Latest / Stuff You Should Know / Selects: How ESP Works (?)

Transcript

Selects: How ESP Works (?) · Stuff You Should Know

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Hey guys, it's Josh and for this week's select, I've
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: chosen our twenty fifteen episode on ESP. It's a really
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: good one. We talk about all sorts of things about ESP,
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: including the science, and I know what you're thinking. You're
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: thinking science and ESP. Yes, indeed, and that's one of
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: the things that makes this episode so cool. So I
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: hope you will open your mind, tune in, turn on,
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: drop out, keep on trucking, and enjoy this episode.
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a production of iHeartRadio.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark. There's
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Charles w Chuck Bryant, and Jerry's over there. I didn't
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: even have to look why, I just knew.
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: Yes, and dudes and dudets. We are in our new studio.
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, can you tell its own different.
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: It's the very first one and it's tiny.
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: Wait what do you mean it's the very first one.
• 1:06
  Speaker 2: Very very first podcast that we've recorded in here.
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: Oh gotcha?
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I was gonna say. I said tiny, but
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: it's not tiny. It's cozy, but it is all all ours, Yeah,
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: al ours.
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: Everybody else at House Stuff Works doesn't really know that yet,
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: but they will.
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Because when we actually have butt detection and when
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: someone sits down in these seats that aren't us to
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: get a shock.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And plus an alarm goes off at our desks.
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, what's it called dmr TM? I how are you, sir?
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: I'm pretty good.
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: I feel like this is fancy. This is our first
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: real like studio. That's not true.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: No, I'm trying to remember. The last one was.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: No, but it's not a utility closet. It's not a
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: lactation room. It's not Yeah, it's not a murder room.
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: It's not like an office with like desk for like
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: office furniture. Yeah, it's a it's a studio that was
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: built out for the specific purpose of recording podcasts.
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: Yep. All we have to do is put up our
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: Aaron Cooper originals. The artwork, got a couple of those
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: waiting together, and we got to work on the lighting
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: in here a little bit.
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: Jerry's said she's gonna hang some china balls for us. Yeah.
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: She keeps pushing the china balls.
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: So anyway, enough about that. We just wanted to say
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: we're super excited to be in our new office, in
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: our new studio.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: It does feel good. Yeah, kudos for that intro. I'm
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: not going to say that. I knew you were going
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: to say that.
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I was going to say that too.
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: I knew that you were thinking of saying that, Chuck.
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: Yes, ESP.
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: Do you believe in ESP?
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: No?
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: No, not at all. Do you what do you think
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: it is? Because surely, I mean, just about anyone could
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: agree that humans have some sort of ability somehow to
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: make good guesses or to predict the future, or whatever
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: you want to call it. Do you agree or do
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: you think it's strictly just us selectively paying attention to
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: random instances over others.
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: I think it's that, and as we'll talk about, I
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: think it's the just the nature of coincidence is going
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: to happen because so many things happen every day that
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: something is bound to seem like something you dreamed about
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: the night before at some point in your life.
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: But the other millions of dreams you have that, don't
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: I think those are the ones that are the the
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: tell you know? Do you?
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: I don't know? Like I want to. I spent so
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: many years of my life believing in stuff like that, Yeah,
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: and wanting to go to Duke University to study at
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: their parapsychology department. Did you really believe? Yeah, but you know,
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: believing in ghosts and all this and just that's how
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: I spent my childhood just reading about stuff like that.
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: Very so Ghostbusters really did a number on you.
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah. When that came along, I was like
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: this for me, Yeah, but as an adult, it's not
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: so much that I believe in ESP. It's more that
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: I I refuse to just utterly disbelieve in the possibility
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: of it. Sure, okay, you know what I mean.
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I got you there, because we don't know everything
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: about everything yet, right, but uh yeah, I'm in the
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: I'm the other camp. And I'm not even gonna say
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: the sceptic camp because those people just plug me.
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: Has a bad name, some due to some bad apples.
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: Not all skeptics, No, but there are some that are
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: horses asses. Can we say that?
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: I don't know. We'll find out, all right, Well, let's
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: talk about And I thought this was interesting because I
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: never knew that ESP is just a big collective term
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: for all manner of par paranormal phenomena. You could also
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: call PSI.
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and so a dude named jb Ryan who will
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: talk about later.
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: He coined ESP the Granddaddy.
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: And then in the forties another guy coined the term
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: PSI and PSI is a Greek letter and it's equated
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: with psyche or the soul ps i. And the reason
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: that the guy chose PI is because he felt ESP
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: suggested it was something supernatural. Yeah, sure, and SI he
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: felt suggested that this is a normal part of humanity.
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: We just don't understand it.
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: It sounds like science, right. But there are several categories
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: of ESP, and this is the one that I never
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: knew the actual definitions for these. I sort of just
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: threw them all in a bag together. You have telepathy,
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: and that's when you can you know, you're over there
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: reading my thoughts. Yes, like Chuck is really not happy
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: to be in the new studio.
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: That's not true.
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: He'd rather be at home on the couch.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: I'm reading your thoughts right now, and I know that
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: you like this place.
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: Okay, Well, you're a telep right. Clairvoyance, which is the
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: ability to see events or things objects happening somewhere else
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: at the same time. So are you doing are you clairvoyant?
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: I am. I'm seeing your couch right now and I'm
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: seeing it's not that comfy. Yeah, so you're not missing
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: that much at the moment.
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: I know somewhere Jonathan Strickland is waxing his head, bald head.
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: That's just a logical assumption.
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: Okay. Then we have our pre cogs precognition, that's when
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: you see into the future, retrocogs retro cognition. You can
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: see into the distant past.
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: That's there's another that's a widely accepted definition of retrocognition. Yeah,
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: like seeing you know, cave like TikTok running around with
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: the dinosaurs like you do, which I guess never would
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: have happened. Yeah, But there's another term for retrocognition, whereas
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: something in the future affects something in the past. So
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: a decision you make in the future, yeah, affects your past.
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: And an example given is that you have a dream
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: about a dinosaur. Now, let's say a spotted dog, okay,
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: and then the first thing the next morning, you go
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: outside to water your lawn and this same spotted dog
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: or a similar spotted dog walks by. The idea isn't
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: that that was very coincidental or that you had esp
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: in your dreams, Yeah, but that you seeing that dog
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: in the morning affected your dream the night before. Oh okay,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: so that's another definition that's emerging for retrocognition. That's getting
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: a lot of traction because of the stuff we're finding
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: on the quantum scale, just weirdness like that.
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: All right. Then you have your mediumship and that's miss
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: Cleo who can channel dead spirits.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I forgot about her.
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: And then you heard.
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: How much money that woman grossed in the nineties.
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: She made a lot of dough, I hope. So yeah, I.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: Mean she was working hard. She had a finite window
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: of opportunity, and she worked that whole time. She didn't
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: like buy a sailboat and sail around the world after
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: like first million. You know, like she worked.
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: So you're not in the camp of like she's taking
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: people's money and taking advantage of people.
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: I see that argument, sure, for sure. I also see
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: like if people want to spend their money on that
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: and they get something out of it, knock yourself out.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: All right. And then you have a psychometry, which is
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: the ability to read info about a person place by
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: touching the person no object. And that's what I like
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: to call the dead zone. Right, Christopher Walkin, he would
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: place his hands on you and he would see something.
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: Man. I think we talked about it recently about how
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: that movie holds up. Still. Yeah, that is such a
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: good movie.
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it really is good, Chris Walkin.
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: There's another one, Chuck called telekinesis, which is like Uri
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: Geller stroking a spoon in it bending right, like being
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: able to manipulate matter just using a light touch of
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: your mind.
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: But there is no spoon. Yeah.
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: Wasn't that from Matrix?
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: All right? So basically, like you said, jb Ryan is
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: the granddaddy of all this, and he actually started studying.
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: I mean, he was a legitimate scientist. He wasn't some quack.
• 9:16
  Speaker 2: And this was in the nineteen thirties where he started
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: at Duke University studying para parapsychology basically.
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: And he wasn't the first. He was one of the
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: first laboratory experimenters in academia to really study SAI. Right
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: before him, probably about forty or so years before him,
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: William James and some of his pals at the Society
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: for Psychical Research really laid the groundwork for applying the
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: scientific method to the study of paranormal phenomenonah, and they
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: did two things. They outed frauds, like fraudulent mediums, like
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: very famously Madame Bleovartsky. But then they also investigated ones
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: like the reach them typically with like an open mind. Yeah,
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: and if they found somebody that they just couldn't explain,
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: they would they studied them. So they were they were
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: studying each one with an open mind. And the ones
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: they figured out were frauds they outed as frauds. The
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: ones they figured out it couldn't quite explain. Yeah, they
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: sought to investigate scientifically rather than just saying, oh, they're
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: frauds somehow, right, So that was the groundwork of the
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: study of cy.
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: What was Madame Blevartsky Steele of the Cony?
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: She was she actually she was almost a cult leader,
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: you could argue she was. She she created Oh man,
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: it's called like theodism, I think, huh, which is it was?
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: It was almost a cult. It was a huge movement
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: in the nineteenth century where like you go to like
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: a seance and there was a medium there and they
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: would channel like the spirits of the dead relatives of
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: people who were there, holding hands in the circle and
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: stuff like that. And she gained a lot of power
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: and wealth and prestige until she was outed as a fraud.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: And I don't remember the the it's theosophy, that's what
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: it is. Theoism. Theoism has to do with theo Huxtable.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: Did you see The Source Family, by the way, that documentary. No,
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: I haven't about the La cult in the seventies.
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: I saw the icon on Netflix and never clicked as a.
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: Good it's really good and it's it's awesome. Actually, I
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: recommend everyone see. It's one of those where they interview
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: a lot of them today and they weren't like, you know,
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: they didn't commit suicide like everyone was like, it was
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: pretty great.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah.
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: They're all fine. They're all just a bunch of hippies.
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: Still they were out in La Yeah, yeah, right in Hollywood.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: There was one in There was a documentary I saw
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: about a cult in Miami and they were like super
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: fundamentalist Christian but they also were the basis of their
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: religion was formed on pot too.
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: Well, that's what the Source Family was.
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: I wonder if they were related.
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: Well, it was the seventies. Yeah, there were a lot
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: of pot cults, I bet.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: But did they turn into like huge pot dealers.
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: No, I don't think so this cult did. They had
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: a band though, and.
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: The called the Source M.
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: You know, I can't remember the name of the band,
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: but it's pretty interesting.
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: To Manhattan Transfer.
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that was. It's a really good documentary that it's
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: just funny to see how these people now they're like,
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: it was awesome. Yeah, I had a lot of sex
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: and smoked a lot of weed.
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's kind of what got hurt too. They these
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: guys didn't seem to have a lot of sex though.
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: They were like real like compartmentalized gender wise, like male
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: dominance and all that. But they just smoked a ton
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: of pot all the time, including their little kids. Oh well,
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: that's not good, like like four year old smoking.
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: Oh that's terrible.
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it was in the documentary. It's worse seeing I
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: don't remember what you.
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: Had me up. You lost me there.
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: I lost everybody there in that documentary.
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: Yeah. All right, So back to this ESP thing. Jb
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: Ryan Yeah, jb Ryan, Well, basically, there's a there's a
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: lot of different outlooks on what ESP might be. Some
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: people think that everyone's got it, but some people it
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: just pops up every now and then, like I might
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: have a dream that comes true or whatever. Other people
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: think that only certain people have it, they have the
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: gift as they say, uh, and that they have to
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: be in this special like you know, mental state to
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: access it the shinn, yeah, the shinning. And then other
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: folks say that everyone has that potential, but some people
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: are just like in tune with it, and some people aren't.
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: Right, and you fall into none of those three camp Yes,
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: So we'll talk a little more about some ideas of
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: what ESP is right after this. So, Chuck, you said
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: that basically how people see ESP is either everyone has it,
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: some people have it, or no one has it. Basically,
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: whether you're a skeptic or a believer. If you are
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: a believer in ESP and somebody comes to you and says, okay,
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: explain ESP, like what is it, there's actually a couple
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: of very common suggestions or proposals.
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: One made sense for a while before we knew a
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: little more about the brain, and that was that ESP
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: was some form or fashion of the electromagnetic spectrum that
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: we were receiving information from outside of our usual senses.
• 14:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And like you said, it fell out of favor
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: because basically it didn't explain anything about how it moves
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: through time or there. It didn't pick up on some
• 15:08
  Speaker 2: special part of your brain that receives this message.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: And there was a did you see that study I
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: sent you? That was I think from twenty ten where
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: they put people in an MRI and then showed them
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: different pictures or whatever, and they did they showed like,
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: I put you in the Wonder machine and now I'm
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: showing you a picture of the flower and that's it.
• 15:34
  Speaker 2: Okay, it's lovely, except it sounds like a German rave.
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, a little bit. But that would be the non
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: ESP stimuli the control group to test ESP and to
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: see if the brain reacted differently, and then to see
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: if there was a part of the brain that's picking
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: up on ESP, I would show you the flower, and
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: then in the other room, I would also show Emily
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: that flower, I think about it and send you the
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: thought of that flower. So you're getting ESP stimuli and
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: then non ESP stimuli. And from the MRI they showed
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: that the brain didn't react differently.
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: Gotcha.
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: So it suggests that there isn't a sensory organ or
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: region of the brain that's responsible for picking up ESP,
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: which doesn't debunk the possibility of ESP. It just undermines
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: the idea that there's a region of our brain that
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: would be responsible for picking that up.
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: Plus, I Emily's over there, My first guess is gonna
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: be dog every time, and it's flower.
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: And then well, it wasn't about guessing. It was just
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: to see, like showing you the ESP version, right, and
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: then the non ESP version of the same thing. So
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: you weren't guessing, do you understand?
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I get it. No, I would have guessed dog
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: or wine.
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: There wasn't guessing, That's what I guessed.
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: Emily thinks she has a gift a little bit, so
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: she would have been disappointed. She's got the shin Yeah,
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: a little, she thinks. Yeah, But I think she is
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: just super observant and intuitive.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: But that's definitely one explanation for it.
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah, which we'll get to of course. So these days
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: there are other theories, one of which is that it's
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: called spillover, that there's basically another dimension that that doesn't
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: you know, have our laws here and our dimension, and
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: that sometimes stuff just sort of spills over from that
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: and we see the future or the past.
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, And if you're a skeptic, you probably just pull
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: the decent size clump of your hair out of the
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: side of your head at that point.
• 17:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, because this is something you can't prove obviously, it's
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: like completely and of course they'll say it exactly. Yeah,
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: you know.
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, And I think I got the impression from this
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: article that they were making that point, like science is
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: just chasing its tail and trying to explain ESP because
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: it's not currently capable and science goes doesn't work like that. Yeah,
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: you know, at least with the electromagnetic spectrum explanation, it
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: was pointing to something that we already know exists, right,
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: It's just that there's no way to show that we
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: would be getting how we would be getting information from it,
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: because that electromagnetic explanation, Yeah, it basically says if you
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: compare it to other findings from ESP, it makes even
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: less sense. Right, Because with ESP, one of the hallmarks
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: of it is that no matter whether you're out there
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: outside of the studio thinking about wine or a dog
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: or something and I'm picking up on it, or if
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: you're in China and I'm here and we're doing the
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: same thing, the signal doesn't weaken at all.
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And that just flies in the face of all
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: we know about electromagnetic.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: Rights exactly, no good, right, So there's a lot of
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: things wrong with the proposals of what ESP is.
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but you know, the reason why still people still
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: believe in this stuff is because of either hearing a
• 19:02
  Speaker 2: story about their friend who said, you know, listen to
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: this crazy thing happened, or experiencing it themselves in some
• 19:08
  Speaker 2: way or another, having a dream that something similar happened,
• 19:11
  Speaker 2: and all of a sudden you're like, I might at
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: the gift exactly where it popped up in me, you know,
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: briefly at least.
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: And there's a I mean, there's a lot of evidence
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: of a strange and unusual occurrences, sure that support the
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: idea of ESP.
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: This article gives a really good one about an eighteen
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: ninety eight book called Futility.
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that was.
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: Written by a guy named Morgan Robertson right, And in
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: it the guy details this book or this boat called.
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: The titan Ship.
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah ship, the boat a big old boat, yeah, which
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: is sailing across the Atlantic and hits an iceberg at
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: night and sinks and a bunch of people die because
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: they weren't enough lifeboats.
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: This is eighteen ninety eight and if that sounds familiar.
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: The Titanic did the same exact thing, the Titanic, not
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: the titan Yeah, did the same exact thing fourteen years later.
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, if there are a bunch of similarities. The titan
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: struck an iceberg in the book on the starboard side
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: on an April night in the North Atlantic, off the
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: coast of Newfoundland, and the real Titanic struck an iceberg
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: on the starboard side in April in the North Atlantic,
• 20:22
  Speaker 2: off the coast of Newfoundland.
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: And the starless night.
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: I don't know about that, Okay. They were both said
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: to be unsinkable. More than half of the passengers of
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: the Titanic perished, and more than half of the passengers
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: and crew on the titan perished. So there's all these
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: things in there. But you do a little more digging
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: and you find out that Robertson was he was a seaman,
• 20:46
  Speaker 2: and he knew a bunch of this stuff. And it's
• 20:50
  Speaker 2: not unreasonable to think at the time they wanted to
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: build the biggest ships, and the word titan would be
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: a great name back then for a super big ship, right,
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: And that sailing route was a common one, and there
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: were icebergs and April might have been a common month
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: for that kind of voyage, so all of it can
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: be explained away kind of. But it is definitely something
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: you look at and go, oh interesting.
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: It is interesting and it's amazing coincidence, and it focuses
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: the attention and captures the imagination. But then, yeah, once
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: you hear about Robertson's background, it becomes slightly less impressive.
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: So then kind of too over the years that little
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: Colonel got erased and added to it was that this
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: idea for this book came to him in a trance,
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: which bolsters the.
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: Esp th Yeah, is that true or is that just
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: been added?
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: I'm sure it was added over the years, Okay. Which
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: is a big problem with this kind of anecdotal evidence
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: is that you know, it gets embellished in urban Yeah, exactly.
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: And it's just it's not enough that this is a
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: really interesting, unique circumstance or coincidence or whatever. There has
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: to be this extra layer of proof, like it came
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: to him in a trance.
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: Come on. Yeah. So back to Ryan, he did some
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: like I said, in the nineteen thirties, he started studying
• 22:12
  Speaker 2: the stuff with one of my favorite inventions by his
• 22:16
  Speaker 2: colleague Carl Zenner. Of course, if you've seen Ghostbusters he
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: was using. He was using a version of Zenner cards.
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: The shapes weren't all exactly. I think there was one
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: that was different in Ghostbusters, but the original Xenner cards were.
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: It was a deck of twenty five plane white cards,
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: with each of them had one of five symbols a circle,
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: a plus sign, a square, a star, five pointed star,
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: and the three wavy lines.
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Like water a river?
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: Is that what that is?
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: Maybe?
• 22:49
  Speaker 2: Okay? And the idea is that, just like in Ghostbusters,
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: you hold it up and asked the you know, not
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: showing them the card at obviously not the symbol, and
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: say what do you see? And they say what they see?
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: And then you record after the deck how many they.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: Got right, right, But the person holding the card is
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: supposed to be thinking about what they're seeing, sure, so
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: that the other person, the target, the receiver, can pick
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: it up telepathically.
• 23:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and I did they have these online. I took
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: the test yesterday and I went through the twenty five
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: deck and I only got six out of twenty five.
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: And at the end it just said you are not
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: a psychic.
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: Oh really?
• 23:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I thought it was kind of funny.
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: Statistically speaking, for just one trial that is more than chance.
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: You did better than chance. So maybe you do have
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: a touch.
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: Six of what would chance be?
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: I guess chance would be if there's five different ones.
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: To be twenty percent, and so this was six of
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: twenty four would be it? No, that's less.
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, No, you did six of twenty four. So you
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: did twenty four or twenty five twenty five, so five
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: of twenty five would be chance.
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: Okay, so I got one more? Yeah, well, and I
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: think like three of the first eight or so or
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: six I got And I was like.
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: Oh, I've got the gift, right, but I.
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: Didn't know, Like it's randomly generated, so it's not like
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: someone was on the other side thinking of that card.
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: So I literally I was like, what do I do?
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: I was like, I'm just guessing.
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: So that brings up some interesting stuff, like there's there's
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: evidence that when a machine is involved, Yeah, there is
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: no telepathy. There would only be clairvoyance, right, yeah, So
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: I mean if telepathy is you picking up what's in
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: someone else's mind and a computer is mindless, then you
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: shouldn't be able what you were saying, like, you should
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: it shouldn't you should not be able to know what
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: zener card it's going to pick next, right, But there
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: have been investigations using computers and using machines that show
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: above chance, yeah, that there is some sort of weird interaction.
• 25:01
  Speaker 2: Like a random number generators.
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, So Princeton University has a department called the
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Department PAIR, right, of course, and
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: Pair has been doing studies for a couple of decades.
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: They've done millions of trials and basically they'll say, this
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: is a random number generator or this this machine operates
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: randomly or whatever. We want you to think of a number,
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: and we want to see if you can influence the
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: numbers that this computer spits out.
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: Oh so you're thinking of the number, then the you're okay.
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: That makes like the human is trying to affect the computer,
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: the output the behavior of the computer. Of course, if
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: you're sitting across the room or in another room thinking
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: about a number that a random generator should put out,
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: it should have zero effect whatsoever.
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: It's a computer.
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: The weird thing is is what Princeton has found is
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: that yes, over enough trials, you there is a slight
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: very slight but measurable effect that human has on a
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: random number generator. Come on, it's on Princeton's website. And
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: this is stuff that like is apparently accepted in the
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: in the scientific community that the trials that they are
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: running are so widespread and so repeatable and have been
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: done so many times that the data that they're coming
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: up with is it's significant.
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: Well, Ryan with his inner card experiments in the thirties
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: did find that some people got what they thought were
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: pretty impressive results, like you know a few I can't
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: remember their names, but Hubert Pierce was he one of them.
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: He was the one how.
• 26:38
  Speaker 2: Many what was his percentage?
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: He had one where he got remember how you got
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: three in a row and you were like, oh my god, Yeah,
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: he got twenty five in a row once? What twenty five?
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: Come on, No, I'm not kidding. He was also documented
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: as selecting five hundred and fifty eight correct out of
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: eighteen hundred and fifty which is the odds of that
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: happening by chain. Yeah, we're twenty two billion to one.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: Now, were these the early experiments because okay, because I
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: did read that and this seems like I can't believe
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: he didn't check this, but apparently the early cards were
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: a little translucent. Oh really, yeah, some of them were.
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: And then he corrected for that and the and the
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: percentages went down. And then they, I know, other scientists
• 27:23
  Speaker 2: said that you are somehow influencing with your body tell right,
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: like you basically you don't have a good enough poker vase.
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah. In the earliest Ryan experiments with the xener cards,
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: he would hold the card up and go and he'd
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: be making eye contacts right the guy. Yeah, The guesser
• 27:41
  Speaker 1: would be like, is it the wavy line? Yeah, he
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: started shaking his head almost in perseent, but he uh he.
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: That's called sensory leakage, where you the person who is
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: holding the card and knows who the card is. Yeah,
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: somehow there's some detail about your face that when you
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: do a thousand trials with somebody, yeah, they start to
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: pick up on and it affects their guests. It influences
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: their guests. So to correct for that, to control for
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: that sensory leakage, that cross, Yeah, they they came up
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: with something called the gans Field experiment.
• 28:20
  Speaker 2: Ah. Yes, as a German gunsfeld that means whole field
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: in German, and that is when they started putting people,
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: they would start depriving their other senses. Basically, right, they
• 28:34
  Speaker 2: would be in a like a dimly lit room with
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: red lighting, and they would have white noise, and they
• 28:40
  Speaker 2: would have their eyes covered with these special glasses.
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: Or ping pong balls cut in half like Kermit the Frog.
• 28:47
  Speaker 2: I guess later on they said, we should just make
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: some glasses.
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: Exactly, We've got the funding.
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: So basically the idea was, let's rule out any uh
• 28:55
  Speaker 2: any of that gross sensory leakage.
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah, which he so apparently. Later on in Ryan's experiments,
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: after he started controlling for stuff, the percentages started to
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: drop of correct guesses. He was also he's generally a
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: respected researcher for a couple of reasons. One, whenever he
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: did whenever evidence of like some sort of bias or
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: fraud or something was brought to him, he corrected for it.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, he wore glasses and a white coat, right.
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: That was another one. But also he was daring enough
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: to stake his entire career on a field of study
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: that will get anybody mocked publicly privately, can really shut
• 29:50
  Speaker 1: down a lot of opportunities for you. This guy and
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: his wife Louisa Ryan both dedicated their careers to establishing
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: the field of parapsychology and really studying it rather than
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: just walking away from it.
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think he was like, I really want
• 30:04
  Speaker 2: to prove this is true?
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: Was he?
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: Yes, he did that.
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: That was a huge criticism of him. He got you
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: was a definite believer. He was quoted by I don't
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: know what the guy's steal was, but one day he
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: was visited by one person and the interviewer who went
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: on to write a paper I think in Scientific American
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: to expose him. He said he kept a file of
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: people of the results of tests where people he suspected
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: were purposefully getting things wrong because they didn't like him
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: to mess with his data. He just took those and
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: never published them. He didn't include him in the results,
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: which would definitely affect the number of correct hits.
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: That was a huge criticism. That's not good science at all.
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: But he was definitely a believer, which was another criticism.
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: But he was daring and he did. There was another
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: story where it's called the Levy affair, where a guy
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: named Levy, who was an electrical engineer working in the
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: lab unplugged I guess the sensor that would correct negative
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: hits for a little while during a trial, so that
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: all that were recorded for a little bit were positive hits,
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: and then he plugged it back in. Well, this one
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: guy saw what the guy was doing and went to Ryan,
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: and Ryan went to the guy Levy and said, did
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: you do this? And Levy said yes, he's like you're fired,
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: and just like threw the results away and all that.
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: So he wasn't like he was a true believer, but
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: he wasn't just some like outright fraud right right, But
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: he was and still is under the microscope as much
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: as probably any researcher in all of academia ever has been.
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: All right, Well, right after this break, we'll talk a
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: little bit about what skeptics say about ESB. All right, Josh.
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: One thing you'll hear skeptics say a lot is extraordinary
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: claims require extraordinary evidence. And I have to agree with them. Yeah,
• 32:18
  Speaker 2: And it is an extraordinary claim here, and so far
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: there hasn't been extraordinary evidence. And one of the things
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: I pointed to earlier that I think is what's going
• 32:29
  Speaker 2: on if you look at statistics, you look at six
• 32:32
  Speaker 2: billion people on planet Earth and them thinking a gazillion
• 32:37
  Speaker 2: things each day, and that is scientific, by the way, gazillion.
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: At some point somebody is going to think something that
• 32:45
  Speaker 2: mirrors something that happens in the near future, and it's
• 32:49
  Speaker 2: just chance and coincidence.
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: I have a great example of that, man. Okay, it
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: happened this very morning. What yeah, I did. I was
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: at the printer. You know, we just moved offices, and
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: I was at the printer and I had like an
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: extra pizza paper that I didn't need, and I realized, like,
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: we have no paper recycling here.
• 33:07
  Speaker 2: So on my way back yet that is everyone out
• 33:10
  Speaker 2: there is like, what kind of office would I.
• 33:12
  Speaker 1: Right, we just said we have a fifty five gallon
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: drum that we throw stuff into that it catches on fire.
• 33:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and then we send it out.
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: We have a burning drum, that's what it's called.
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: Now we're getting those soon.
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: Right, And we are getting them soon. I know this
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: because on my way back to my desk, I popped
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: into Izzy, the it guy who's also the head of
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: all recycling and stuff here. I was like, Izzy, we
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: need a paper recycling bins by the printer, and he goes,
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: I'm writing an email right now to everybody about that
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: very thing.
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: You almost did your Izzy impression.
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it was close, and so, like I thought about it,
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: that's pretty amazing. Yeah, you know, but it was about
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: nine in the morning, and this is a company wide email,
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: so it would be something that Izzy would probably knock
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: out about that time.
• 33:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: The reason I was thinking of is because I was
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: just at the printer. We just moved into this office
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: and we didn't have bins yet, so it was still
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: a potential thing for somebody to be thinking about or
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: doing or writing an email about. And so there's all
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: these different, really overlooked variables or factors to this whole
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: thing that you don't think of. Instead, it just seems
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: like an amazing coincidence or ESP. To me, the really
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: significant thing was that I happened to be researching ESP
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: while this happened. That's what really kind of stood out
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: to me. But if you really kind of look at it,
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: like there's a finite amount of things that people could
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: think about in any given day, in any given context
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: in an office or something like that, Like had I
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: been a goat at a petting zoo and I went
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: over and talked to the cow and the cow was
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: writing the email about recycling bins. Maybe, but we're in
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: an office. I'm talking to the guy about recycling bins.
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: There's just a lot of stuff that you kind of
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: Once you take that into account, it becomes less amazing,
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: Like like the guy writing the Titan Titanic book.
• 35:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you know what used to happen to me now
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: that I think of it is I used to and
• 35:11
  Speaker 2: this it's weird. It was only with phone landlines. It
• 35:14
  Speaker 2: hadn't happened with the cell phone. But I used to
• 35:17
  Speaker 2: like know the phone was going to ring right before
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: it rang. Oh yeah, like almost go to reach for it.
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: And I mean it's not like it happened all the time,
• 35:26
  Speaker 2: but it happened enough times where I was like, oh,
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: that's weird.
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: Sure, I know what you're talking about.
• 35:29
  Speaker 2: But that was all it was to me. I was
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: not like I have the gift.
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: Well think about it in that respect too. You know
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: fifteen twenty people. So was it you knew who was
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: calling or just that the phone was about.
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: To run now just that it was about to ring.
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, that is weird. You definitely do have.
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: Esp yeah, or maybe I don't know, maybe the phone
• 35:51
  Speaker 2: made a little tick noise right before it rang that
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: I didn't pick up on. Yeah, but only subconsciously, you know.
• 35:58
  Speaker 1: Well, that's another explanation for it. That, right, that there
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: is subliminal stuff in the environment that is just too
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: weak in nature for us to pick up on consciously,
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: but our unconscious does or subconscious does, which frankly opens
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: up a whole other can of worms. You know, as
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: far as you know, how real is that kind of
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: thing there, But probably a little closer to reality is
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: the idea that our attention isn't focused on everything that
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: we're picking up at all times, like like I see
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: your beard, and I see your shirt and everything, but
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: I'm still also picking up like sensory information from like
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: Jerry's computer that I can see in my peripheral vision
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: or whatever. My attention isn't focused on it, but my
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: brain is still receiving information. So the idea that our
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: brains can put it together all this information that we're
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: not aware consciously that we're receiving, but we're still getting
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: impressions from it. That's that could be a great explanation
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: for esp as well.
• 36:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and you know what now to think about it,
• 37:01
  Speaker 2: The fact that it's never happened with my cell phone.
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: Sort of makes sense because maybe there it was a
• 37:07
  Speaker 2: mechanical function a landline.
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, like you said a click or a tick,
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: But yeah, I think you meant like a click.
• 37:12
  Speaker 2: And it wasn't even the newer model. This was back
• 37:15
  Speaker 2: in the day when it was yeah, a ringing like bell. Sure,
• 37:19
  Speaker 2: so maybe that does explain it.
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah. I've got another good example that I came across
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: from researching this. Let's say that you and I are
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: hanging out, yeah, and you're humming a Baby on the
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: fire work, right, just over and over again. I don't
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: know that song, but I'm reading Yes you do, No,
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: I don't, Yeah you do it? Was it Katy Perry?
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: I don't know Katy Perry anyway.
• 37:42
  Speaker 2: Although I will have to say I did love that
• 37:44
  Speaker 2: halftime show. It was great, well it was. It was hysterical.
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: What's up with the sharks being a meme? Now?
• 37:51
  Speaker 2: It was thin?
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: They were really significant.
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: She looked like she worked at corn Dog on a Stick.
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: I don't know what that is that' thought all corn
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: dogs are on sticks.
• 37:59
  Speaker 2: It's that place in the Hot Dog on a stick,
• 38:01
  Speaker 2: that place in the mall where they were those big
• 38:04
  Speaker 2: giant Yeah. No, I don't know anything about Katy Perry,
• 38:08
  Speaker 2: but it was the funniest most Like the crazy just
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: kept coming and coming, and I was like, this is
• 38:14
  Speaker 2: the best thing I've ever seen. So anyway, in.
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: This universe, you're well aware of Katy Perry and her
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: song Firework, and you're humming it to yourself. But I'm
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: sitting there reading the New Yorker and I'm engrossed in it,
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: and I don't notice that you get up to go
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: make some nachos, and you come back in, and you
• 38:32
  Speaker 1: catch my attention because you're coming back in with some
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: nachos and they smell awesome, And now my attention is
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: directed to you, and you're still humming Firework right right,
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: And I'm like, I was just thinking about that song Firework.
• 38:44
  Speaker 1: I had that in my head. How crazy we must
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: be connected. I didn't realize that you had been humming
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: it earlier, and beneath my awareness I picked it up.
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: Although once I became aware that you were humming it,
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: it seemed to me like I had well.
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And that ties into another explanation is that people
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: who do seem to have that gift are just really,
• 39:06
  Speaker 2: really hyper observant on minute details. Like the same people
• 39:11
  Speaker 2: that can pick up on micro expressions. They might feel
• 39:14
  Speaker 2: like they have the gift because they're just really in
• 39:17
  Speaker 2: tune to what's going on around them or not just
• 39:20
  Speaker 2: like a big lunkhead walking around.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: So a lot of people who believe in ESP say, yes,
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: we agree with that, especially parapsychology researchers, and there are
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: still plenty of respected ones out there. There's a guy
• 39:33
  Speaker 1: named Darryl Bem.
• 39:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I saw that thing you sent. He's been doing
• 39:37
  Speaker 2: this for a while now.
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah, legitimately we should talk about him. But to button
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: up that point, there is a lot of parapsychologists or
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: even just plain old psychologists who are researching ESP, yeah,
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: who say, yes, that definitely most likely accounts for almost
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: all of it, and that's good for us to be
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: thinking about that, and that in and of it self
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: deserves like academic inquiry and research. Right. Yeah, But there
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: are still some experience experiments that are being produced by
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: guys like Daryl Bem that are showing some weird results
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: that go beyond this kind of explanation.
• 40:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah. And one of the problems, well, we'll talk about
• 40:19
  Speaker 2: the problems with even this research about it being reproducible
• 40:22
  Speaker 2: in a second. But he did a couple of experiments.
• 40:25
  Speaker 2: This is from NPR.
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: Akroll which wrote this. Oh really, yeah, from from from
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: Radio Lab.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: Nice. I didn't know that these are the two that
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: he pointed out. He did nine different experiments, but the
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: two that he highlighted was at Cornell, which is where
• 40:41
  Speaker 2: bim is A does his work, right.
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and he's again a very respected psychologist. And this study,
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: that of these experiments was published in the Journal of
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: Personality and Social Psychology, which is a respected journal.
• 40:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah. So they The first one was a computer quiz.
• 40:59
  Speaker 2: They took a hundred student it's fifty males and fifty women,
• 41:03
  Speaker 2: and basically they showed a computer screen with two little
• 41:07
  Speaker 2: curtains on it, side by side and said behind one
• 41:10
  Speaker 2: is nothing a brick wall, and behind the other is
• 41:15
  Speaker 2: something sexy. Yeah, some kind of you know, I was
• 41:19
  Speaker 2: about to call it pornographic, but who knows. Maybe it's
• 41:22
  Speaker 2: art nakednessism.
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah, gross, This just make you feel like your dad
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: saying it or something.
• 41:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, this room's too small for you to say.
• 41:35
  Speaker 2: So basically he would say, you tell me what you
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: think you're going to see, and they were all hooked
• 41:42
  Speaker 2: up two machines to read the you know, they're what's
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: going on in their body, of course, and you would
• 41:48
  Speaker 2: think it would be a fifty to fifty result, but
• 41:50
  Speaker 2: they actually got a fifty three point one percent result
• 41:54
  Speaker 2: for the what uh Crawlwitch calls erotic stimuli. And basically
• 42:02
  Speaker 2: they they think, or at least that's what Bem thinks,
• 42:07
  Speaker 2: is that one possibility is that if there is if
• 42:10
  Speaker 2: they think they're going to see something erotically stimulating, then
• 42:15
  Speaker 2: it got passed back through time.
• 42:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's kind of his position, is that retrocognition thing. Yeah,
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: that they somehow their future selves who saw the erotic
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: image was stimulated enough that that stimulation traveled backwards three
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: seconds and influenced their choice.
• 42:32
  Speaker 2: Because they were they would be slightly stimulated physiologically right
• 42:36
  Speaker 2: before they guess. And he said, before the computer even
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: chose which which one to.
• 42:42
  Speaker 1: Show, right, they right, they were making their choices often correct,
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: before the computer chose to show an erotic or non
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: erotic image. And fifty three percent it doesn't sound like much,
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: but Krolwitch points out a couple of things. One that
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: when there was a control group that was shown non
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: eurotic pictures. Yeah, they did forty nine point eight percent correct,
• 43:04
  Speaker 1: which is chance.
• 43:05
  Speaker 2: And they're fifty to fifty and they're all not happy, right,
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: They're like, I don't want to be the control.
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: They're like, can we get a little steamier in here?
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: But and he also pointed out that fifty three fifty
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: three point one, to be specific, doesn't sound like much,
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: but apparently that's a point two percent chance where on
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: a scale between zero and one, where zero is it's
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: not going to happen, and one is that it's definitely
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: gonna happen. Yeah, And apparently, as far as correlation goes,
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: or links between two things something affecting another, a point
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: two is about the same as the link between aspirin
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: and heart attack prevention, the link between calcium intake and
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: bone mass, the link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer.
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: So things that are touted is like, pay attention to.
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: This, yesh, yeah, yeah exactly. So stuff that we accept
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: is like, yeah, yeah, if you're around second and smoke,
• 44:06
  Speaker 1: you can get cancer from that. This is probably has
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: the same exactly, yeah it is. And later on a
• 44:12
  Speaker 1: meta analysis of Bem's experiments, some other experiments that were
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: carried out afterward, and then some other experiments all grouped
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: together a meta analysis showed that they weren't. It wasn't
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: statistically significant if you took all of the existing body
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: of literature of these experiments. But it was a New
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: Scientist article and it was pretty cool. In the comment section,
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: somebody said, yeah, it's not reproducible, but a lot of
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: science isn't reproducible, And it reminded me of our scientific
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: method episode, Yeah, where like apparently a lot of trials
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: that like pharmaceuticals are based on aren't reproducible. Wasn't it
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: like fifty percent of them?
• 44:57
  Speaker 2: Yeah, which doesn't surprise me of course.
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 45:00
  Speaker 2: All right, And then there was this other experiment that
• 45:02
  Speaker 2: I need you to explain to me because I didn't
• 45:04
  Speaker 2: understand it. Okay, you're ready, Like I got the first part,
• 45:07
  Speaker 2: but I didn't. It didn't make sense to.
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: Me because it's a little mind blowing.
• 45:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: So you know how like if you are studying something, sure,
• 45:15
  Speaker 1: and you write it down, Yes, it gets in your
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: brain a little more.
• 45:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so that when you're tested on it later, you
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: will recall it more easily.
• 45:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a common study method. Write something down okay.
• 45:27
  Speaker 1: So Bem carried out a very simple experiment that did
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: the opposite of that. First, he showed some people a
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: bunch of a bunch of words, forty eight random words
• 45:36
  Speaker 1: I think noun's like tree or something like that.
• 45:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and he told them to visualize it though, right.
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: Right, So they saw all forty eight words and thought about.
• 45:43
  Speaker 2: Them, not visualized the letters, but visualized the thing, right,
• 45:46
  Speaker 2: like see the tree and.
• 45:47
  Speaker 1: You're yeah, just just to kind of try to memorize
• 45:50
  Speaker 1: all forty eight words.
• 45:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 45:52
  Speaker 1: Then the computer randomly selected twenty four of those words,
• 45:56
  Speaker 1: and then after they'd done that, Bem gave them a
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: test of recall to see how many they recalled, right, Yes,
• 46:04
  Speaker 1: So the people had to type out the words they recalled.
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: Then after that, the computer randomly selected twenty four of
• 46:15
  Speaker 1: the forty eight words for the people to type after
• 46:18
  Speaker 1: they'd already taken the test of recall. And those twenty
• 46:22
  Speaker 1: four words are the ones that people more consistently got
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: right on the earlier tests.
• 46:28
  Speaker 2: Oh okay, So.
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: It's another example of that retrocognition that these people getting
• 46:35
  Speaker 1: the words in their heads after the test somehow went
• 46:38
  Speaker 1: backward and influenced their recall and memory. Gocha for the
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: test that they took before they learned them.
• 46:46
  Speaker 2: That makes more sense a little. Yeah, it is a little,
• 46:49
  Speaker 2: but see time travel melts my brain too. Right.
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: So this guy published this stuff in like twenty ten,
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: and like it was, it made a huge, huge splash,
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: huge criticism. The Act Demic Journal was criticized and bem
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: was you know, pillar eat and all that. But he's
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: still you know, put out these these very reproducible, understandable,
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: simple exercises that still showed statistically speaking, there were some
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: significant results that went beyond chance.
• 47:17
  Speaker 2: So when it comes to debunking ESP one thing that
• 47:21
  Speaker 2: you're not gonna you know, you said fraud, You're not
• 47:24
  Speaker 2: going to see a lot of people call researchers outright
• 47:28
  Speaker 2: frauds because that's just sort of a dangerous thing to say. Sure,
• 47:31
  Speaker 2: it's not nice, but there are people out there who
• 47:36
  Speaker 2: I guess are criticized for, you know, basically trying to
• 47:39
  Speaker 2: call out and this is something completely different. But these
• 47:43
  Speaker 2: these on stage psychic.
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: Shows like crossing Over with John Edwards.
• 47:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah, like it's easy to pick those people out and
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: say you're a big fraud and this is not true
• 47:52
  Speaker 2: of course, and all you're doing is cold reading. Cold
• 47:55
  Speaker 2: reading we talked about in the Animal Pet Psychics episode, Right,
• 48:00
  Speaker 2: that's basically when you get up on stage and you say, sir,
• 48:02
  Speaker 2: I'm sensing someone there. You're having some trouble with another
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: man in your life with a name of j or
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: or is it h or O P or maybe it's P.
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: Yes P, my boss Peter. Yes, yes, exactly. And that's
• 48:21
  Speaker 2: all a could reading is. It's throwing out these really
• 48:22
  Speaker 2: broad things that anyone can latch onto. So it's really
• 48:25
  Speaker 2: easy to call those people out. And there's a guy,
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: sort of a guy famous for doing that. His name
• 48:32
  Speaker 2: is James Randy, and he's famous for his offer of
• 48:36
  Speaker 2: one million dollars to anyone that can prove their psychic ability,
• 48:41
  Speaker 2: which of course no one stepped up to do that.
• 48:43
  Speaker 2: But then he gets poop pooed a little bit, like
• 48:46
  Speaker 2: you're just making a mockery of trying to legitimately disprove something.
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: And mockery is absolutely the right word. Yeah, And to me,
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: the presence of mockery indicates the absence of objectivity.
• 48:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: So like what you're dealing with then, with a guy
• 49:02
  Speaker 1: like that, is a set of beliefs a belief system
• 49:06
  Speaker 1: running up against another belief system, just like a couple
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: of religions or something like that. It's not objectivity against
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: fraud or anything like that. It's belief against belief or something.
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: And yeah, the idea of lumping together John Edwards with
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: Darryl bem is just that's, you know, fraudulent in and
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: of itself.
• 49:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's just they call that theatrics, just like the
• 49:32
  Speaker 2: on stage theatrics of a stage psychic. Yeah, so I
• 49:36
  Speaker 2: totally agree.
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I do too. I think there's a
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: definite room for a healthy scientific inquiry into just about anything,
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: whether skeptics believe in it or not.
• 49:48
  Speaker 2: Sure, if you can get some funding for it, who cares.
• 49:52
  Speaker 2: That's my motto.
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: You got anything else on ESP, let me think. No,
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: I've got one more thing I found. I came across
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: the nineteen ninety i think five Nightline with Ted Copple, Yeah,
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: where the news broke that the CIA had been studying
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: ESP and trying to do remote viewing what Ronson was
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: talking about and the men who stare at goats?
• 50:16
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, John.
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: When it finally became declassified in nineteen ninety five, Ted
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: Copple did like a twenty minute Nightline segment on it.
• 50:24
  Speaker 1: Totally worth watching. It's some pretty softball questions.
• 50:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: Robert Gates, who would later become the head of Defense. Yeah,
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: he's on there just basically trying as politely as possible
• 50:35
  Speaker 1: to show that he does not believe in any of this,
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: even though he was the Formacia director. And it's just neat.
• 50:42
  Speaker 2: Plus you get to watch Copple again, right, he was
• 50:45
  Speaker 2: great news man. Yeah, I miss those dudes. I miss
• 50:49
  Speaker 2: I was just thinking yesterday about Brokaw.
• 50:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, rather I was.
• 50:54
  Speaker 2: I was always a Brokaw man.
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: Did you I liked Peter Jennings he was great.
• 50:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 50:59
  Speaker 1: I don't even know all of them were great.
• 51:00
  Speaker 2: I don't even have any idea who does nightly news
• 51:03
  Speaker 2: now I don't watch it.
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: It was Brian Williams until about a day ago.
• 51:06
  Speaker 2: Did he get fired? He like got I know, the
• 51:09
  Speaker 2: whole kerfuffle, but he didn't get fired for it.
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: Did. I'm using my esp to predict that by the
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: time this came this comes out, who will not be
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: there anymore? Wow, I think this is getting big quick interesting.
• 51:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Twitter's involved, man, the Twitter takedown.
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Uh. If you want to know more about ESP.
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: The internet was virtually set up for you to go
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: find out more about it. You can start by typing
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: ESP in the search bar at HowStuffWorks dot com. Since
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: I said that it's time for listener mail.
• 51:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah, before we do listener mail, I just want to
• 51:43
  Speaker 2: give a quick shout out to my buddy Isaac McNairy.
• 51:47
  Speaker 2: If you remember, I did a Judge John Hodgman episode
• 51:49
  Speaker 2: with Emily in which I did a bad home renovation
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: and this dude stuff you should know. Listener from Kansas
• 51:57
  Speaker 2: carpenter Master Carpenter said hey, man, I'll come and stay
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: with you and help you do your your project there
• 52:03
  Speaker 2: right And I said this sounds crazy, and he actually
• 52:07
  Speaker 2: came and did it and it looks awesome and he's
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: a super cool guy. And if you're in Kansas near Eldoredo, Kansas,
• 52:15
  Speaker 2: there's no better guy to hire, El Dorados. It's El Daredo. Actually, Okay,
• 52:20
  Speaker 2: he has to point out, but not only is he
• 52:22
  Speaker 2: a great carpenter and a cool guy, but he works
• 52:24
  Speaker 2: with a nonprofit called Outreach Program And you can find
• 52:28
  Speaker 2: it an Outreach Program dot org where they're basically feeding
• 52:32
  Speaker 2: the world. They package food and they get people together
• 52:36
  Speaker 2: in a room and package these mass quantities of food
• 52:39
  Speaker 2: to send to other countries and feed the hungry. And
• 52:43
  Speaker 2: he's just a really good dude. So thanks to Isaac
• 52:46
  Speaker 2: for that. And my kitchen list is looking good. So
• 52:49
  Speaker 2: again for his nonprofit that is Outreach Program dot org.
• 52:53
  Speaker 2: And if you need a great carpenter and you're in Kansas,
• 52:55
  Speaker 2: check out retro Fit Remodeling.
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: Nice.
• 52:58
  Speaker 2: All right, listener mail to call this pronunciation help. Hey guys,
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: I'm a botanist and just wanted to throw throw you
• 53:05
  Speaker 2: a rope to help you out with pronouncing plant family names.
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: All plant family names end in A C.
• 53:12
  Speaker 1: E A E. Oh yeah, I thought I got that wrong.
• 53:16
  Speaker 2: It is a mess of vowels. Guys. When you read it,
• 53:18
  Speaker 2: you should just imagine you were spelling ace as in acee.
• 53:25
  Speaker 2: So when you read a plant family name, just break
• 53:28
  Speaker 2: off A the acee and read the first part and
• 53:31
  Speaker 2: then spell acee. So the plant family for poison oak
• 53:34
  Speaker 2: is Anacardia anacardi a ce. So it's just Anna cardi
• 53:41
  Speaker 2: a ce. I remember it by imagining the aneurysm and
• 53:46
  Speaker 2: cardiac arrest I would have if I fell into it
• 53:50
  Speaker 2: A N A C A R D I what well
• 53:55
  Speaker 2: she spelled out anna CARDI, Oh gotcha the first two
• 53:58
  Speaker 2: first letters from each of those words. Anyway, guys, I
• 54:01
  Speaker 2: love your podcast. Find it endearing when you two puzzle
• 54:04
  Speaker 2: out on pronunciations.
• 54:05
  Speaker 1: Ace A, see, that's good to know.
• 54:08
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so I love you, bunches and that is from Jane,
• 54:11
  Speaker 2: and she said ps. In Europe they pronounce plant families
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: completely differently other parts of see. Other parts of the
• 54:19
  Speaker 2: US might have other conventions, but the above pronunciation is
• 54:22
  Speaker 2: standard in California.
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: Oh well, okay, what ac ac If you want to
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: let us know something that we should have known before
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: we even recorded, but you're generous enough with your time
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: and effort to correct us, I guess there's a way
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: to put it. Sure we That was very helpful. Thanks
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: a lot, Jane. If you want to be like Jane
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: in other words, you can send us an email to
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: Stuff Podcasts at iHeartRadio dot com.
• 54:55
  Speaker 2: Stuff you Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio. For
• 54:58
  Speaker 2: more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
• 55:02
  Speaker 2: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.