Actually, the only sense in which it's "prima facie" evidence that "completely contradicts" the ME hypothesis is that of a first impression-- and a hasty, thoughtless one at that.
If the ME hypothesis were that a percentage of people equal to or greater than one percent of the square root of the population of an area practicing the TM-Sidhi program together would eliminate all violent crime in that area, Peter would have a case. But that isn't what the ME hypothesis says. It says only that violent crime should *decrease*. One instance of violent crime would invalidate the hypothesis only if there had been no violent crime at all, or only one violent crime, in the area previously. There are plenty of entirely legitimate reasons for serious doubts about the validity of the ME hypothesis. This one doesn't even begin to qualify. Sal, of course, wouldn't know the difference. But Peter should. (That's 50 posts for me this week.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <drpetersutphen@...> wrote: > > Well, this is a great example of what's called "prima facie" evidence that > completely contradicts the ME hypothesis (I won't even call it a theory) that > would stop any serious scientist in their tracks and make them reconsider how > they have conceptualized the ME. Of course such evidence is ignored or post > hoc metaphors are employed to explain it away. Remember Bevan's infamous > "washing machine" metaphor. Good Lord! > > Let's face it. We all wish the ME was this robust field effect of > consciousness that could transform the world. It's not. The research is > ridiculous from a scientific perspective that is why its not taken seriously. > > > --- On Wed, 3/9/11, Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@...> wrote: > > > From: Sal Sunshine <salsunshine@...> > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Iraqi American Filmmaker Beaten in > > Fairfield > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2011, 8:18 AM > > On Mar 8, 2011, at 11:15 PM, Bill > > Coop wrote: > > > > > Nobody has mentioned the obvious: > > > > > > What happened to the Maharishi Effect? > > > > I was thinking exactly the same thing! > > > > Sal
