What do you think?
Rate this book
Best of Skeptical Inquirer
Paranormal Borderlands of Science
Headlines and television news reports feature accounts of reincarnation, the predictions of astrologers, and psychic "miracles." Citizens report UFO sightings. Police departments call on psychics to provide clues in baffling crimes. From every available information source, the public is bombarded with unsubstantiated claims of paranormal phenomena. How much of the evidence is reliable? What is the truth behind these claims?
Paranormal Borderlands of Science is an exciting, well-informed examination of the most publicized and exotic claims of astrology, ESP, psychokinesis, precognition, UFOs, biorhythms, and other phenomena. Written by respected psychologists, astronomers and other scientists, philosophers, investigative journalists, and magicians, the 47 articles in this superb collection present a skeptical treatment of pseudoscientific claims - an aspect often sorely neglected in sensationalized media reports.
This book is an effort to help readers sort fact from fiction and sense from nonsense among the astonishing variety of assertions labeled "paranormal." Never before published in book form, the essays in this anthology originally appeared in the Skeptical Inquirer, a leading magazine devoted to the critical investigation of pseudoscience from a scientific viewpoint.
Among the contributors Isaac Asimov (distinguished science fiction author), Martin Gardner (Scientific American columnist), James Randi (The Amazing Randi), Philip Klass (noted UFO skeptic), Scot Morris (Omni), and James Oberg (NASA).
An essential contribution to skeptical literature, this book will be of lasting value to all those wishing to balance the case for paranormal claims by reading the dissenting critics.
Paranormal Borderlands of Science is an exciting, well-informed examination of the most publicized and exotic claims of astrology, ESP, psychokinesis, precognition, UFOs, biorhythms, and other phenomena. Written by respected psychologists, astronomers and other scientists, philosophers, investigative journalists, and magicians, the 47 articles in this superb collection present a skeptical treatment of pseudoscientific claims - an aspect often sorely neglected in sensationalized media reports.
This book is an effort to help readers sort fact from fiction and sense from nonsense among the astonishing variety of assertions labeled "paranormal." Never before published in book form, the essays in this anthology originally appeared in the Skeptical Inquirer, a leading magazine devoted to the critical investigation of pseudoscience from a scientific viewpoint.
Among the contributors Isaac Asimov (distinguished science fiction author), Martin Gardner (Scientific American columnist), James Randi (The Amazing Randi), Philip Klass (noted UFO skeptic), Scot Morris (Omni), and James Oberg (NASA).
An essential contribution to skeptical literature, this book will be of lasting value to all those wishing to balance the case for paranormal claims by reading the dissenting critics.
484 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1981
2 people are currently reading
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
March 8, 2025
Yesterday the world lost another amazing skeptic with the death of Joe Nickell at the age of 80. His articles aren't in this book but many of the others we lost including Frazier, Randi, and Asimov to name a few. Its not a book I would recommend reading cover to cover but one to pick up and enjoy an article here and there in your free time. Reflecting on Nickell's death made me realize that with what little time we have we should use to learn as much as we can. I think that this book helps with that by allowing us to see things as they are and not what we want to believe.
April 2, 2025
THE FIRST COLLECTION OF ARTICLES TAKEN FROM THE ‘SKEPTICAL INQUIRER’
Editor Kendrick Frazier (1942-2022) was a board member of the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), and a longtime editor of their magazine, ‘Skeptical Inquirer.’
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1981 book, “There has … been a considerable flurry of activity in … [what] I call the borderlands of science… in large part the activity that goes on in these borderlands has nothing to do with the true spirit of science. This is the land of pseudoscience and fringe-science, and the paranormal... It is not the subject matter, however, that makes for pseudoscience. Each of these subjects can, to a degree at least, be treated in a responsible scientific fashion. All efforts to do so deserve support. When alleged ESP is tested in rigorously controlled experiments by scientifically trained investigators… then the practice deserves to be called ‘parapsychology’ and distinguished from other personal claims of alleged psychics. When that description doesn’t fit, it is pseudoscience.” (Pg. vii-viii)
Later, he adds, “This book is for people who are asking these questions in the true spirit of inquiry, who care about the truth, and who are willing to see their ideas and those of others subjected to the light of critical reasoning, scientific experimentation, and detailed analysis. And it’s for scholars and teachers who find their students and friends frequently asking these questions and desire to give accurate and reliable information in response.” (Pg. xi-xii)
He continues, “These critiques are an outgrowth of an effort … by a group of distinguished scientists, philosophers, educators… and other investigators. Concerned that the public was not very well informed … they formed an organization called the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal … [which] attempts to encourage the critical investigation of such claims … The Committee founded a quarterly journal, the ‘Skeptical Inquirer,’ to disseminate accurate information about the results of these inquiries.” (Pg. xii)
Humanistic philosopher Paul Kurtz wrote in the opening essay, “Although I have no doubts that [J.B.] Rhine is committed to an objective experimental methodology, I have substantive doubt about his views on clairvoyance, precognition, and PK [psychokinesis]. The problem here is that one may question not simply the reliability and significance of the data but the conceptual framework itself… If ESP is some special function of the mind, then we need INDEPENDENT verification that it exists, that is, reliable predictions. One of the problems with ESP is that parapsychologists have noted a ‘decline’ effect; namely, that even gifted subjects in time lose the alleged ‘ESP’ ability… I must confess that I am unable to explain why there are significant above-chance or below-chance runs; [but] to maintain that these are due to psi, present or absent, is precisely what is at issue… possible alternative explanations … that have been suggested are bias, poor experimental design, fraud, and chance.” (Pg. 18)
Martin Gardner notes, “It is worthy of note that Einstein’s main reason for skepticism is the fact, so often emphasized by Rhine, that reported psi forces do not decline with distance. All of the four known forces of nature---gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak force---diminish in strength as they radiate from a source. Rhine has always considered this proof that psi forces lie entirely outside the bounds of normal physical laws… Einstein found it easier to … adopt the simpler explanation: namely that some sort of bias, of which experimenters were unaware… accounted for the statistical results.” (Pg. 62)
Ronald A. Schwartz suggests, “It’s a good bet that subject complicity is the main explanation for all sorts of wondrous phenomena… Whenever people are called upon to perceive the seer’s message, their perception can be influenced and shaped. The eagerness with which people latch on to the fanciful idea of extrasensory perception… rather than… their own complicity, is the really intriguing aspect of the demonstration. Perhaps recognition of one’s own contribution is just too lackluster an explanation.” (Pg. 105)
James E. Alcock says of Near-Death Experiences [NDE], “Each and all of the various characteristics of the ‘death’ experience have been found to occur, alone or in a combination, in various ‘normal,’ non-death circumstances, such as those associated with emotional or physical stress, sensory deprivation, hypnagogic sleep, drug-induced hallucination, and so on… the reports of people who have been near death pose no demand for metaphysical interpretation.” (Pg. 167)
Ernest H. Taves says of Betty Andreasson’s UFO claims, “What are we to make of it? We might begin with this: The aliens are capable of extragalactic flight. Exceeding the speed of light poses no problem. They have crossed intergalactic space to observe us since the beginning of time… They love the human race. They are here to help us. Granting this, we must be incredulous at their manifest inability to communicate meaningful intelligence. Never, surely, in the history of space travel have aliens come so far for so long to communicate so little.” (Pg. 183)
Larry Kusche says of the disappearance of the steamer Sandra in the Bermuda Triangle in 1950, “If the Sandra disappeared that very night, how could anyone have known and reported what the crew were doing as the sun set?... Did they really see the lights of St. Augustine? Was the sea really tranquil? All these points are crucial… If conditions had been stormy, the loss would not be considered unusual.” (Pg. 284)
James R. Stewart says of purported ‘cattle mutilations’ by UFOs, “There were 75 to 100 reports of mutilated cattle … during the latter part of October [1974]… Meetings were held which were attended by law-enforcement officials, state veterinarians, and interested farmers. The general conclusion reached at these meetings was that in the vast majority of instances the cattle had simply died of natural causes and the teeth marks and tearing actions of small predators had caused what was termed the ‘mutilations.’ While not everyone agreed with the findings, it was obvious that … officials were convinced that the mutilations were, in fact, a natural phenomenon.” (Pg. 291)
Ronald D. Story says of the ‘lines’ in Nazca, Peru, claimed by Erich von Däniken in his book ‘Gods from Outer Space’ as ‘an improvised airfield,’ “There are several good reasons why the lines probably were not ancient landing strips: (1) there simply would be no need for a runway… to accommodate a space vehicle that should be capable of a vertical landing; (2) many of the lines run right into hills, ridges, and the sides of mountains; (3) the soft, sandy soil would not be a suitable surface for any kind of heavy vehicle to land on.” (Pg. 321)
He says of the Piri Re’is map, “certain errors … testify clearly to the [cartographer’s] limited knowledge of the geography of the world… includ[ing]: the omission of about 900 miles of South American coastline, a duplication of the Amazon River, the omission of the Drake Passage between Cape Horn and the Antarctic Peninsula… and a nonexistent landmass… that is drawn about 4,000 miles south of where Antarctica should be.” (Pg. 325)
George O. Abell says of Velikovsky’s theory, “It ignores what is known about the most basic laws of mechanics… it ignores gravitation theory; it violates the most fundamental principles of electricity and magnetism and thermodynamics; it even ignores the very nature of planets and comets. Yet Velikovsky describes his theory as though he were invoking these very physical principles…” (Pg. 394)
All books written by members of CSICOP, will be “must reading” for those interested in skeptical perspectives on such matters.
Editor Kendrick Frazier (1942-2022) was a board member of the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), and a longtime editor of their magazine, ‘Skeptical Inquirer.’
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1981 book, “There has … been a considerable flurry of activity in … [what] I call the borderlands of science… in large part the activity that goes on in these borderlands has nothing to do with the true spirit of science. This is the land of pseudoscience and fringe-science, and the paranormal... It is not the subject matter, however, that makes for pseudoscience. Each of these subjects can, to a degree at least, be treated in a responsible scientific fashion. All efforts to do so deserve support. When alleged ESP is tested in rigorously controlled experiments by scientifically trained investigators… then the practice deserves to be called ‘parapsychology’ and distinguished from other personal claims of alleged psychics. When that description doesn’t fit, it is pseudoscience.” (Pg. vii-viii)
Later, he adds, “This book is for people who are asking these questions in the true spirit of inquiry, who care about the truth, and who are willing to see their ideas and those of others subjected to the light of critical reasoning, scientific experimentation, and detailed analysis. And it’s for scholars and teachers who find their students and friends frequently asking these questions and desire to give accurate and reliable information in response.” (Pg. xi-xii)
He continues, “These critiques are an outgrowth of an effort … by a group of distinguished scientists, philosophers, educators… and other investigators. Concerned that the public was not very well informed … they formed an organization called the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal … [which] attempts to encourage the critical investigation of such claims … The Committee founded a quarterly journal, the ‘Skeptical Inquirer,’ to disseminate accurate information about the results of these inquiries.” (Pg. xii)
Humanistic philosopher Paul Kurtz wrote in the opening essay, “Although I have no doubts that [J.B.] Rhine is committed to an objective experimental methodology, I have substantive doubt about his views on clairvoyance, precognition, and PK [psychokinesis]. The problem here is that one may question not simply the reliability and significance of the data but the conceptual framework itself… If ESP is some special function of the mind, then we need INDEPENDENT verification that it exists, that is, reliable predictions. One of the problems with ESP is that parapsychologists have noted a ‘decline’ effect; namely, that even gifted subjects in time lose the alleged ‘ESP’ ability… I must confess that I am unable to explain why there are significant above-chance or below-chance runs; [but] to maintain that these are due to psi, present or absent, is precisely what is at issue… possible alternative explanations … that have been suggested are bias, poor experimental design, fraud, and chance.” (Pg. 18)
Martin Gardner notes, “It is worthy of note that Einstein’s main reason for skepticism is the fact, so often emphasized by Rhine, that reported psi forces do not decline with distance. All of the four known forces of nature---gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak force---diminish in strength as they radiate from a source. Rhine has always considered this proof that psi forces lie entirely outside the bounds of normal physical laws… Einstein found it easier to … adopt the simpler explanation: namely that some sort of bias, of which experimenters were unaware… accounted for the statistical results.” (Pg. 62)
Ronald A. Schwartz suggests, “It’s a good bet that subject complicity is the main explanation for all sorts of wondrous phenomena… Whenever people are called upon to perceive the seer’s message, their perception can be influenced and shaped. The eagerness with which people latch on to the fanciful idea of extrasensory perception… rather than… their own complicity, is the really intriguing aspect of the demonstration. Perhaps recognition of one’s own contribution is just too lackluster an explanation.” (Pg. 105)
James E. Alcock says of Near-Death Experiences [NDE], “Each and all of the various characteristics of the ‘death’ experience have been found to occur, alone or in a combination, in various ‘normal,’ non-death circumstances, such as those associated with emotional or physical stress, sensory deprivation, hypnagogic sleep, drug-induced hallucination, and so on… the reports of people who have been near death pose no demand for metaphysical interpretation.” (Pg. 167)
Ernest H. Taves says of Betty Andreasson’s UFO claims, “What are we to make of it? We might begin with this: The aliens are capable of extragalactic flight. Exceeding the speed of light poses no problem. They have crossed intergalactic space to observe us since the beginning of time… They love the human race. They are here to help us. Granting this, we must be incredulous at their manifest inability to communicate meaningful intelligence. Never, surely, in the history of space travel have aliens come so far for so long to communicate so little.” (Pg. 183)
Larry Kusche says of the disappearance of the steamer Sandra in the Bermuda Triangle in 1950, “If the Sandra disappeared that very night, how could anyone have known and reported what the crew were doing as the sun set?... Did they really see the lights of St. Augustine? Was the sea really tranquil? All these points are crucial… If conditions had been stormy, the loss would not be considered unusual.” (Pg. 284)
James R. Stewart says of purported ‘cattle mutilations’ by UFOs, “There were 75 to 100 reports of mutilated cattle … during the latter part of October [1974]… Meetings were held which were attended by law-enforcement officials, state veterinarians, and interested farmers. The general conclusion reached at these meetings was that in the vast majority of instances the cattle had simply died of natural causes and the teeth marks and tearing actions of small predators had caused what was termed the ‘mutilations.’ While not everyone agreed with the findings, it was obvious that … officials were convinced that the mutilations were, in fact, a natural phenomenon.” (Pg. 291)
Ronald D. Story says of the ‘lines’ in Nazca, Peru, claimed by Erich von Däniken in his book ‘Gods from Outer Space’ as ‘an improvised airfield,’ “There are several good reasons why the lines probably were not ancient landing strips: (1) there simply would be no need for a runway… to accommodate a space vehicle that should be capable of a vertical landing; (2) many of the lines run right into hills, ridges, and the sides of mountains; (3) the soft, sandy soil would not be a suitable surface for any kind of heavy vehicle to land on.” (Pg. 321)
He says of the Piri Re’is map, “certain errors … testify clearly to the [cartographer’s] limited knowledge of the geography of the world… includ[ing]: the omission of about 900 miles of South American coastline, a duplication of the Amazon River, the omission of the Drake Passage between Cape Horn and the Antarctic Peninsula… and a nonexistent landmass… that is drawn about 4,000 miles south of where Antarctica should be.” (Pg. 325)
George O. Abell says of Velikovsky’s theory, “It ignores what is known about the most basic laws of mechanics… it ignores gravitation theory; it violates the most fundamental principles of electricity and magnetism and thermodynamics; it even ignores the very nature of planets and comets. Yet Velikovsky describes his theory as though he were invoking these very physical principles…” (Pg. 394)
All books written by members of CSICOP, will be “must reading” for those interested in skeptical perspectives on such matters.
October 8, 2010
This is (mostly) a collection of articles by members of PSICOP, that group of skeptics allegedly "objective" about paranormal phenomena. It always amazes me, when reading works by these men (all men) at their lack of an open mind, their lack of a sense of humor, and their FANATICAL DOGMATISM that is even worse than the "fanatics" they supposedly critique (they are as zealously religious about being "humanist" "skeptics" as is any evangelical Christian). What is so painfully apparent when reading this collection is how self-deluded they all are about their aims and their supposed stance of "scientific objectivity." (I must except from this critique the incomparable Martin Gardner, who is always fair and truly objective in his writings). They collectively wonder why anyone would address the nonsense of Erich von Daniken...and then proceed for 60 pages to so address said foolishness. The worst of the lot is the (thankfully no-longer-among-us) "Amazing Randi," James Randi, who started his career fleecing marks of their money as a "magician" and who turned late in life to showing how, for example, Uri Geller accomplished some of the feats Geller claimed. Not only is Randi's work (as even a moderately sensitive reading of his article in this volume on dowsing shows) NOT objective or scientific, but it is clear from everything he writes that he has not lost his contempt for the average person. To him, we were all dupes, suckers, marks ready to be had by the first person to get their grip on us. Thanks, dear-departed Randi: I don't need your help in explaining why I'm so stupid as to believe that there is something to dowsing on occasion (even your so-called experiment, where you ignored all evidence contrary to your thesis, demonstrated some interesting statistical anomalies). In fact, it's nice to be freed from all these self-righteous bigots. Ta-ta, so-called SCIENTISTS.
January 22, 2015
This book explores the boundaries of various pseudoscience theories. It has facts on many theories about various mysteries like U.F.O.s and Psi. With records of experiments, sightings, and tricks on the subject, this book proves and disproves discoveries and theories on the other science. With around 464 pages, this book can challenge anyone. I recommend this book to anyone interested in the subject of pseudoscience.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews