That is exactly how I saw it when I first came across this topic. However, as I have read more about the history of science, there has always been fringe areas of experience - phenomena that science has not yet invested in understanding - whether it be alchemy, astrology, herbology, mesmerism or so on. Generally it is the easily reproducible phenomena that are investigated first. It is the phenomena that are not easily reproducable (eg ball lightening and cold fusion, which now seems to be gaining some solid evidence ) that science struggles with. The social sciences, and in particular, parapsychology are such areas, where the inconsistency in reproducibility are part of the nature of the phenomena meaning statistics are a key tool in understanding such events.
I struggle with this statement. I understand your intention and it sounds fine, but does that mean it is ok to be a bit sloppy with our ordinary science?
Science works by refuting or confirming existing ideas and paradigms. Seems to be that one piece of science requires as much care as any other piece of science. I think there is only one gold standard for any science - can it be reproduced or not - this dictates whether we regard it to be true or not. In many ways, science provides the extra scrutiny through multiple reproductions of very important findings. The best theory to explain Remote Viewing will be one that does not require the re-writing of our knowledge of the universe, but extends it, and explains it in new ways (like Einsteinian General Relativity re-interpreted and expanded the still very functional Newtonian Gravity).
Absolutely. Totally agree. I intensely dislike it when people refer to Remote Viewing as psychic. It just pollutes the whole situation - like referring to Astronomy as Astrology - astronomers to do not take to that kindly. Remote Viewing refers to a specific protocol, with particular expected results. There is no woo-woo (magic spells, spirit guides, angels, etc.) , anyone can do it if you follow the protocol, and the results need to be analyzed statistically.
Once again, this follows a common historical science pattern. Once the phenomena can be reproduced and measured, the theories start. It is informative to read the history of theories of magnetism and electricity. We probably haven't thought of the theory that explains the "mystical" behavior of RV. However, I do like Dean Radin's proposal in "Entangled Minds" (sounds like Evan Rex Walker's theory you quote). It is through the scientific investigation of things that don't fit that major scientific paradigm shifts occur. I think this area probably has a Nobel Prize in it.
