Ideas Worth Suppressing: Psi Wars and TED’s Worst Nightmare
::::::::
by Original art by Meryl Ann Butler for OpEdNews.com
On April 2nd, Ph.Ds, MDs, and other degreed and interested supporters of the Set Science Free Campaign, “A Global Alliance of Rational Scientists & Academics,” will be participating in a protest rally at the TED Headquarters in NYC.
TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) is a global set of conferences that have included past presenters such as Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Bill Gates, and a selection of Nobel Prizewinners . Jill Bolte Taylor’s stunning talk, Stroke of Insight has gotten over 14 million views.
TED’s catchy, well-known slogan is “ideas worth spreading.”
The Set Science Free Campaign is protesting TED’s policy of keeping their scientific board anonymous as well as their decision to remove scientist Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D’s TEDx talk, The Science Delusion, from TED’s main page. Sheldrake’s talk inspired controversy because he questioned what he refers to as “materialistic assumptions” of modern science. He argued that these assumptions should be questioned as part of the scientific process of determining if they’re really true.
Rupert Sheldrake speaking at TEDx by www.sheldrake.org
April 2nd marks the one-year anniversary of TED’s decision to remove Sheldrake as well as Graham Hancock’s TEDx talk, on a similar topic.
Graham Hancock’s censored TEDx talk by blog.ted.com
The Set Science Free Campaign has also organized two petitions on their website, one which can be signed by signatories with a PhD or MD degree, and the other which can be signed by any interested others. The campaign is a grassroots effort organized by concerned citizens who feel that scientific boards should not be anonymous, noting that “Science should be open to challenge and anonymous scientific boards must be exposed as a matter of scientific principle,” and “It is our position that even if one disagrees with Sheldrake, he still has a right to be heard. It was disrespectful for TED to remove his talk without giving a valid reason.”
The Setsciencefree.org website also notes, “Sheldrake challenged TED’s “anonymous scientific board’ to a public debate. TED refused, and additionally refuses to name the members of the “scientific board” that called for the removal of his talk. Legitimate scientific boards are not anonymous. Science is based on personal accountability and members of scientific boards and scientific journals must be public.”
Rupert Sheldrake by Rupert Sheldrake
Sheldrake has been accused of “pseudoscience.” However, his professional credentials are sobering. There are far too many to mention here, but the high points include: a double first class honors degree, Cambridge University, where he was awarded the University Botany Prize; he studied philosophy and history of science at Harvard University, as a Frank Knox Fellow; he received a Ph.D. in biochemistry, Cambridge University; as a Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, he was Director of Studies in biochemistry and cell biology; he is a Rosenheim Research Fellow of the Royal Society, and he has published over 80 papers in scientific journals, including Nature.
The Setsciencefree.org website asks, “How could one with such a pedigree be accused of pseudoscience? Perhaps this is “proof of Clay Shirky’s assertion that ‘institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution.'”
Craig Weiler is the author of a 270-page book exploring this deep controversy: Psi Wars: TED, Wikipedia and the Battle for the Internet: The Story of a Wild and Vicious Science Controversy … that Anyone Can Join!
Dr. Larry Dossey (http://www.dosseydossey.com/larry/default.html) says, I have closely followed Craig Weiler’s incisive writings on this subject. Craig gets it right from start to finish — well, not “finish,” because the controversy still rages. He understands the sociocultural and academic issues clearly and has the guts to say so in this excellent book.
Dossey has authored nine books and numerous articles, and is the former Executive Editor of the peer-reviewed journal Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, the most widely subscribed-to journal in its field. He has lectured all over the world, including at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Cornell, the Mayo Clinic and at the Universities of Pennsylvania, California, Washington, Texas, Florida, and Minnesota. So when Dossey says, “Craig Weiler’s voice in this book is restrained, clear, and factual. After reading it, you will be in a good position to decide whether TED is about “ideas worth spreading” or “ideas worth censoring'” his is a voice worth listening to.
Craig Weiler by Craig Weiler
I’m appreciative that Craig Weiler has agreed to an interview with OEN.
Meryl Ann Butler: Thanks, Craig for making time to answer some of our questions. Your book, Psi Wars, is 270 pages, but can you give us a shorter summary of what this war with TED is about?
Craig Weiler: Thank you for interviewing me! The main story in my book is about the TED controversy, but in order to tell that story I had to put it into perspective and provide a huge amount of background information so that readers would understand the context. Otherwise it can be hard to understand why this controversy ignites such passion in people. So I had to tell the story of parapsychology and why people take it seriously and that included showing what happens when skeptics address the real evidence, not their imagined version of it. It’s all there in the scientific papers.
And I had to tell the story of the skeptics and their organizations. I refer to this type of skeptic as an ideologue, since most people can understand what that means. Most people don’t know that organizations like the James Randi Educational Foundation and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry are actually atheist advocacy organizations that have nothing to do with real science. Atheism has its fundamentalists, just like all the religions do. And in about the same percentages. Over the years these activist atheists have positioned themselves as defenders of science, but in reality they’re defending their belief system. They use all the standard tactics: bullying, ridicule and harassment combined with a win-at-any-cost mentality.
These organizations have the ear of the mainstream media, which is why alternative views get so little press. And where you really see the full out attack by these ideologues is on Wikipedia, where they have a stranglehold on all the alternative topics.
The TED controversy was a perfect example of the irrational side of skepticism because the mentality at TED and the way they handled the controversy was pretty typical of what happens.
While many writers have tackled the subject of psi, no one had addressed the cultural aspect of it and and telling the TED story while providing the necessary background was the perfect way to deal with it.
I also talked at some length about why this change is happening.
MAB: Thanks for that fascinating background, Craig. And ok, I’ll bite: why IS this change happening?
CW: That’s a good question because this running battle between parapsychological research and mainstream resistance has been going on for a lo-o-o-ong time. The first scientific investigations into the paranormal began with the formation of the Society for Psychical Research — in 1882, the car hadn’t even been invented yet, and and already parapsychological research was under attack.
For over a century, the mainstream scientific community has successfully suppressed this research largely by denying it funding, discouraging students from doing research in this field, not publishing research in prominent journals and basically blackballing anyone who shows an interest in the subject. I don’t know why this taboo is so strong, I don’t get it at all, but it’s there. Most of the parapsychology researchers have stories about their work getting suppressed, but the real kicker here is that the Parapsychological Association itself discourages people from entering that field!
What’s different now is that the normal scientific channels, which have been used to marginalize this research, are being bypassed. This is because of the Internet. The same technology that gives us unlimited access to cute babies, and funny videos of cats has also created a way for the research to reach a much wider audience. As soon as the skeptical scientific community lost its chokehold on the information, change was coming. It was inevitable.
I should add here that while skepticism rules science in academia, the majority of scientists are not skeptical. They just go along with it because they have to.
The game has already changed a great deal. When I first started blogging about six years ago, it was common for skeptics to make a number of assertions that were blatantly false, such as “there is no evidence for psi.” It’s easy nowadays to disprove this with a single link: http://deanradin.com/evidence/evidence.htm
The skeptics are being challenged all the time now when they make these kinds of statements in public forums. A lot more people are informed.
This is the situation that TED stepped into, a turning point in history where the existing scientific paradigm was beginning to be challenged by informed, intellectual people. And by doing what they did, TED became the focal point for all the outrage that had been building up over the years. They deserve it frankly. They behaved badly.
Galileo endured severe repercussions for theories later proven true. by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Galilee.jpg
MAB: Hearing this background and perspective really helps in understanding what the hullabaloo is about. Can you give us a synopsis of what happened with the Los Angeles TEDx, and why it’s important?
CW: The controversy first started because TED removed a video by Rupert Sheldrake from its main page and stuck it in an obscure blog post where it would not be searchable on the main site. This caused an uproar. In the video Sheldrake talked about questioning materialism, the mainstream philosophical approach to science. Next, TED removed a video by Graham Hancock, which was along the same lines, in that he was also questioning materialism, but his approach was not a scientific one.
The uproar, combined with the persistent efforts of skeptic Jerry Coyne, undoubtedly affected TED’s approach to TEDxWestHollywood, an independently produced TED program organized and produced by Suzanne Taylor that was scheduled for April 14th, 2013. They probably would have left it alone were it not for the growing controversy. The event had been in development for a year after all and Suzanne and TED had basically come to terms. But out of nowhere TED started bearing down on the the WestHollywood program and eventually they decided to withdraw her TEDx license with only two weeks to go before the show.
Logo image for Suzanne Taylor’s TEDxWestHollywood event in Los Angeles by Suzanne Taylor
Two things: first, TED focused their attention on the two speakers on the TEDxWestHollywood roster who were scientists explicitly talking about psychic ability. This left very little doubt as to TED’s motives. They weren’t just “in favor of science” as they claimed, they were pushing a very specific atheism-based ideological agenda. You can approach any subject scientifically. Many people felt that they were effectively trying to censor a certain class of scientific experiments because they produced positive results, which went against TED’s ideology. TED never gave Suzanne any good reasons for doing what they did. Nor could they. Scientifically, their actions were indefensible.
Taylor with Marianne Williamson and Daphne Rose Kingma planning presentations by Photo credit Joan Hangarter
Second, Suzanne Taylor was harmed by what TED did. While Sheldrake and Hancock came out relatively unscathed from the experience — and perhaps gained in popularity — Suzanne was left without a venue or financial backing just two weeks prior to the date of the big event! She put up, by her estimate, $40,000 to cover the show, get a new venue and livestream it.
However in the last minute rush, she didn’t change her livestream account to remove the TEDx name. TED had it cancelled for copyright infringement two days before the show. Then Livestream would not provide her with a link from the old web address to the new one. It was all very petty.
MAB: It sounds remarkably petty. On his HuffPo blog, Deepak Chopra posted several thoughtful letters (including his own) directed to TED from accredited scientists and the broader community of concerned professionals, all of whom took exception to TED’s antics. Reading through them is fascinating, and they all seem to be on the same page as you.
Deepak Chropra by wiki, CC license
How do you think the April 2nd protest might affect this situation? Where does that leave this controversy, and where do you see this going?
CW: The anniversary protest coming up April 2nd is unprecedented in human history as far as I know. It is a public protest whose sole goal is to force the advancement of science against the will of mainstream scientific institutions. It is non ideological and non religious in nature. This is basically a call to follow the evidence. It is just one more step in what appears to be a long road.
I suspect that we’ll see the social change in the sciences at about the pace that we see other social changes, such as women’s rights, minority rights, gay rights, etc. That is to say, it will be a fight. What’s stopping more research and funding and mainstream acceptance now, is basically fear.
Skeptics are very quick to attack when their position is threatened and they are quick to use authority and bullying to get their way. At some point, though, the public perception will change enough that scientists and graduate students will lose their fear of speaking out and start challenging the status quo publicly. Then it’s basically over. The skeptics will still whine and complain, but they will get all the sympathy of White Supremacists claiming to be misunderstood. The truth has a way of getting out.
My personal goal is more long term. At some point, perhaps we can start addressing the lost minority. There are millions of people who are very psychic who are now suppressed and marginalized based on a characteristic they were born with and have no control over. There are a whole list of issues they are dealing with right now because they have to hide who they are in order to be accepted.
MAB: Essentially, you’ve described a war between top-down, arrogant, paternalistic, vertical hierarchy and bottom-up, horizontally-based cooperative crowdsourcing that forces change upwards from “we, the people.”
I really liked how you explained the issue in your book:
On the one side we have materialists/reductionists/skeptics who see the universe as a lifeless machine that can be understood by figuring out its mechanics. On the other side we have Biocentrists, for lack of a better term, who see consciousness and life as being fundamental to the universe. In other words, they see the universe as a giant thought. You generally won’t hear much about the second theory, but the evidence is much better than most people realize. Mainstream science does not acknowledge this, which is pretty much why there’s a big controversy.
You’ve done a great job of breaking new ground in your book. I found it a compelling read…I stayed up pretty late a couple of nights because I wanted to read “just one more page,” it was so fascinating! And the larger story is really just beginning.
Thanks for visiting with us, Craig. Is there anything else you want to mention before we complete the interview?
CW: Yes. First of all, thank you so much for this interview! I’m very grateful for the opportunity that you and OpEdNews have given me to share this information. I think that this is a controversy with far reaching ramifications.
I would like to share something personal. I started learning about parapsychology several years ago because I am psychic myself, although not professionally. I wanted to see if there really was scientific evidence for psychic ability; I was curious. I did not go into this expecting to find an extremely biased ideologue skeptic culture hell bent on suppressing anything and everything they disagreed with. I discovered that quite by accident.
They are a loud, vocal and determined minority, but when you understand how they operate and what they do to get their way, it is relatively easy to counter them. The most important thing I have learned about them is that they don’t know very much and very few can effectively argue for their position. They are all hot air. That is their great weakness.
That’s why neither TED, nor Jerry Coyne nor any other skeptic ever took up Sheldrake or Hancock on their challenges to debate. They couldn’t win. In fact, they would certainly have been exposed as relatively ignorant. The Texans have a saying for that: “All hat and no cattle.”
Watch Rupert Sheldrake’s TED-censored talk: click here
Watch Graham Hancock’s TED-censored talk: click here
See Craig Weiler’s Interview with Paul Revis, Organizer of The TED Protest Coming April 2nd
Submitters Website: http://www.merylannbutler.com
Submitters Bio:
Meryl Ann Butler is an artist, author, educator and OpedNews Managing Editor who has been actively engaged in utilizing the arts as stepping-stones toward joy-filled wellbeing for over 25 years. She studied art with Harold Ransom Stevenson in Sea Cliff NY for seven years before opening her own art school. Stevenson had been a student of Norman Rockwell. Her art in a wide variety of media can be seen on her YouTube video, “Visionary Artist Meryl Ann Butler on Creativity and Joy” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcGs2r_66QE A NYC native, her response to 9-11 was to pen an invitation to healing through creativity, entitled, “90-Minute Quilts: 15+ Projects You Can Stitch in an Afternoon” (Krause 2006), which is a bestseller in the craft field. The sequel, MORE 90-Minute Quilts: 20+ Quick and Easy Projects With Triangles and Squares was released in April, 2011. Her popular video, How to Stitch a Quilt in 90 Minutes with Meryl Ann Butler can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrShGOQaJQ8 She has been active in a number of international, arts-related projects as a citizen diplomat, and was arts advisor to Baltimore’s CIUSSR (Center for Improving US-Soviet Relations), 1987-89. She made two trips to the former USSR in 1987 and 1988 to speak to artists, craftpeople and fashion designers on the topic of utilizing the arts as a tool for global wellbeing. She created the historical “First US-Soviet Children’s Peace Quilt Exchange Project” in 1987-88, which was the first time a reciprocal quilt was given to the US from the former USSR. Her artwork is in collections across the globe. Meryl Ann is a founding member of The Labyrinth Society and has been building labyrinths since 1992. “Creativity and Healing: The Work of Meryl Ann Butler” by Burl Hall is at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Creativity-and-Healing–T-by-Burl-Hall-130414-18.html Burl and Merry Hall interviewed Meryl Ann on their BlogTalk radio show, “Envision This,” at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/envision-this/2013/04/11/meryl-ann-butler-art-as-a-medicine-for-the-soul She has written for Opednews since 2004. Archived articles http://www.opednews.com/author/author1820.html Older archived articles, from before May 2005 are here.,
Eslkevin's Blog 
http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEV7ovMjRTvmMA2JMPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByMG04Z2o2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw–/RV=1/RE=1396016047/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3d_Ni4_6YJPM8/RS=%5EADAxG2PjwZ_9mS5s95YSXG3y.banz8-