im not going through it all that should be enough to prove the point.

Not in the slightest. Presenting a false dichotomy as eternally settling the point is extremely shallow and intellectually bankrupt. Why are you in such a rush to judgment on this issue? Could it be that you're possible an a priori materialist who doesn't want their cherished beliefs challenged? The irony is certainly not lost on the universe, then, as we're writing this in the atheism sub-reddit.