102,815
edits
Changes
→Well-known mediums
Critiquing the Afterlife Experiments'' By Ray Hyman "The studies were methodologically defective in a number of important ways, not the least of which was that they were not double-blind." Schwartz and Hyman debated these points in the March 2003 issue of the ''Skeptical Enquirer''.[http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-05/follow-up-schwartz.html] ''Follow Up: How '''Not''' to Review Mediumship Research'' By Gary Schwartz The ''Skeptical Enquirer'' May 2003 [http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-05/follow-up-hyman.html] ''Hyman’s Reply to Schwartz’s
Critiquing the Afterlife Experiments'' By Ray Hyman "The studies were methodologically defective in a number of important ways, not the least of which was that they were not double-blind." Schwartz and Hyman debated these points in the March 2003 issue of the ''Skeptical Enquirer''.[http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-05/follow-up-schwartz.html] ''Follow Up: How '''Not''' to Review Mediumship Research'' By Gary Schwartz The ''Skeptical Enquirer'' May 2003 [http://www.csicop.org/si/2003-05/follow-up-hyman.html] ''Hyman’s Reply to Schwartz’s
'How Not To Review Mediumship Research'' In January 2007 Julie Beischel and Gary Schwartz published the results of a triple-blind study in ''EXPLORE The Journal of Science and Healing'' that also had positive results.[http://www.explorejournal.com/article/PIIS155083070600454X/fulltext] ''Anomalous Information Reception by Research Mediums Demonstrated Using a Novel Triple-Blind Protocol'' by Julie Beischel, PhD and Gary E. Schwartz
'How Not To Review Mediumship Research'' In January 2007 Julie Beischel and Gary Schwartz published the results of a triple-blind study in ''EXPLORE The Journal of Science and Healing'' that also had positive results.[http://www.explorejournal.com/article/PIIS155083070600454X/fulltext] ''Anomalous Information Reception by Research Mediums Demonstrated Using a Novel Triple-Blind Protocol'' by Julie Beischel, PhD and Gary E. Schwartz