tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2780326387798511389.post2888316843139302357..comments2010-09-03T16:53:22.726-07:00Regan Leehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13786586311631698822noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2780326387798511389.post-79263338331601184992010-09-03T16:53:22.726-07:002010-09-03T16:53:22.726-07:00Some kind of knowledge of the topic before criticizing would be nice, you know? ;)fra. Scorpiohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13591414953405560634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2780326387798511389.post-70502284143948851522010-09-03T16:52:09.908-07:002010-09-03T16:52:09.908-07:00As &#39;uber-skeptic&#39; and psychologist researching schizotypy I assure you, that both schizotypy and happy schizotypes concept are based on lots of research. <br />Yes, we have examined &#39;any&#39; (because &#39;all&#39; would be impossible and even statistically unnecessary) of these &#39;paranormal believers&#39;. Many, many times.<br />Here, eat this book please: Claridge Gordon, &#39;Schizotypy: Implications for illness and health.&#39;, Oxford Press, 1997.fra. Scorpiohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13591414953405560634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2780326387798511389.post-67873109674690140782008-11-08T05:19:00.000-08:002008-11-08T05:19:00.000-08:00That crap pisses me off!!! <BR/><BR/>Seriously, how dare they make some sort of diagnosis on those they consider to be woos! Have they examined all or even any of these people and are they even qualified to?<BR/><BR/>Another example of people pretending to be skeptics. No skepticism there, just pure debunkery.Lesleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07650512451759278182noreply@blogger.com