The ESP debate rages on.

ESP Report Sets Off Debate on Data Analysis

I think that this is just another example of finding any possible way to mitigate the impact of a study that suggests that ESP exists.  If the protocols can't be attacked then attack the data analysis.  When attacks on the data analysis fail, the critics will inevitably cry fraud.  This is not the first time this has happened and most likely won't be the last.  This said, it kind of makes you wonder about all the statistics thrown around in more accepted scientific fields.

In the constant effort to hunt down bias in results, critics might consider the obvious bias against ESP in the first place.  I don't think that ESP research has a fair shot under the best of circumstances, so it really won't surprise me when Daryl Bem's research is torn apart and kicked aside like so many papers before it.

Bem's results have allegedly failed replication so far which is, again, not surprising.  This happens whenever positive ESP results receive a lot of public attention.  There is usually very little discussion of these failed replications though.  One of the attempts to replicate this particular study wasn't even a true replication attempt as it did not follow Bem's protocol.  This, again, is common when it comes to ESP studies under scrutiny.

Keeping all of this in mind, if we ever hope to have any scientific recognition of psychic abilities then we need to stop relying on statistics that can be made to say whatever each particular side wants them to say.  All this gets us is endless battles over statistical analysis and proper interpretation of results.  If we really want recognition and acceptance then parapsychology needs to focus on more observable effects.  The best that I can think of would be macro-psychokinesis.  That is, the movement of objects by mental means.

Most, if not all, demonstrations of psychokinesis on a larger-than-statistical level have been decried as hoaxes with various conjurers stepping forward to demonstrate how they can do the same thing through parlor tricks.  Some performers, demonstrating what is ostensibly a psychokinetic effect, have been later exposed as frauds.  A small number, however, have not.  One such case would be that of D.D. Home, whom I have written about before.

The thing about psychokinesis is that most psychokinetic feats can indeed be duplicated by parlor tricks.  That is just the nature of the beast.  However, I think it would be foolish to proclaim that the PK feats are tricks when there's no evidence to support that claim in a particular case.  Just because something can be duplicated by trickery does not mean that it is impossible by less-deceptive means.  When one cries fraud the burden of proof is theirs.  All of this in mind, I still think that demonstrating psychokinesis will be the thing that silences the detractors.  It may take many years of laboratory study, but I think it's the best bet.

My message then is that anyone that wants psychic abilities to be taken seriously should set about developing their abilities to the highest level possible.  It is going to take direct observation of psychic functioning to get it viewed as a real phenomenon.  Even then you should expect fire from all sides.  There are people that won't be convinced no matter what.  Many psychics and researchers alike have been permanently disgraced because there was too much doubt cast on them, too much ambiguity in the results they produced.  Some just weren't vigilant enough in examining what they had to offer before offering it, or they tried to augment it with parlor tricks.  My advice, then, is try to prove it at your own risk.

Parapsychology going mainstream? - My previous post about this very topic.
Journal’s Paper on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage - More on the debate and "outrage."