Spooks vs. Psychics: Who Predicted 9/11 Better?

[snopes]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/0...-vs-psych.html

[Majorsam]

This is uncanny.

15 years before 9/11 a psychic predicted with remarkable accuracy that supporters of Colonel Khadaffy would launch an attack at the White House from the air, and that military people would be killed aborting the attack. Also, that a building would collapse after being hit with a missle that fell from the sky.

One wonders why we don't have more psychics on staff.

[diddy]

Originally Posted by Majorsam

One wonders why we don't have more psychics on staff.

Probably becouse nobody has been able to prove that psychic powers actually exist and have a higher success rate than:
1) Plain guessing
2) Vague premonitions that can be interpreted in hundreds of different ways.

Originally Posted by diddy

Probably becouse nobody has been able to prove that psychic powers actually exist and have a higher success rate than:
1) Plain guessing
2) Vague premonitions that can be interpreted in hundreds of different ways.

Not to mention the American government did employ psychics, they were useless so they got sacked.

[Majorsam]

I'm frankly surprised that this nonsense was going on as late as 1986, though. I remember reading that the CIA did studies in the 1950s/60s in "remote sensing" (as did the Soviet Union, as I recall), but one would think they'd have enough data that such psychic clap-trap wasn't worth the effort by then.

Of course, if they were silly enough to start such an experiment, they were probably too silly to stop it.

[DemonWolf]

Originally Posted by Majorsam

I'm frankly surprised that this nonsense was going on as late as 1986, though. I remember reading that the CIA did studies in the 1950s/60s in "remote sensing" (as did the Soviet Union, as I recall), but one would think they'd have enough data that such psychic clap-trap wasn't worth the effort by then.

Of course, if they were silly enough to start such an experiment, they were probably too silly to stop it.

I'd say that they'd be silly not to start it. In a cold war type of environment, you need to explaore any option that could possible give you and edge. However, it is very silly, as you put it, to continue exploring an option after that option has proven to be fruitless.

[ganzfeld]

Originally Posted by diddy

1) Plain guessing

Did you say "plane"? OMG! You were exactly right!!!!!! AMAZING

[Majorsam]

Originally Posted by DemonWolf

I'd say that they'd be silly not to start it. In a cold war type of environment, you need to explaore any option that could possible give you and edge. However, it is very silly, as you put it, to continue exploring an option after that option has proven to be fruitless.

Well, point taken. I am of the belief that the paranormal should be rigorously & systematically tested to see if there is, in fact, anything there and should not be disregarded out of hand. However, I think that sometime prior to 1985 they probably had enough data to make it clear it was a lot of hooy.

I had a realization as I was riding home that this may not have been some spy-masters idea, but may have been a requirement from congress. No data to support, just a wild hunch. But then, 73.9% of my hunches are uncannily accurate

[ganzfeld]

Originally Posted by DemonWolf

I'd say that they'd be silly not to start it. In a cold war type of environment, you need to explaore any option that could possible give you and edge.

Well, I don't recall the CIA putting a whole bunch of cash into voodoo dolls. Not that I wouldn't put it past them but the "you have to explore every option" excuse doesn't fly. You have to explore every option for which you have some reason to expect a chance of good results, not every option possible.

[DemonWolf]

Originally Posted by Majorsam

Well, point taken. I am of the belief that the paranormal should be rigorously & systematically tested to see if there is, in fact, anything there and should not be disregarded out of hand. However, I think that sometime prior to 1985 they probably had enough data to make it clear it was a lot of hooy.

I had a realization as I was riding home that this may not have been some spy-masters idea, but may have been a requirement from congress. No data to support, just a wild hunch. But then, 73.9% of my hunches are uncannily accurate

I agree that it is wasteful to continue to explore that for as long as they did.

Originally Posted by ganzfeld

Well, I don't recall the CIA putting a whole bunch of cash into voodoo dolls. Not that I wouldn't put it past them but the "you have to explore every option" excuse doesn't fly. You have to explore every option for which you have some reason to expect a chance of good results, not every option possible.

You phrased it better than I had. There is little point in wasting time and resources on something that has little possibility of sucess or that will be little use even if it does work.

Voodoo dolls for example would require a bit of the subject (hair, for example) or a personal item (clothing, for example). I can't imagine the effort involved in obtaining either of these items would be woth it just to give Nikita Khrushchev a bad case of jock itch.

OTOH, I might make a show of researching it in the hopes that the Soviets would really waste time and resources on it.