/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7571968
>he vast majority would be in favor of it.
which is why nobody does it, right?

>>7561896
>a few educated people spending large sums of money on a project

>others have questioned the methodology of the Global Consciousness Project, particularly how the data are selected and interpreted

>the data anomalies reported by the project are the result of "pattern matching" and selection bias which ultimately fail to support a belief in psi or global consciousness

>Other critics have stated that the open access to the test data "is a testimony to the integrity and curiosity of those involved," but in analysing the studies, May et al. stated that they found only chance derivations throughout

>Independent scientists Edwin May and James Spottiswoode conducted an analysis of the data around the 11 September 2001 events and concluded there was no statistically significant change in the randomness of the GCP data during the attacks and the apparent significant deviation reported by Nelson and Radin existed only in their chosen time window

>"the data, so far, is not solid enough for global consciousness to be said to exist at all. It is not possible, for example, to look at the data and predict with any accuracy what (if anything) the eggs may be responding to."


>Robert Matthews said that while it was "the most sophisticated attempt yet" to prove psychokinesis existed, the unreliability of significant events to cause statistically significant spikes meant that "the only conclusion to emerge from the Global Consciousness Project so far is that data without a theory is as meaningless as words without a narrative"


>"the only conclusion to emerge from the Global Consciousness Project so far is that data without a theory is as meaningless as words without a narrative"
>"the only conclusion to emerge from the Global Consciousness Project so far is that data without a theory is as meaningless as words without a narrative"

10/10 project :^)