stripping the gurus - Brahma Kumaris Info

216 STRIPPING THE GURUS
could be enhanced through guidance and assistance from departed
physicians and therapists.
And why not? But wait, there’s (2002) more:
In addition to instructing jurors not to discuss the trial with
friends or relatives, will judges [in the future] advise juries
not to confer with deceased friends and relatives about the
case? Or might they, on the contrary, insist that jurors attempt
to communicate and seek advice from the departed?....
A victim’s afterlife testimony could be a critical factor in
determining the conviction or acquittal of the defendant....
Doctors in the future will need to seriously entertain the
possibility that their patients do not show up for their sessions
alone. What if a therapist’s client is bringing along one
or more deceased persons to his sessions?
Yes, “What if?” (Is it not frightening to consider that one’s innocence
or health could someday be in the hands of people like
these—who make Shirley MacLaine look level-headed by comparison—and
their “verified, genuine mediums”?)
Rather more reasonably, the skeptical Dr. Ray Hyman (2003)
has given his evaluation of Schwartz’s startlingly poor experimental
design and interpretation of data in his testing of alleged mediums:
Probably no other extended program in psychical research
deviates so much from accepted norms of scientific methodology
as this one does.
“Finest scholars.” Fit and able to “cogently” criticize Wilber’s
own “brilliant” work—in which they have found precisely none of
the absolutely glaring issues cataloged herein.
Schwartz has also done much comparable “living energy,”
feedback-related theorizing—e.g., (1999) with Russek. That wishful
thinking includes facile defenses of crystal healing (see Randi
[2001b] for contra), out-of-the-body experiences and homeopathy.
(Against homeopathy, see Park [1997]; Stevens [2001]; Jarvis
[1994]; and Randi [2001d], [2002a], [2002b], [2003b], [2003c],
[2003d].) All of those aspects of “alternative medicine,” however,
have failed to show their purported effects in numerous properly
controlled studies, in spite of Schwartz’s (1999) “theorizing” as to
why they “should” work, e.g., in terms of “systemic memory”: