In <sheafferCEHqrq.JzJ at netcom.com> sheaffer at netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>>I'm surprised McGrath and Sheaffer haven't stepped in yet. Sheaffer
>>and Persinger don't see eye to eye, I'm told.
>Why should *I* step in, Chris? You know far more on the subject than
>I do, and you're doing a fine job of answering all of the claims that
>are being made in favor of Persinger's rather shaky theories. I'm just
>sitting back reading this, and enjoying it very much.
Thanks, Bob! It's all in a day's work for "SkepticalMan!"
I was delivering a lecture last night and used a slide of one of
Persinger's "hard data" graphs. It showed a "good correlation" between
locations where UFOs were seen in Canada - and mild earthquakes in
southern Minnesota. In most cases, the earthquakes were about 4.5 in
magnitude and were 500 to 800 kilometres (!) away from the places where
the UFOs were seen. What's more, there was a "lag effect" whereby the
earthquakes occurred a month or two after the peaks in UFO reports.
Naturally, this was a "direct correlation" that Persinger found, and he
noted it was caused by a buildup of seismic energy that just happened
to manifest itself in one place as a UFO and in another place hundreds
of miles away and months later as a minor tremor. Of course, the fact
that the UFO sightings were explained later as airplanes and stars is
Yes, this was published in a refereed journal. Sounds a bit like psi
effects, doesn't it, with that "lag effect" thrown in there?
(I still wonder why I'm not invited to speak at UFO conferences ...)
Chris Rutkowski - rutkows at cc.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba - Winnipeg, Canada