From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1ea92c0e5255811d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-12 08:10:05 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!green.readfreenews.net!news.readfreenews.net!news-xfer.cox.net!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.easynews.com!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!uunet!dfw.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0901.news.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0902.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:09:44 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.3) Gecko/20030308
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Way OT: Adam Smith and Software Markets
References: <mailman.12.1047007348.4331.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <1047043964.776224@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <87isuvw9tb.fsf@inf.enst.fr>
 <b4adgc$h6a@niven.ksc.nasa.gov> <1047052877.215272@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <cf188409.0303071034.7222896e@posting.google.com>
 <1047065756.226519@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <%UBba.57202$qi4.39112@rwcrnsc54>
In-Reply-To: <%UBba.57202$qi4.39112@rwcrnsc54>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1047485385.47345@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@nightcrawler.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1047485386 reader2.ash.ops.us.uu.net 3303 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:35253
Date: 2003-03-12T11:09:44-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

tmoran@acm.org wrote:
>    So you don't believe in subliminal suggestion or
 > other experimental observations? Sheeeesh.

I'm not aware of any high-quality evidence that exists
for the efficacy of subliminal suggestion, that's all.

It's my personal prejudice that most "experimental"
results in psychology have qustionable statistics,
questionable reasoning, and questionable conclusions,
and reveal more about the biases of the experimenters
than about the subjects.